15 ms·

Is Anonymous Less Anonymous Now?

23 points by jcr 15y ago

faitswulff 15y ago
TL;DR - No.
- jcr 15y ago
  You should read the article, and then form an opinion. If you're really curious, try to figure out what information was released by the umm "non-conforming" admin about other Anonymous users/members. I don't know the details, or care to know, but it doesn't sound good.
- erikb 15y ago
  This is really the kind of comment we don't need. It is your right to decide that an article doesn't help you. But the comments are for the readers interested in real discussion about the topic.
rabidsnail 15y ago
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iS-0Az7dgRY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iS-0Az7dgRY
erikb 15y ago
Are we really asking the right questions? I mean, for us guys, who are not part of Anonymous, does it really matter how strong their hierarchy is? For me other questions matter a lot more. Like, how does Anonymous influence our laws and how do these apply to my daily life? Maybe they help making organisations who possess a lot of power, to consider the public oppinion more (like Sony, Paypal, and so on). Or maybe they help the governments more to convince big organisations like Google and Facebook to spy on ME. AnonOps is for sure not the one, who dictates which questions matter for me and which don't. I hope the scientists who try to analysie the Anonymous situation don't forget that, despite spending so much time in the surroundings of them.
- PostOnce 15y ago
  "us guys, who are not part of Anonymous" Anyone can be part of Anonymous at any time just by saying so. At least, this is my idea of Anonymous. If Anonymous is doing something you like, you can either follow instructions that some other random (possibly secretly organized) person/group has posted to the internet, or you can simply decide what you think would be a productive action for you to take. Anonymous doesn't like Organization X, and wished to cause them economic harm by DDoSing their servers, you join in the DDoS, or, if you are more thoroughly versed in infosec, you can engage in a different sort of attack. If you don't support what Anonymous is doing at that particular moment, you can simply choose not to participate. My idea of Anonymous is that it changes from day to day, both in members and in structure. It may become more or less organized depending on who views themself as a member on that particular day, or who supports the currently popular "operation". This may be a naive, misinformed, or idealistic view, but it's the view I've always had. Anonymous can't be disassembled, since you could imprison every member of Anonymous today, and tomorrow an entirely different group of people could reconstitute it to just as much effect. I would be glad to hear alternative opinions of the nature of Anonymous.
zby 15y ago
Sounds relevant: http://www.jofreeman.com/joreen/tyranny.htm http://www.jofreeman.com/joreen/tyranny.htm Some quotes: "During the years in which the women's liberation movement has been taking shape, a great emphasis has been placed on what are called leaderless, structureless groups as the main -- if not sole -- organizational form of the movement." " Contrary to what we would like to believe, there is no such thing as a structureless group. Any group of people of whatever nature that comes together for any length of time for any purpose will inevitably structure itself in some fashion. The structure may be flexible; it may vary over time; it may evenly or unevenly distribute tasks, power and resources over the members of the group. But it will be formed regardless of the abilities, personalities, or intentions of the people involved." "A "laissez faire" group is about as realistic as a "laissez faire" society; the idea becomes a smokescreen for the strong or the lucky to establish unquestioned hegemony over others. This hegemony can be so easily established because the idea of "structurelessness" does not prevent the formation of informal structures, only formal ones."

23 points by jcr 15y ago

faitswulff 15y ago

TL;DR - No.

jcr 15y ago
You should read the article, and then form an opinion. If you're really curious, try to figure out what information was released by the umm "non-conforming" admin about other Anonymous users/members. I don't know the details, or care to know, but it doesn't sound good.
erikb 15y ago
This is really the kind of comment we don't need. It is your right to decide that an article doesn't help you. But the comments are for the readers interested in real discussion about the topic.

rabidsnail 15y ago

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iS-0Az7dgRY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iS-0Az7dgRY

erikb 15y ago

Are we really asking the right questions? I mean, for us guys, who are not part of Anonymous, does it really matter how strong their hierarchy is? For me other questions matter a lot more. Like, how does Anonymous influence our laws and how do these apply to my daily life? Maybe they help making organisations who possess a lot of power, to consider the public oppinion more (like Sony, Paypal, and so on). Or maybe they help the governments more to convince big organisations like Google and Facebook to spy on ME. AnonOps is for sure not the one, who dictates which questions matter for me and which don't. I hope the scientists who try to analysie the Anonymous situation don't forget that, despite spending so much time in the surroundings of them.

PostOnce 15y ago
"us guys, who are not part of Anonymous" Anyone can be part of Anonymous at any time just by saying so. At least, this is my idea of Anonymous. If Anonymous is doing something you like, you can either follow instructions that some other random (possibly secretly organized) person/group has posted to the internet, or you can simply decide what you think would be a productive action for you to take. Anonymous doesn't like Organization X, and wished to cause them economic harm by DDoSing their servers, you join in the DDoS, or, if you are more thoroughly versed in infosec, you can engage in a different sort of attack. If you don't support what Anonymous is doing at that particular moment, you can simply choose not to participate. My idea of Anonymous is that it changes from day to day, both in members and in structure. It may become more or less organized depending on who views themself as a member on that particular day, or who supports the currently popular "operation". This may be a naive, misinformed, or idealistic view, but it's the view I've always had. Anonymous can't be disassembled, since you could imprison every member of Anonymous today, and tomorrow an entirely different group of people could reconstitute it to just as much effect. I would be glad to hear alternative opinions of the nature of Anonymous.

zby 15y ago

Sounds relevant: http://www.jofreeman.com/joreen/tyranny.htm http://www.jofreeman.com/joreen/tyranny.htm Some quotes: "During the years in which the women's liberation movement has been taking shape, a great emphasis has been placed on what are called leaderless, structureless groups as the main -- if not sole -- organizational form of the movement." " Contrary to what we would like to believe, there is no such thing as a structureless group. Any group of people of whatever nature that comes together for any length of time for any purpose will inevitably structure itself in some fashion. The structure may be flexible; it may vary over time; it may evenly or unevenly distribute tasks, power and resources over the members of the group. But it will be formed regardless of the abilities, personalities, or intentions of the people involved." "A "laissez faire" group is about as realistic as a "laissez faire" society; the idea becomes a smokescreen for the strong or the lucky to establish unquestioned hegemony over others. This hegemony can be so easily established because the idea of "structurelessness" does not prevent the formation of informal structures, only formal ones."