5 ms·

Dudes. This is not at all helpful. Website defacements just create more of an excuse for a crackdown. If you're going to risk your life and freedom hacking thin

• knowaveragejoe 14y ago
  This. I think hacktivism and subsequent whistle-blowing can do good, but this is pissing in the wind.
  • vy8vWJlco 14y ago
    By that token so is voiding your ballot, but if that were the only form of expression available to you, you might be happy to be able to make even that small squeak. Voiding your ballot (and in the same way, defacing a website) sends a message to your peers and the authorities that you are dissatisfied and that alone can be solidifying. That is one of the purposes of any protest, be it disassociating yourself from an injustice or creating graffiti to propagandize for your cause. It creates, at minimum, an opportunity for a group acknowledgement of that dissatisfaction. However imperfect the expression, it can still contribute to positive change. (I would also, for example, say self-immolation is a terrible waste, but it's damn hard to dismiss. In the same way, Aaron Swartz's death says something timeless, whether he intended it or not, and however regrettable or frustrating or futile or "selfish"...) Is the sentiment of disapproval here due to one wrong being used against others (which I echo) or fear ("excuse for a crackdown")?
  • znowi 14y ago
    Yes, sadly, most cases of whistle-blowing in the government sector end up in retaliation and prosecution of whistle-blowers themselves and little to no change in the relevant agencies. Wikileaks had a great potential. It's like a startup set out to disrupt the market of public/government relations. But it was washed away into near-irrelevance. And not only because the forces they stood up against are immensely powerful, but also because most people, really, don't care. Nonetheless, I'm glad whistle-blowers exist and have guts to speak up. The case of Wikileaks and others did reveal how deeply corrupt are those in power and how grand their appetites are.
• phaus 14y ago
  The article I read simply stated that the FBI was made aware of someone plotting to kill protesters, not that they were planning to do it themselves. Other than that, I get the point of your post.
  • nextparadigms 14y ago
    Yes, that's why he said to find out "who was planning to kill the protesters".
• Jach 14y ago
  You're assuming your alternatives are within their intellect or capability (whether in terms of ability to pull it off or ability to get information that does not exist / never happened). I don't think they are. So a question: is this action better than no action at all, which is the reasonable alternative for these people? I reckon you're right that this is a waste of time.
• johnpowell 14y ago
  And a waste of perfectly good security flaws. Save that hole in Apache for something good.
• mcantelon 14y ago
  Often the people most critical of activists and actions are the ones not doing any activism themselves.
• nextparadigms 14y ago
  The video does mention some documents leaked that are password-locked and encrypted, and that they will start seeding some redacted information from it to media outlets. So we'll probably see soon if any of it is real.
• mehrshad 14y ago
  Absofuckinglutely this. These 'hacks' annoy IT directors and allow self-described Deliverators to congratulate themselves amongst their script-kiddie nmap brethren in some private IRC. Then there's the more altruistic 'hacking' which uncovers truths obfuscated by those who've wronged in the interests of greed and cronyism. This prank is immature, ineffective and honestly a waste of taxpayer money - additional personnel will be hired and major unnecessary purchases will be made of consulting services and software and equipment which we'll likely have to foot the bill for. You're doing nothing to protect our civil liberties or expose the misdeeds of the corrupt and complacent. Try again.
• deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
• chrismarlow9 14y ago
  Agreed. It gives them a new boogyman. A terrorist that cannot be named or specified by race, ethnicity, or any other factor. It opens the door to anyone they deem a threat being detained in relation with "anonymous". The very thing that made them will kill them. When the boogyman is nobody, it incriminates everybody.
• temphn 14y ago
  Let's say this Anon's action inspires other Anons within the federal government to take in a USB key and torrent a few GB of internal emails. Then it's a huge win. Any Anons with sysadmin skills will now join the federal government (they're always hiring), turn off logging, bundle up a tar, cover their tracks, and put it on the web. Nothing will take down a .gov faster than shining some sunlight on their Pentagon Papers. If caught, each Anon can invoke federal whistleblower statutes and dare the courts to jail them and spawn one hundred more Anons. Some will no doubt be jailed, but the power to administer computers is now the power to hold unjust institutions accountable. This is information war.
  • singular 14y ago
    Ask Bradley Manning how that whistleblowing thing works out. I think it's important to realise doing things like that, whether ultimately for the good or the bad, comes at a huge personal risk.
    • codesuela 14y ago
      To be fair Bradley Manning was prosecuted because he bonded (they had very long chats) with the guy who was supposed to relay that information. If you read the chat transcripts you can tell that Manning was very troubled at the time and wanted someone to talk to. IMHO this does not necessarily apply to someone who works at the DOJ and uses an anonymous channel to submit confidential documents to e.g. Cryptome
    • analog 14y ago
      It worked out with the Arab Spring didn't it? "Manning and WikiLeaks were credited as catalysts for the Arab Spring that began in December 2010, when waves of protesters rose up against rulers across the Middle East and North Africa after the leaked cables exposed government corruption" [1] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Manning http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Manning
      • eaurouge 14y ago
        Manning and WikiLeaks may have been credited by some as catalysts for the Arab Spring, but they were not. Mohamed Bouazizi's self-immolation was the catalyst for the Arab Spring. It's not as if Tunisians needed anyone to tell them how corrupt their government was. Once Tunisia looked like it might fall, revolutionaries in other countries started planning their own protests.
• deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
• hermannj314 14y ago
  Exposing emails, hacking the FBI? This is not at all helpful. Murdering politicians, assassinating police officers and judges, freeing the wrongly imprisoned by force. A willingness to die fighting. Any or all of those would change things, possibly for the better. But this, this is a waste of your time and ours.
  • mseebach 14y ago
    So, here's a free piece of advice: Put away the Guy Fawkes mask, turn down the RATM and read a book. You live in a real democracy. Not a perfect one, those don't exist, a real one. That makes you more free than most people alive today and all the dead ones. All of them. Your frustration shouldn't primarily sourced in the brokenness of the system, but in how the vast majority of your co-citizens disagree with you that it's broken - or, at least, fundamentally disagrees with what the solution is. Your mission as a citizen in a democracy is to convince your fellow citizens that this is wrong and that it should be fixed. The second you pick up a weapon, you lose. Game over.
  • eksith 14y ago
    Can you say martial law? I know several officers who belong on either side of the integrity fence. Losing the bad ones violently will only turn the good ones against whatever good you're hoping to accomplish. This is absolutely the worst thing they could do. There are plenty of politicians, police officers and judges who are doing everything they can to free those wrongly imprisoned. Besides that, not everyone who works inside the "machine" is evil; most are just doing their jobs to whatever capacity they can and I assure you, they don't sleep well when their work is used for injustice. Violence is the worst option. Ask India. They got independence peacefully after violent rebellion failed.
    • throwaway2048 14y ago
      At the time India gained independence, the British Empire was in shambles, and was financially derelict after World War 2. A strong argument can be made that it was the implicit threat of violence which the UK would be totally unable to handle at the time is what ultimately led to Indian independence. The situation is not a particularly effective argument that non violent solutions are always preferable, or even possible.
• genwin 14y ago
  Dudes. This is not at all helpful. Sitting at the front of the bus just creates more of an excuse for a crackdown.
  • rosser 14y ago
    Seriously? This again? Anonymous is not Rosa Parks.
    • genwin 14y ago
      The analogy compares actions, not things.
      • deleted 14y ago
        [deleted]
      • rosser 14y ago
        Defacing a website from behind who knows how many layers of anonymizing proxies isn't being black and sitting at the front of a segregated bus, either.
        • genwin 14y ago
          Both are forms of civil disobediance. Neither need cause significant damage other than to sensibilities. The number of those layers is irrelevant.