4 ms·

Whenever a news story refers to Anonymous as a group, you know that the author has a terrible misunderstanding of Anonymous. And whenever you see an expert ref

by davidu 12y ago

Whenever a news story refers to Anonymous as a group, you know that the author has a terrible misunderstanding of Anonymous. And whenever you see an expert refer to Anonymous as a group, you know that they are either being misquoted, or are also full of BS. Since we know Biella isn't full of BS based on her past work, I'm hoping she is being misquoted and her story is being taken out of context or just blown up a bit in advance of her book. There is no single group called Anonymous. It's the banner loosely knit groups of hackers use out of convenience. Some are organized for long periods of time, some are individuals who want a flag to fly. And the ethos is so similar, that a common flag makes sense.

skrebbel 12y ago
Actually, there's a chance both you and the professor are correct. To an anthropologist, the word "group" might mean something closer to "subculture" than "organization".
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
snowwrestler 12y ago
Anonymous is actually a single group. The fact that anyone can elect to join the group does not disprove its existence. One way to tell that Anonymous is a distinct group is to look for splinter or opposing groups with different names--because these would illustrate the edges of the Anonymous group identity. Both exist. Maybe you are thinking of groups with more restricted membership, like the staff of a company? But that is not the only definition of the word "group."
- davidu 12y ago
  Ok. That makes sense. You've changed my opinion. It's very far from our classical view of what a group is (where members are generally aware of other members, there is some semblance of leadership, rules, or hierarchy, etc.), but I understand your point. I'm not sure people who read the general news about Anonymous think of it that way, I think they believe it's an actual group in the way they think of a club or something with more structure around it.

by davidu 12y ago

skrebbel 12y ago

Actually, there's a chance both you and the professor are correct. To an anthropologist, the word "group" might mean something closer to "subculture" than "organization".

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]

snowwrestler 12y ago

Anonymous is actually a single group. The fact that anyone can elect to join the group does not disprove its existence. One way to tell that Anonymous is a distinct group is to look for splinter or opposing groups with different names--because these would illustrate the edges of the Anonymous group identity. Both exist. Maybe you are thinking of groups with more restricted membership, like the staff of a company? But that is not the only definition of the word "group."

davidu 12y ago
Ok. That makes sense. You've changed my opinion. It's very far from our classical view of what a group is (where members are generally aware of other members, there is some semblance of leadership, rules, or hierarchy, etc.), but I understand your point. I'm not sure people who read the general news about Anonymous think of it that way, I think they believe it's an actual group in the way they think of a club or something with more structure around it.