does anyone know anything about anonymous. My friend told me about it and i would like to learn more.:domokun:
Printable View
does anyone know anything about anonymous. My friend told me about it and i would like to learn more.:domokun:
Erm what is anonymous?
Anonymous (used as a mass noun) is a group, whose members are geographically spread around the world but connected through the Internet, initiating active civil disobedience, while attempting to maintain anonymity. Originating in 2003 on the imageboard 4chan, the term refers to the concept of many online community users simultaneously existing as an anarchic, chaotic, global brain. It is also generally considered to be a blanket term for members of certain Internet subcultures, a way to refer to the actions of people in an environment where their actual identities are not known.
Well NO, go away
Never heard of it, /v/irgin :trollface:Quote:
Originally Posted by ma names me
Darklinky probably has a fairly decent synop, though I'd quibble on the "active civil disobedience" part. Rather, think of them closer to something between a vigilante mob and a bunch of people out to amuse themselves at the expense of others (referred to as "lulz"). They tend to go after popular and easy/convenient targets that cannot or will not be targeted legally, which has in the past included, but is not necessarily limited to: Church of Scientology, white supremacists, ISP censorship, far-right political parties, internet security companies, child porn, Sony, and hip hop. There is no centralized infrastructure or overall leadership as a consequence of the original inception and present nature of the organization, which means that while certain general trends can be pointed out in terms of overall behavior, specific acts can vary wildly. Conventional tactics include DDoS (Distributed Denial of Service) attacks aimed at disabling websites via use of anon-owned and controlled botnets, organization of protests, and on the higher scale, gaining direct access to computer systems with the intention of obtaining and redistributing information.
Read up on one of the various sites that cover the internet (remade ED, oh internet, kym etc...I know which one I would recommend...) if it's genuine interest OP. I suspect it isn't though.
Cyber anarchists, maybe?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mistral
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mistral
Doesn't affect me.
Mildly amusing though.
Would ya ever fuck off.
No. Anarchists have a political goal, the reduction or destruction of the state apparatus (depending on the specific flavor of anarchism). Anonymous is organized under semi-anarchic principles, but only insofar as these principles occurred emergently from its original development. It was not conceived of as "anything"; it merely grew memetically, and it has no real overarching political ambition.Quote:
Originally Posted by deadlegion
your post are always very informative.:)Quote:
Originally Posted by Mistral
:domokun: :domokun: :domokun: :domokun: :domokun:
This is a wonderful smiley. I'd say more but Mistral and Linky pretty much covered everything. Anonymous is also usually a different group of people each time something happens, but ever since the Scientology protests, actual organizations taking their face have popped up and they don't really have anything to do with a true Anonymous moments.
A good way to show it would be to use an example of Dollars. This was a fictional group in the anime Durarara that are basically the same as Anonymous except they have a main site and membership, but it's unknown on the whole. Remove the head of the group and that spot to organize and you just get a bunch of people taking the name for the power of the name. This is what Anonymous is nowadays, with many different groups taking the name.
I just know not to fuck with anonymous. I've seen too many instances of people getting it angry.
Do anarchists always need to have political goals though?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mistral
I've always thought the lust for mayhem and disarray was enough :P
Anarchists with serious political goals would be like hippies who are businessmen.
Anarchist: a person who rebels against any authority, established order, or ruling power.
With the exceptions of child porn and hip hop I think most of the other examples you mentioned could possibly be regarded as authority/established order of sorts.
I agree with much of this, though there are exceptions.Quote:
Originally Posted by deadlegion
Not sure about 'Anon' or others like them, really... Maybe some sort of 'look at ME! I can ride a BIKE!' - mentality that was missed during early adolescence, fostering a 'I'M a STAR, now! I might be a socially-retarded miscreant, but I can jerk you AROUND using the INTERNET!' mind-set?
Potential book title:
"Cyber-terrorism: Learning to Accept Your Agoraphobia and Latent Homosexuality"
Who can say, really....
No, it'd be like a hippie that has economic beliefs. Which they do. The businessman is practicing one variety, whilst the hippie another. They're both economic beliefs. By the same token, the support of a structure and the desire for the abandonment of a structure are both goals and purposes. Not wanting something counts as having an opinion about it. It's not the opposite of having an opinion about it. Actively seeking to eliminate something counts as having a goal related to that something. Anarchism is a political belief like any other.Quote:
Originally Posted by deadlegion
Anarchism is also not a lust for mayhem or disarray. A proper anarchist would simply state that governments and "the man" are unnecessary and self policing or mob rule is sufficient to handle social structure. It's not the pure abandonment of society, they typically just don't like that there's people "running the show" so to speak. But the flavor of anarchist that distrusts the government and seeks a more...direct control over the way the world works, while fairly common, would probably not self identify as an anarchist. Those that do tend to be more the I HATE MY PARENTS, AUTHORITY NEEDS TO DIE sort. The misunderstanding is easy to make, but not necessarily correct.
Most of those groups Anonymous targets are fringe groups. Several of which are going against the societal grain. The argument can be made that they're simply vigilantes trying to support civil order. If they were true anarchists they'd be going for something that might lead to some sort of social change or lawlessness. Protesting for the maintaining of internet free speech and pointing out the lawlessness and social weirdness of a group like Scientology would not be in line with Anarchistic belief. They're supporting a right given in most nations (freedom of expression) and trying to annoy criminals and criminal organizations. Worse still when they've cooperated with law enforcement and a large number opted to follow certain rules and regulations as far as their larger public protests went. The anarchist would likely just do whatever it took, then see what happens. Possibly attempting to justify it as "the right thing to do", even if it were not strictly legal to do it.
Raype is pretty spot on here. Especially about anarchy. While I'm not an advocate of it I do think many people don't fully understand it.
As someone who was pretty well involved in 4chan for awhile I can say wholeheartedly that it's retarded. Troll random forum > get banned > make new accounts > troll more > get banned more > ???? Been out of that for some years now. Oh highschool...those were the days...of fail.
*inb4someonesaysimstillfail*