anonymous

[Rok124]

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.

i was carefully reading though your post and to me you make them sound like minor terrorists on the webz

[Mistral]

i was carefully reading though your post and to me you make them sound like minor terrorists on the webz

"Freedom fighters."

Ah, seriously, vigilante is probably the best word for them. They do seem to have a moral code of behaviour, or more accurately given the lack of centralized leadership and wide nature of the varied populations they draw upon for their membership, myriad moral codes of behaviour that happen to share sufficient points of congruence to permit organized action against any that dare offend those beliefs; outside of those points of congruence, it tends to be difficult to direct them at anything if enough of the individual members may see little point in it. They're also very prideful when taken as a whole; as ace101 noted, offending the group is also a good way to draw their ire. Online, they favor illegal acts to make their displeasure clear, while when acting out in public, they instead tend to prefer peaceful protests, which, to be honest, is simply an anon-specific manifestation of a general trend that treats online affairs as somehow "less real" than the physical world, and hence without consequence. Terrorism, I suppose, isn't necessarily a horrible way to describe it, but it's imperfect in that they don't really seem to seek to inspire terror. Rather, they seem to either want to amuse themselves, or simply punish anyone they think is evil or has the audacity to claim to threaten them, and sometimes, when the stars converge, they can do both at once.

[kaiouti]

Anonymous=Loki The Trickster God

[gezegond]

They're a bunch of really really bored people.

[ying20080304]

does anyone know anything about anonymous. My friend told me about it and i would like to learn more.

I don't know relevant information.

[Pickles]

I don't know relevant information.

Then why did you post?

[Pickles]

I'm sorry, I've seen alot of shit on EP, but that had to be the most pointless post I've ever seen here.

[Cookie Monster]

It's prolly a bot, report posts like this if you guys suspect it.

[JKDarkside]

Seriously, it's hypnotic.

[Pickles]

It's prolly a bot, report posts like this if you guys suspect it.

I didn't even think of that, been so long since I've seen one in action.

[bigbigbuddy]

They aren't vigilantes, they aren't fighting for the law while breaking the law. They are fighting for proper freedom, while taunting the law =]

[Rok124]

"Freedom fighters."

Ah, seriously, vigilante is probably the best word for them. They do seem to have a moral code of behaviour, or more accurately given the lack of centralized leadership and wide nature of the varied populations they draw upon for their membership, myriad moral codes of behaviour that happen to share sufficient points of congruence to permit organized action against any that dare offend those beliefs; outside of those points of congruence, it tends to be difficult to direct them at anything if enough of the individual members may see little point in it. They're also very prideful when taken as a whole; as ace101 noted, offending the group is also a good way to draw their ire. Online, they favor illegal acts to make their displeasure clear, while when acting out in public, they instead tend to prefer peaceful protests, which, to be honest, is simply an anon-specific manifestation of a general trend that treats online affairs as somehow "less real" than the physical world, and hence without consequence. Terrorism, I suppose, isn't necessarily a horrible way to describe it, but it's imperfect in that they don't really seem to seek to inspire terror. Rather, they seem to either want to amuse themselves, or simply punish anyone they think is evil or has the audacity to claim to threaten them, and sometimes, when the stars converge, they can do both at once.

id just like to stick to the belief that they do anything for the lulz


and if the oppourtunity is starting to dissapear then they will do anything to get it back

hence the situation of them being pissed off about SOPA

[SegNin]

I heard their origin traces back to 4chan.
And they like to wear Guy Fawkes masks when they make public appearances.





And that's all I have to add. (You guys covered the rest already)