Is Anonymous becoming a major force?

by **Afartica** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 10:10 pm

Their new youtube video where they lay out "the plan" makes them look like their trying to incite an anarchist revolution, but what do you think? Are they a political force or just a bunch of hackers that got a little too cocky?

by **Natapoc** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 10:11 pm

Can you please link to the video in question?

by **Tubbsalot** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 10:12 pm

Anonymous, like all hacker 'organisations,' are generally ineffective and overdramatic.

by **Afartica** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 10:14 pm

Natapoc wrote:Can you please link to the video in question?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_9T1SPJXRI

I wasn't sure if it was okay to link on these forums, I never see anybody do it

by **Conserative Morality** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 10:19 pm

Anon just blows a lot of hot air. They could fuck a few peoples' lives up, but that's pretty much their upper limit of destruction.

by **Greater Cabinda** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 10:21 pm

They're people who should stick to attacking people who really deserve it, like Scientology.

by **Lackadaisical2** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 10:24 pm

I severely doubt it, all the Man has to do is come out with a cute new picture of a kitten and bam, there goes the revolution. :roll:

by **Tergnitz** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 10:25 pm

by **Natapoc** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 10:27 pm

Anonymous: The true vanguard party! Execute phase one faithfully and we'll tell you what phase 2 is when the time comes...

by **Conserative Morality** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 10:29 pm

Natapoc wrote:Anonymous: The true vanguard party! Execute phase one faithfully and we'll tell you what phase 2 is when the time comes...

If Anon is the start of the revolution, it's only going to go downhill from here.

by **Natapoc** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 10:32 pm

Conserative Morality wrote:
Natapoc wrote:Anonymous: The true vanguard party! Execute phase one faithfully and we'll tell you what phase 2 is when the time comes...

If Anon is the start of the revolution, it's only going to go downhill from here.

There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with electing a anime styled blowup doll as world dictator.

by **Natapoc** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 10:33 pm

Greater Cabinda wrote:They're people who should stick to attacking people who really deserve it, like Scientology.

Do you disagree with their targets? If so why?

by **Conserative Morality** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 10:33 pm

Natapoc wrote:There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with electing a anime styled blowup doll as world dictator.

Save the fact that it will be wearing a Guy Fawkes mask.

by **Mikoyan-Guryevich** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 10:36 pm

Anonymous are still a bunch of criminals anyway you look at them. Hell, you can say that some of their targets "deserved" to have their personal information destroyed or distributed but really what they are doing makes them no better than the poor bastard they hacked. They won't be a political force because nobody with half a brain would even consider supporting them.

by **Seperate Vermont** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 10:37 pm

That widely depends on how you view them. I'm sure they would love to be considered that.

Should they not be underestimated? Certainly. But there's a difference.

by **Natapoc** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 10:38 pm

Conserative Morality wrote:
Natapoc wrote:There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with electing a anime styled blowup doll as world dictator.

Save the fact that it will be wearing a Guy Fawkes mask.

It's actually headless. The'll decapitate it first.

by **Natapoc** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 10:39 pm

Mikoyan-Guryevich wrote:Anonymous are still a bunch of criminals anyway you look at them. Hell, you can say that some of their targets "deserved" to have their personal information destroyed or distributed but really what they are doing makes them no better than the poor bastard they hacked. They won't be a political force because nobody with half a brain would even consider supporting them.

Bunch of criminals? They are not that bad really. Hacktivism ftw!

by **Greater Cabinda** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 10:39 pm

Natapoc wrote:
Greater Cabinda wrote:They're people who should stick to attacking people who really deserve it, like Scientology.

Do you disagree with their targets? If so why?

I disagree with their strategy.

There is no way they will ever be able to do serious harm to a nation-state that is without severe internal disruption already (Egypt, for example).

Therefore, I believe that they're actions should be limited to targeting specific non-state entities that genuinely cause harm to others.

by **Nanatsu no Tsuki** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 10:40 pm

Conserative Morality wrote:Anon just blows a lot of hot air. They could fuck a few peoples' lives up, but that's pretty much their upper limit of destruction.

Pretty much this^.

I don't think they have the necessary force to stage major attacks. Can they fuck some people up? They've demonstrated that they can. But anything major? Nah.

They can't even organize themselves. Half of the people who say they're from Anon usually are fibbing out of their asses.

by **Mikoyan-Guryevich** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 10:48 pm

Natapoc wrote:
Mikoyan-Guryevich wrote:Anonymous are still a bunch of criminals anyway you look at them. Hell, you can say that some of their targets "deserved" to have their personal information destroyed or distributed but really what they are doing makes them no better than the poor bastard they hacked. They won't be a political force because nobody with half a brain would even consider supporting them.

Bunch of criminals? They are not that bad really. Hacktivism ftw!

They aren't that bad and mostly harmless but it is really difficult to tell if they are working for the better.

by **Conserative Morality** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 10:49 pm

Natapoc wrote:Bunch of criminals? They are not that bad really. Hacktivism ftw!

No, they're a bunch of petty criminals who are speeding up the destruction of our civil liberties.

by **Natapoc** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 10:59 pm

Conserative Morality wrote:
Natapoc wrote:Bunch of criminals? They are not that bad really. Hacktivism ftw!

No, they're a bunch of petty criminals who are speeding up the destruction of our civil liberties.

How so? How is it their fault if civil liberties get trampled on? Are they violating your rights?

by **Tergnitz** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 11:02 pm

Natapoc wrote:
Conserative Morality wrote:No, they're a bunch of petty criminals who are speeding up the destruction of our civil liberties.

How so? How is it their fault if civil liberties get trampled on? Are they violating your rights?

Yes, actually. My right to privacy if I was one of the individuals on one of the any number of user databases that they have stolen, copied, or otherwise damaged or seen.

by **Tubbsalot** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 11:02 pm

Natapoc wrote:How so? How is it their fault if civil liberties get trampled on? Are they violating your rights?

Their actions have alarmed the general population, corporations and government, and provided a case for the regulation and censorship of the internet.

I'm not 100% sure how serious I'm being, but that's how the case goes.

by **Conserative Morality** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 11:02 pm

Natapoc wrote:How so? How is it their fault if civil liberties get trampled on? Are they violating your rights?

If a child abuses their curfew, why should their curfew be extended? By violating their curfew, they are proving that they cannot handle such a curfew and therefore must be reined in. Same principle with rights and governments. Anon is the child violating their curfew, and the government is the parent at wits end.

Is Anonymous becoming a major force?

Is Anonymous becoming a major force?

Who is online