We Are Legion

[\V/]

And so corruption should continue, and no one should stand against them...isn't that what got us here?

[O Really]

And so corruption should continue, and no one should stand against them...isn't that what got us here?

Not to speak for rstrong, who is capable of speaking for himself, but it sounds to me like he's saying it's one thing to fall onto the grenade to save your mates, but quite another to be tossed on it while being told there's no danger. A civic-minded person might very well be willing to risk jail and ruin for the cause (whatever his/her cause might be), but they shouldn't be misled by claims of "anonymity" and "strength in numbers."

[\V/]

And so corruption should continue, and no one should stand against them...isn't that what got us here?

Not to speak for rstrong, who is capable of speaking for himself, but it sounds to me like he's saying it's one thing to fall onto the grenade to save your mates, but quite another to be tossed on it while being told there's no danger. A civic-minded person might very well be willing to risk jail and ruin for the cause (whatever his/her cause might be), but they shouldn't be misled by claims of "anonymity" and "strength in numbers."

That's the problem...I've not made such allegations, or claims...just saying

[O Really]

And so corruption should continue, and no one should stand against them...isn't that what got us here?

Not to speak for rstrong, who is capable of speaking for himself, but it sounds to me like he's saying it's one thing to fall onto the grenade to save your mates, but quite another to be tossed on it while being told there's no danger. A civic-minded person might very well be willing to risk jail and ruin for the cause (whatever his/her cause might be), but they shouldn't be misled by claims of "anonymity" and "strength in numbers."

That's the problem...I've not made such allegations, or claims...just saying

Well, not you personally, but one of your vids says pretty clearly... "We have Safety in Numbers Brothers and Sisters and when the time is right a Video shall be released with the available information to your choice of becoming and joining our Anonymous Freedom Fighters for this new Era." I suppose one could say that "Anonymous Freedom Fighters" is just a name and not descriptive, but still...

[\V/]

Is there something wrong with fighting for freedom?

[billy.pilgrim]

Is there something wrong with fighting for freedom?

the pot needs the stiring

[O Really]

Is there something wrong with fighting for freedom?

That's a separate question from the one on the table.

Let me ask rstrong's question in a way that could be answered yes or no. As an apparent supporter of Anonymous and possible participant, do you think that those being encouraged to participate are made aware of the personal risks they incur and the potential penalties if caught, as shown in rstrong's data?

[billy.pilgrim]

Is there something wrong with fighting for freedom?

That's a separate question from the one on the table.

Let me ask rstrong's question in a way that could be answered yes or no. As an apparent supporter of Anonymous and possible participant, do you think that those being encouraged to participate are made aware of the personal risks they incur and the potential penalties if caught, as shown in rstrong's data?

were they?

did they make a difference?

was their individual sacrifice worth it?

http://library.thinkquest.org/C0126872/ ... er=alabama


On May 2 that same year, over 1000 African-American children marched in the Children's Crusade. Singing "We Shall Overcome," the children were sprayed with water from high-power hoses that could blast off clothing. They also attacked by vicious German shepherds. By the end of the day, police (under the order of Eugene "Bull" Connor) had arrested 959 boys and girls.

Images of the attacks were shown on national television and in newspapers. These pictures conveyed powerful messages, and many Americans became disgusted by what they saw. As in instances elsewhere, the police had not protected the protesters, but had helped to attack them instead. Power holders such as Alabama Governor George Wallace and police chief Eugene "Bull" Connor were usually at the head of such orders.

A few days after the Children's Crusade, new marchers were hosed. When the police received no retaliation, the marchers were allowed to continue onward with their march. This continuation seemed to symbolize the constant reforms that were achieved by using peaceful protest. By choosing to break away at the wall of segregation in Birmingham, the SCLC and many African A mericans had risked their lives. But when a meeting between white and black leaders took place on May 10, 1963, however, African Americans knew that it had been well worth the effort.

[\V/]

Is there something wrong with fighting for freedom?

That's a separate question from the one on the table.

Let me ask rstrong's question in a way that could be answered yes or no. As an apparent supporter of Anonymous and possible participant, do you think that those being encouraged to participate are made aware of the personal risks they incur and the potential penalties if caught, as shown in rstrong's data?

One would like to believe so, given they are hackers.
Here's a better question...do you think Anons are 'only' computer hackers?

[O Really]

Here's a better question...do you think Anons are 'only' computer hackers? [/color]

No, and I know the concept of "joining" is a bit intentionally fuzzy. But the vid - which is what started the issue - seems to be recruiting computer participants, for whom there is some risk, as rstrong said.

[\V/]

One would like to believe so, given they are hackers.
Here's a better question...do you think Anons are 'only' computer hackers?

No, and I know the concept of "joining" is a bit intentionally fuzzy. But the vid - which is what started the issue - seems to be recruiting computer participants, for whom there is some risk, as rstrong said.

[\V/]

Anonymous vs. rapist football players and "slow-walking" authorities

Which side are you on?

Anonymous promises to shake up Internet in 2013
The side that exposes corruption...of course

[Leo Lyons]

Anonymous vs. rapist football players and "slow-walking" authorities

Which side are you on?

Anonymous promises to shake up Internet in 2013
The side that exposes corruption...of course

So how does attacking the Internet expose corruption? Methinks you are a wannabe who wants to be noticed.

You ain't gonna go and shoot up some school or theater to get your moment of fame are you?

[\V/]

Anonymous vs. rapist football players and "slow-walking" authorities

Which side are you on?

Anonymous promises to shake up Internet in 2013
The side that exposes corruption...of course

So how does attacking the Internet expose corruption? Methinks you are a wannabe who wants to be noticed.

You ain't gonna go and shoot up some school or theater to get your moment of fame are you?

In response to your uninformed questions, and oblivious thought. :-0?>

[Wneglia]

Hacktivism: Civil Disobedience or Cyber Crime?

[O Really]

Hacktivism: Civil Disobedience or Cyber Crime?

I don't think civil disobedience and crime - cyber or regular - has ever been mutually exclusive, has it? Problem in the article is that in some instances there is no clear distinction where the crime begins.

[O Really]

It's a weird title. By definition Civil Disobedience is crime and doing it online makes it Cyber Crime. That said, I'd argue that actions done anonymously and without the willingness to accept the consequences are not Civil Disobedience. That's not to say that I'm opposed to all such nonviolent actions, just that I would not call them "Civil Disobedience".

Good point. A lot of the purpose of "civil disobedience" is to break the law, get arrested (or harassed, or whatever) and get publicity and hopefully sympathy for the cause. OTOH, if the purpose is not to get caught, but to break out a force that can't be put back in the bottle (like release of lots of documents or whistle-blowing by burglary), then you've probably got a better chance of getting it done if you don't publicize the actual doing.

[rstrong]

A lot of the purpose of "civil disobedience" is to break the law, get arrested (or harassed, or whatever) and get publicity and hopefully sympathy for the cause.

Or, in minority rights issues, to bring about change regardless of sympathy. Often a law is unconstitutional or just plain wrong - but the politicians won't be bothered to change it because there's no popular support for the change. And so "civil disobedience" involves breaking the law, getting arrested and then challenging that law in court.

[rstrong]

We have Safety in Numbers Brothers and Sisters

Anonymous has been effective and few of its hackers have been busted.

I count 88+ arrests, plus 40 more served with search warrants and warned by the FBI. And no doubt there are more, just not officially linked to Anonymous or listed in the article.

Add another 13 arrests of LulzSec members, with several others having their computers seized. I recommend reading that entire "Law enforcement response" section BTW. It'll cure anyone of the notion that active Anonymous members enjoy any anonymity or protection.

[...]

I don't much disagree with the intentions of Anonymous. If they want to convince teenagers and young adults that they're soldiers in the war against the rich and powerful, well, there's a lot that's commendable about that too.... so long as you're honest with them about what they're getting into.

But Anonymous hasn't been using them as soldiers; they've been using them as suicide bombers. They use false claims of invincibility and safety in numbers. Once the teen carries out his attack, he finds out that his anonymity was a myth. The "numbers" he expected to support him are nowhere to be found. Even the expected glory, prestige and popular support from Anonymous turns out to be no more real than the 72 virgins those other suicide bombers expect.

Two more young LulzSec hackers convicted, for the Sony Pictures attack. One sentenced Thursday to a year in prison and ordered to pay $605,663 in restitution. The other to be sentenced next month. There have been other arrests and convictions since the posts above.

Still watching to see how that "Safety in Numbers Brothers and Sisters" helps them.

[\V/]

It's called solidarity!!!