Why Anonymous are not to be trusted

[Zenkyai]

This is my first post, so please be nice My mother put me on an IEP  all through grade school, and it was not until my parents put a computer in our house did i realize how my learning disability actually effected me. I encourage grammar/spelling corrections as a response, but please dont make me feel inferior. I would just like to add my thoughts on this topic, and hopefully stimulate some new ideas towards the issue of trusting a group that resists our all consuming ontological grasp of reality.

i read this whole thread, and thought it was great.  I will admit, my knowledge about anonymous is limited , and only comes from main stream media. I have always wanted to no more, but never really sought out information. Not because i was lazy, but because i know what they are trying to do as Anonymous.   In my mind, being anonymous allows you to enter into a discourse and participate without having to sacrifice your alterity/Otherness.

quite frankly, we live in a time where everyone takes alterity is taken for granted

I dont think anyone experienced the results of having their alterity obliterated more than the jews who lived in Nazi Germany

not seeking out information was my way of honoring those who have had to suffer from the loss of their altetiy/otherness


i do not think its constructive to argue about what anonymous has said. If they wanted to be known for what they say, i dont think they would of chosen to go by that name. Instead, i think its more constructive to look at what they have done, and then decided if those actions are those of anonymous. I think its likely that someone is using their god given power, simply to help people that are suffering at the hands of cruel governemtns, and someone realized what this entity was doing and decided to be their voice/mask for the public. That is the beauty of operating under the guise of anonymous, no one can reduce you to the same. Thus we will never really know. I feel like anonymous is forcing us to come face to face with the violence of ontology, by denying people the ability to know them an a ontological fashion. 

I dont think we should trust anonymous in the same way we trust our neighbor, but i do think we should trust them as an entity that resists our ontological grasps of the world. Hopefully by positioning themselves outside the box, they will institute real change. We should keep our eye raised, because history has shown us exactly what people can do in a position of power. Only time will tell, and actions speak louder than words

        `Zenkyai

[ArMaP]

This is my first post, so please be nice

Welcome to Pegasus, Zenkyai.

In my mind, being anonymous allows you to enter into a discourse and participate without having to sacrifice your alterity/Otherness.

I don't understand what "alterity/otherness" means, could you please explain it? Thanks in advance.

But, even without knowing what it really means, I don't think anyone has to sacrifice any thing to speak their mind, at least in free countries.

i do not think its constructive to argue about what anonymous has said. If they wanted to be known for what they say, i dont think they would of chosen to go by that name.

Well, what we get is mostly things they say, as they appear more worried about making publicity of their actions than on the actions themselves, as they keep on pointing their actions most likely to appear on the mainstream media than on other, less attention-grabbing but more useful actions they may do.

Instead, i think its more constructive to look at what they have done, and then decided if those actions are those of anonymous.

That's one of the problems, as anyone can claim to be part of Anonymous.

I think its likely that someone is using their god given power, simply to help people that are suffering at the hands of cruel governemtns, and someone realized what this entity was doing and decided to be their voice/mask for the public. That is the beauty of operating under the guise of anonymous, no one can reduce you to the same. Thus we will never really know.

That's also one of the problems, as anyone can do bad actions and claim they were made by Anonymous, anyone can claim good actions made by others were made by Anonymous, etc.

I feel like anonymous is forcing us to come face to face with the violence of ontology, by denying people the ability to know them an a ontological fashion.

Sorry, I don't understand what you mean by that.

I dont think we should trust anonymous in the same way we trust our neighbor, but i do think we should trust them as an entity that resists our ontological grasps of the world. Hopefully by positioning themselves outside the box, they will institute real change.

From what I have seen, they have done nothing that resulted in real change, at least in a more global level, the level they were supposed to be acting.

We should keep our eye raised, because history has shown us exactly what people can do in a position of power. Only time will tell, and actions speak louder than words

I agree, and that's what I haven't seen, actions speaking positively about them.

[Ellirium113]

Sorry, I don't understand what you mean by that.
From what I have seen, they have done nothing that resulted in real change, at least in a more global level, the level they were supposed to be acting.

Uh...I think the term "nothing" will be taken quite literally again...I think we should maybe used the term "done little" as they HAVE done "SOMETHING". 

[ArMaP]

Uh...I think the term "nothing" will be taken quite literally again...I think we should maybe used the term "done little" as they HAVE done "SOMETHING". 

OK, what "something" did they did that resulted in real change?

[Ellirium113]

Maybe Thor could elaborate since it was his insistence that "NOTHING" was very WRONG.

[zorgon]

Maybe Thor could elaborate since it was his insistence that "NOTHING" was very WRONG.

Well I for one am willing to concede that some people in Anonymous MAY have the right idea at heart... and truly believe that what they are doing is for the common good...

But with no Leader and no focused purpose ANYONE can do ANYTHING they want   

[Ellirium113]

Well I for one am willing to concede that some people in Anonymous MAY have the right idea at heart... and truly believe that what they are doing is for the common good...

But with no Leader and no focused purpose ANYONE can do ANYTHING they want   

While I whole heartedly agree that their message is noble, who are they to decide that it is for the greater good? How well did that work out for any group throughout history? Unless Anonymous can change human nature all that will happen is one form of corruption will be replaced by another.

[zorgon]

So let's look at specific cases...

In this case we have 10 perps... a small number to be sure... I pulled a few snippets...

Anonymous Defendants Plead Guilty in PayPal Cyber-Attack

The hacker group Anonymous took credit for the attack, saying it was retaliation for the online payment company suspending the account of WikiLeaks, the anti-secrecy website.

Okay so  the 'GROUP" Anonymous is taking credit for this action....

/The charges stem from "denial of service attacks" that saturate targeted computers with communication requests so service is denied to legitimate users. Anonymous was described by prosecutors as an online collective of individuals associated with collaborative hacking attacks motivated by political and social goals.

>so service is denied to legitimate users.  One of those legitimate users would be ME. I depend on Ebay, Etsy, Paypal to make a LIVING  so by denying ME access to my accounts it effects ME Directly and I seriously doubt it effects Paypal as a whole very much at all

So having been on the receiving end several times of Anonymous hack attacks...  yeah I am biased against them

From Anon... the mouth of the horse as it were

We [Anonymous] just happen to be a group of people on the internet who need—just kind of an outlet to do as we wish, that we wouldn't be able to do in regular society. ...That's more or less the point of it. Do as you wish. ... There's a common phrase: 'we are doing it for the lulz.'   "
—Trent Peacock. Search Engine: The face of Anonymous, February 7, 2008

That about covers it  in my opinion 

Journalists have commented that Anonymous' secrecy, fabrications, and media awareness pose an unusual challenge for reporting on the group's actions and motivations. Quinn Norton of Wired writes that "Anons lie when they have no reason to lie. They weave vast fabrications as a form of performance. Then they tell the truth at unexpected and unfortunate times, sometimes destroying themselves in the process. They are unpredictable." Norton states that the difficulties in reporting on the group cause most writers, including herself, to focus on the "small groups of hackers who stole the limelight from a legion, defied their values, and crashed violently into the law" rather than "Anonymous's sea of voices, all experimenting with new ways of being in the world"

Gotta LOVE this one...  the Ion Cannon..

The DDoS attacks were at first carried out with the applications Gigaloader and JMeter. Within a few days, these were supplanted by the Low Orbit Ion Cannon (LOIC), a network stress testing application allowing users to flood a server with TCP or UDP packets. The LOIC soon became a signature weapon in the Anonymous arsenal; however, it would also lead to a number of arrests of less experienced Anons who failed to conceal their IP addresses.[45] Some operators in Anonymous IRC channels incorrectly told or lied to new volunteers that using the LOIC carried no legal risk.

[zorgon]

OK, what "something" did they did that resulted in real change?

Okay I found one...

in 2008 Anon became world reknown as a hackivist group for attacks against scientology. Seems Anon started with the Masks in their Vendetta against the Church of Scientology...   

During the DDoS attacks, a group of Anons including Gregg Housh uploaded a video to YouTube in which a robotic voice speaks on behalf of Anonymous, telling the "leaders of Scientology" that "For the good of your followers, for the good of mankind—for the laughs—we shall expel you from the Internet." Within ten days, the video had attracted hundreds of thousands of views.

On February 10, thousands of Anonymous joined simultaneous protests at Church of Scientology facilities around the world. Many protesters wore the stylized Guy Fawkes masks popularized by the graphic novel and movie V for Vendetta, in which an anarchist revolutionary battles a totalitarian government; the masks soon became a popular symbol for Anonymous. In-person protests against the Church continued throughout the year, including "Operation Party Hard" on March 15 and "Operation Reconnect" on April 12. However, by mid-year, they were drawing far fewer protesters, and many of the organizers in IRC channels had begun to drift away from the project.

In response
By the start of 2009, Scientologists had stopped engaging with protesters and had improved online security, and actions against the group had largely ceased. A period of infighting followed between the politically engaged members (called "moralfags" in the parlance of 4chan) and those seeking to provoke for entertainment (trolls)

So what good did Anon do?  They forced organizations like Scientology to beef up their internet security ad effectively stop the hack attacks.  What did Anon do? they fought internally over wether they shoudl do it for moral issues or laughs (lulz)

In the later Paypal attacks...

The attacks brought down PayPal.com for an hour on December 8 and another brief period on December 9. Anonymous also disrupted the sites for Visa and MasterCard on December 8. Anons had announced an intention to bring down Amazon.com as well, but failed to do so, allegedly because of infighting with the hackers who controlled the botnets

So I guess really they didn't do much  Only an hour or two and Paypal beefed up security to prevent it. Interesting that they never attacked Amazon... maybe too many Anon LIKE Amazon  LOL

So Anon attack HAVE changed things   They made companies BEEF UP security

Too bad WE cannot afford to do that   sigh.......

[zorgon]

Which one of these is the FBI Agent?  Can YOU pick him out?

[ArMaP]

Which one of these is the FBI Agent?  Can YOU pick him out?

The one with the mask? 

[zorgon]

The one with the mask? 

Come on now ArMaP  use those debunker photo analysis skills of yours. It is easy to tell   

[Glaucon]

I said nothing about any "threat".

Regardless, I'm sure we both agree that "psyops" inherently possess the capacity to influence. It's a factor in the processes you use while while your inner dialogue pours over "psyops". I'm not trying to be confrontational or insulting.

[zorgon]

How To Spot the FBI Infiltrators...

Next time your at an Anonymous Event... check out the guy behind you 

[ArMaP]

How To Spot the FBI Infiltrators...

Next time your at an Anonymous Event... check out the guy behind you 

In Portugal it would be the guy on the left, as that's the one with no suit or tie.

Either that or the woman on the second window from the right in the building behind them.