Non-Organization Sends Open Letter to Glenn Beck

Weird • Views: 21,089

Someone purporting to belong to the non-organized anarchist hacker non-group “Anonymous” has sent an open letter to Glenn Beck, inviting Beck to join their “movement,” except they’re not a movement, and saying Beck’s welcome to talk to them any time, except they’re not a “them.” They’re everywhere, all at once, like a gaseous nebula the size of the universe. Beck could just talk to himself in the shower, and they’d all hear it.

(Hat tip: Killgore Trout.)

Jump to bottom

407 comments
1 jamesfirecat  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:39:46am

Wow, I think Glenn Beck may be about to be out crazied….

2 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:41:01am

But if Glenn Beck joins their movement, how will they be anonymous anymore?

3 Kragar  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:41:20am

re: #1 jamesfirecat

Wow, I think Glenn Beck may be about to be out crazied…

They can be the Yin to his Yang.

Or is that the Yang to his Yin?

4 Killgore Trout  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:42:53am

Anarchists and libertarian extremists have always been pals (just check out Ron Paul forums). I think they’ll get along just fine.

5 Amory Blaine  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:43:42am

Who will hand Beck the loofah? *shudder*

6 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:44:06am

This is so funny. You are ALL being trolled.

7 Barrett Brown  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:45:32am

Where in the letter do they claim they are not a “movement”?

8 Charles Johnson  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:46:01am

Did I really need a sarc tag on this post?

9 Michael Orion Powell  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:46:16am

What’s their relation to 4chan?

10 shutdown  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:46:25am

Charles, I would really have preferred not to deal with the imagery of Beck in the shower. Also, Beck is himself already a gaseous nebula (or a nebulous gas), so he is already part of Anonymous.

11 Barrett Brown  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:46:35am

And where in the letter do they invite Glenn Beck to join them?

12 b_sharp  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:46:58am

re: #6 Fozzie Bear

This is so funny. You are ALL being trolled.

Not unless a union rep from the Union of United but Distinct Trolls is on hand to watch the proceedings.

13 Killgore Trout  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:47:36am

re: #9 OrionXP

What’s their relation to 4chan?

There is none. The existence is so ethereal that they as much everywhere and they are nowhere.

14 Decatur Deb  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:47:53am

They surround him.

15 Jack Burton  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:47:55am

re: #8 Charles

Did I really need a sarc tag on this post?

Signs point to yes.

16 Kragar  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:47:56am

re: #9 OrionXP

What’s their relation to 4chan?

Thats where they started.

17 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:48:12am

The only unifying theme I think anon has ever adhered to is:

“We do it for the lulz”

18 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:48:53am

re: #16 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Thats where they started.

It goes back a lot further than that. I’d argue it started on BBS’s in the 80’s and 90’s.

19 shutdown  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:48:55am

re: #9 OrionXP

What’s their relation to 4chan?

It’s their “club house”.

20 Gus  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:49:11am
21 I Am Kreniigh!  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:49:44am

From the letter:
“Anyone who claims to speak for all of us is, quite frankly, a liar.”

Wait, is this some kind of logic puzzle?

From the comments:
“Secondarily, there is a protectionism of the gay agenda here as well. Manning did this for a reason and DADT is likely the reason. If the focus is on Manning, then so to is it on DADT.”

Wait, are we playing the Illuminati card game now? ‘Manning, with support from the Gay Agenda and the UFOs, launches an attack to destroy the US Army.’

22 Political Atheist  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:50:26am

re: #11 Barrett Brown

Implied

You are welcome to talk to us at anytime. We will answer any further questions you may have. After further dialogue,
perhaps then you will see that you and we are not so different. Anonymous can be anyone, anywhere, at anytime, and
that includes you
and your audience as well, Mr. Beck. We simply wish to see the freedoms of all Americans and all
citizens of Earth to be at the very least maintained, and wherever possible, strengthened and enhanced to their fullest
extent.

23 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:50:35am

Again, talking from the POV of sociology of organizations, a movement is loose connection of organizations. These components are hence also called social movement organizations. I would make the call that Anonymous is a (social) movement, not an organization — mainly because it is lacking key functions and criteria usually and generally ascribed to organizations: no formal or informal membership, no application process or criteria other than a minimum of tech savyness and a sharing of strategic goals and tactical means, no initiation rite, no overt leadership, no exclusion or inclusion processes, no hierarchy…

24 Kragar  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:50:47am

re: #21 Kreniigh

From the letter:
“Anyone who claims to speak for all of us is, quite frankly, a liar.”

Wait, is this some kind of logic puzzle?

LOL, good catch.

25 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:50:59am

re: #10 imp_62

Charles, I would really have preferred not to deal with the imagery of Beck in the shower.

Herostrates’s name should be erased from history. Don’t ever forget about that.

/

26 Vicious Babushka  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:51:04am

What’s that smell?

27 lawhawk  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:51:37am

Anonymous= the new Men In Black? /

28 Gus  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:51:47am

Yes, the Anonymous conundrum. We can’t prove a negative because the nebulous Anonymous doesn’t exist as both a person and as a group. They’re not here or there and they’re just doing it for the thrill.

29 b_sharp  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:52:08am

re: #26 Alouette

What’s that smell?

A bowel movement I suspect.

30 Decatur Deb  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:52:10am

re: #25 Sergey Romanov

Herostrates’s name should be erased from history. Don’t ever forget about that.

/

And you just furthered his agenda. The Goddess will not be pleased.

31 shutdown  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:52:45am

re: #18 Fozzie Bear

It goes back a lot further than that. I’d argue it started on BBS’s in the 80’s and 90’s.

The point is that anybody can claim to be involved in Anon, and if you participate in an event or invasion, I guess you are involved. It is an amorphous group that probably takes inspiration from a core set of individuals, without the need for communication since participation is voluntary and information freely available. On an event-be-event basis, these people can be effective and possibly dangerous. As an ongoing voice in any type of discourse, they are irrelevant, as without any platform ideology other than to be disruptive of things they spontaneously disapprove of.

32 Walter L. Newton  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:53:00am

re: #11 Barrett Brown

And where in the letter do they invite Glenn Beck to join them?

“We embrace everyone from all walks of life, from all corners of the earth, to join us in our quest to protect and further
enhance not only our rights to freedom of information and freedom of speech, but all of our human freedoms. “

33 cenotaphium  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:53:28am

re: #21 Kreniigh

Wait, is this some kind of logic puzzle?

Yes.

The puzzle is how much inane bullshit you can write and still get people to take it seriously. It’s called trolling.

If you want a unifying principle to hammer a goal onto Anonymous, that’d be it. The more media attention it gets, the easier it gets to send of missives like this one and get it read and discussed in serious terms by serious people. ..and that’s the joke.

Shades of Oprah’s “over 9000 penises” here.

I guarantee that it will only get worse, the more people pay attention. We’re dealing with kids here. At heart, if not age.

34 Gus  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:53:37am

re: #32 Walter L. Newton

“We embrace everyone from all walks of life, from all corners of the earth, to join us in our quest to protect and further
enhance not only our rights to freedom of information and freedom of speech, but all of our human freedoms. “

Olm. Take me to your leader!

35 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:53:44am

re: #9 OrionXP

What’s their relation to 4chan?

That’s where the english speaking internet crowd learned of the concept. It originated in Japan, though. You kind of have to dig your way through the history of the japanese internet, its skipping the BBS step, etc. Ultimately you will end up at 2channel.

36 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:53:56am

The real danger here is that people might start lieking mudkyps.

37 Charles Johnson  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:54:49am

re: #7 Barrett Brown

Where in the letter do they claim they are not a “movement”?

Sorry, Barrett, but the idea of a group sending an open letter in which they claim not to be a group, and the pretentious language, and a million other things about this just strike me as so absurd I can’t help but laugh at it.

38 Walter L. Newton  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:55:13am

re: #34 Gus 802

Olm. Take me to your leader!

I’m surprised I had to point that paragraph out to BB. I hope that’s equivalent to the sort of repartee he’s use to at “The League?”

39 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:55:13am

re: #37 Charles

Sorry, Barrett, but the idea of a group sending an open letter that claims not to be a group, and the pretentious language, and a million other things about this just strike me as so absurd I can’t help but laugh at it.

THATS THE POINT.

40 Charles Johnson  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:55:48am

re: #39 Fozzie Bear

And I don’t mean laugh with it.

41 Jack Burton  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:55:57am

re: #26 Alouette

What’s that smell?

Something that gives off hydrogen sulfide, indole, 3-methylindole, and thiols.

42 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:56:41am

re: #39 Fozzie Bear

THATS THE POINT.

the lulz. yes.

Again, I don’t think it’s wise to terminologically equate movements with organizations.

43 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:57:11am

re: #26 Alouette

What’s that smell?

44 Gus  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:57:15am

Oh brother.

45 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:57:29am

It’s really, really hard to explain this stuff to people who didn’t grow up in a culture of relentless anonymous trolling. The joke is that the only joke is that people think it might not be a joke.

46 Barrett Brown  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:57:39am

re: #36 Fozzie Bear

Sean Carasov, anti-Scientologist Anon wunderkind, got a Mudkipz tattoo back in 2007. That was a dedicated man.

47 Kragar  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:57:58am

re: #40 Charles

And I don’t mean laugh with it.

Of course, he invites them to join their group after explicitly stating that no one speaks for their group, which makes this one guy sitting in his basement sending a pen pal letter to Glenn.

48 Walter L. Newton  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:58:51am

re: #46 Barrett Brown

Sean Carasov, anti-Scientologist Anon wunderkind, got a Mudkipz tattoo back in 2007. That was a dedicated man.

Big deal… I got drunk once and shaved off all my hair… what the fuck does that prove.

49 Amory Blaine  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:58:54am

Today is I wash the floors day at home. A most dreaded day. I wish the toilet would break..

50 Charles Johnson  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:59:07am

re: #45 Fozzie Bear

It’s really, really hard to explain this stuff to people who didn’t grow up in a culture of relentless anonymous trolling. The joke is that the only joke is that people think it might not be a joke.

Not really. I totally get it. I grew up in the culture of musicians. I get the joke, but it stops being funny when they organize into a group that vandalizes websites.

51 SanFranciscoZionist  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:59:24am

re: #45 Fozzie Bear

It’s really, really hard to explain this stuff to people who didn’t grow up in a culture of relentless anonymous trolling. The joke is that the only joke is that people think it might not be a joke.

I’m just bored.

52 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:59:26am

re: #50 Charles

Not really. I totally get it. I grew up in the culture of musicians. I get the joke, but it stops being funny when they organize into a group that vandalizes websites.

/facepalm.

i’ll be back later.

53 shutdown  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:59:33am

Dealing with Anon is a bit like the “Game” some kids play. When you think of the “Game”, you lose the “Game”. Anon is irrelevant unless you dedicate too much time thinking about it. Like the Gods of the Discworld, they only come into existence when a large enough group of people decides they exist.

54 Barrett Brown  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 10:59:40am

re: #37 Charles

Fair enough. But I’ve just spoken to Operation Payback folks and they didn’t send it, as had been reported this morning. That’s one of the problems with trying to keep tabs on Anon; anyone can speak for it. Forbes tried to portray my friend Gregg Housh as their “official spokesperson” the other day and he was pretty pissed off.

55 Charles Johnson  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:00:30am

re: #52 Fozzie Bear

/facepalm.

i’ll be back later.

I forgot - it’s something brand new, so meta that no one who isn’t part of it will ever understand. Lulz!

56 lawhawk  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:00:53am

re: #21 Kreniigh

It’s a logic bomb… /

57 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:01:19am

re: #54 Barrett Brown

Fair enough. But I’ve just spoken to Operation Payback folks and they didn’t send it, as had been reported this morning. That’s one of the problems with trying to keep tabs on Anon; anyone can speak for it. Forbes tried to portray my friend Gregg Housh as their “official spokesperson” the other day and he was pretty pissed off.

Another functional element of organizations: Spokespersons or official information outlets.

This is a prank. I will secretly pray for Beck falling for it and beclowning himself by taking the bait. It’s already ridiculous that he had it posted on his news website.

58 Gus  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:01:20am

The Tea Party Anonymous is not an organization it’s a movement.

59 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:02:02am

One last try before my late lunch.

Anonymous isn’t anarchist. It is literally anarchy.

60 wrenchwench  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:02:08am

re: #58 Gus 802

The Tea Party Anonymous is not an organization it’s a movement.

And no single person speaks for it….

61 Sol Berdinowitz  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:02:26am

It means you can embrace whatever aspects of the “organization” that appeal to you and distance yourself from the rest, maintaining that it is not a “group”.

62 Amory Blaine  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:02:27am

re: #57 000G

Another functional element of organizations: Spokespersons or official information outlets.

This is a prank. I will secretly pray for Beck falling for it and beclowning himself by taking the bait. It’s already ridiculous that he had it posted on his news website.

The only thing bigger than anonymous is Becks ego.

63 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:02:28am

re: #60 wrenchwench

And no single person speaks for it…

So who sent the letter?

64 b_sharp  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:02:57am

re: #59 Fozzie Bear

One last try before my late lunch.

Anonymous isn’t anarchist. It is literally anarchy.

Are you a member?

65 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:02:59am

re: #58 Gus 802

The Tea Party Anonymous is not an organization it’s a movement.

You know, even highly critical reports of the Tea Party, like Tea Party Nationalism, explicitly called it a “Tea Party Movement” and acknowledged that it consisted of organizations that acted autonomously from one another.

66 sattv4u2  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:03:10am

re: #63 EmmmieG

So who sent the letter?

Sesame Street!

67 wrenchwench  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:03:14am

re: #63 EmmmieG

So who sent the letter?

Doesn’t matter. Anonymous is everyone and no one.

68 Gus  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:03:27am

re: #60 wrenchwench

And no single person speaks for it…

And they’re just doing it for the lulz.

Coming up next. Pikachu figures and how to mooch off your parents until you’re 50.

69 Barrett Brown  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:03:38am

re: #55 Charles

Heh. That was actually a pretty good retort even though I tend to agree with Fozzie.

70 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:03:43am

re: #67 wrenchwench

Doesn’t matter. Anonymous is everyone and no one.

So I could send a letter on behalf of Anonymous?

71 Jack Burton  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:03:57am

re: #45 Fozzie Bear

It’s really, really hard to explain this stuff to people who didn’t grow up in a culture of relentless anonymous trolling. The joke is that the only joke is that people think it might not be a joke.

To be a bit serious for a second though, I’ve noticed that many people seem to have a hard time accepting the fact that large groups of people can act independently towards the same or interrelated goals with little or no planning or contact with each other. People think there must be an organization, a leader, or a conspiracy.

So to someone who doesn’t get net culture, anonymous trolling, or the Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory; it’s obvious that this must be an organized group or movement.

72 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:03:58am

re: #70 EmmmieG

So I could send a letter on behalf of Anonymous?

Go for it! :D

73 wrenchwench  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:04:16am

re: #66 sattv4u2

Sesame Street!

This missive was brought to you by the letter A with a circle around it.

74 imherefromtheinternet  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:04:34am

Reification fallacy is full of lulz.

The media hasn’t the slightest idea how to report on Anonymous. I can just imagine Wolf Blitzer trying to wrap his gnarled brain around this. Well actually FOX does know: demonize the naughty scamps and scare their elderly audience into a state of perpetual fear for the soul of their nation.

9,000 penises indeed.

75 Sol Berdinowitz  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:04:39am

re: #70 EmmmieG

So I could send a letter on behalf of Anonymous?

Just remember not to sign it, or it won’t be…

76 Decatur Deb  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:04:46am

re: #70 EmmmieG

So I could send a letter on behalf of Anonymous?

Tell them you’re interested in gold coins.

77 b_sharp  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:04:48am

re: #67 wrenchwench

Doesn’t matter. Anonymous is everyone and no one.

Can’t be, I’ve never joined them in anything, and they do do things.

78 Gus  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:05:00am

This is getting weird.

79 wrenchwench  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:05:02am

re: #70 EmmmieG

So I could send a letter on behalf of Anonymous?

On behalf of, yes, as long as you don’t speak for it/them.

80 Brother Holy Cruise Missile of Mild Acceptance  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:05:06am

somehow I just don’t see Beck’s pseudo fascism meshing well with the anarchy that is anonymous…

81 Barrett Brown  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:05:12am

re: #70 EmmmieG

Yes, send one to Commentary.

82 Walter L. Newton  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:05:39am

I’ve got to go have a movement. I’m old, we pray for these moments.
//

83 Charles Johnson  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:05:51am

re: #71 ArchangelMichael

To be a bit serious for a second though, I’ve noticed that many people seem to have a hard time accepting the fact that large groups of people can act independently towards the same or interrelated goals with little or no planning or contact with each other. People think there must be an organization, a leader, or a conspiracy.

So to someone who doesn’t get net culture, anonymous trolling, or the Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory; it’s obvious that this must be an organized group or movement.

And I repeat — when any so-called anonymous disorganized group all runs the same program and uses it to attack a website, at that point they are an old-fashioned, non-meta organized group, no matter what kind of pretentious rhetoric they use to describe themselves.

84 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:06:03am

re: #71 ArchangelMichael

To be a bit serious for a second though, I’ve noticed that many people seem to have a hard time accepting the fact that large groups of people can act independently towards the same or interrelated goals with little or no planning or contact with each other. People think there must be an organization, a leader, or a conspiracy.

So to someone who doesn’t get net culture, anonymous trolling, or the Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory; it’s obvious that this must be an organized group or movement.

THIS.

Fuck lunch, this is hilarious.

85 wrenchwench  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:06:09am

re: #77 b_sharp

Can’t be, I’ve never joined them in anything, and they do do things.

OK, everyone except you. And me.

86 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:06:14am

re: #74 imherefromtheinternet

The media hasn’t the slightest idea how to report on Anonymous.

That goes for almost anything internet, though.

I still think it’s cute when they report on YouTube hits.

87 valuepack  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:06:27am

OT:
are comments now invisible if you’re not logged in, or am i missing something?

88 Gus  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:06:35am

re: #82 Walter L. Newton

I’ve got to go have a movement. I’m old, we pray for these moments.
//

Like you Walter, I too pray to God that these you men and women find Jesus in their hearts.

89 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:06:56am

re: #83 Charles

And I repeat — when any so-called anonymous disorganized group all runs the same program and uses it to attack a website, at that point they are an old-fashioned, non-meta organized group, no matter what kind of pretentious rhetoric they use to describe themselves.

Charles, somebody posts the script, millions download and run it. It doesn’t imply actual organization. It’s just a crapload of independent assholes.

90 Killgore Trout  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:07:04am

re: #80 Dreggas

somehow I just don’t see Beck’s pseudo fascism meshing well with the anarchy that is anonymous…

Beck is past fascism and off into libertarian extremism. Libertarians and anarchists get along just fine.

91 Barrett Brown  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:07:04am

re: #80 Dreggas

But Beck has always been our secret leader. How do you think a morning zoo crew radio host who cries like a bitch and talks exclusively in nonsense-speak got to where he is? “Healthcare is akin to Nazism” is one of our old memes, like Mudkipz and Power Wrist.

92 shutdown  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:07:43am

re: #81 Barrett Brown

Yes, send one to Commentary.

You know, I think I have decided I don’t like you. You seem to be a pretty typical bulletin board bully, for all you hide behind a veil of intellectual argumentation.

93 Walter L. Newton  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:08:18am

re: #88 Gus 802

Like you Walter, I too pray to God that these you men and women find Jesus in their hearts.

I just pray for a bowel in my movement. Is that what Anon is like? A bunch of turds that don’t belong to any movement, but occasionally leave themselves around, and when we see them, we say.. “That must have belonged to a movement?”

94 Charles Johnson  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:08:56am

re: #87 valuepack

OT:
are comments now invisible if you’re not logged in, or am i missing something?

No - I’m doing some work on the database to fix some small problems.

95 jamesfirecat  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:08:58am

re: #86 000G

That goes for almost anything internet, though.

I still think it’s cute when they report on YouTube hits.

Chat Roulette!

You know how in Russian Roulette you have five empty chambers and a bullet?

Well in Chat Roulette you have five chambers full of c**k and one full of reporters trying to do research on it….

96 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:09:00am

re: #93 Walter L. Newton

I just pray for a bowel in my movement. Is that what Anon is like? A bunch of turds that don’t belong to any movement, but occasionally leave themselves around, and when we see them, we say.. “That must have belonged to a movement?”

Hahaha, yes, in a way.

97 Killgore Trout  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:09:04am

re: #83 Charles

And I repeat — when any so-called anonymous disorganized group all runs the same program and uses it to attack a website, at that point they are an old-fashioned, non-meta organized group, no matter what kind of pretentious rhetoric they use to describe themselves.

Barret Brown said he talked to them this morning. A simple email, im or phone call connects right to the leaders of the group who know what’s going on.

98 cenotaphium  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:09:05am

re: #74 imherefromtheinternet

Reification fallacy is full of lulz.

The media hasn’t the slightest idea how to report on Anonymous. I can just imagine Wolf Blitzer trying to wrap his gnarled brain around this. Well actually FOX does know: demonize the naughty scamps and scare their elderly audience into a state of perpetual fear for the soul of their nation.

9,000 penises indeed.

I think Fox news does the best reporting on Anonymous, in that it is the funniest.

Remember this?

Hackers on steroids! Close the curtains and get a dog!

99 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:09:29am

re: #89 Fozzie Bear

Charles, somebody posts the script, millions download and run it. It doesn’t imply actual organization. It’s just a crapload of independent assholes.

It’s kind of like people reading the Communist Manifesto and deciding they will want to be Communists and start a revolution. Sure, they may join organizations for this cause and because all these people and organizations share the same goal, maybe their actions will be identical. If sharing strategies and tactics made one part of the same group, the War on Terror would already have been won.

100 Barrett Brown  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:09:31am

re: #92 imp_62

101 Gus  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:09:46am

re: #96 Fozzie Bear

Hahaha, yes, in a way.

Tell that to the judge.

102 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:09:50am

I’m going to be sitting here singing about fish heads all day now.

103 Charles Johnson  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:09:59am

re: #89 Fozzie Bear

Charles, somebody posts the script, millions download and run it. It doesn’t imply actual organization. It’s just a crapload of independent assholes.

Somehow, I don’t think the people who track down and arrest these disorganized non-entities see that quite the same way.

104 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:10:11am

re: #97 Killgore Trout

Barret Brown said he talked to them this morning. A simple email, im or phone call connects right to the leaders of the group who know what’s going on.

Well, that’s the thing. There are people who are active, but that doesn’t make them leaders. I wouldn’t use the term leader to describe them, unless you are talking about Moot, who has a special place there.

105 sattv4u2  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:10:15am

re: #93 Walter L. Newton

I just pray for a bowel in my movement. Is that what Anon is like? A bunch of turds that don’t belong to any movement, but occasionally leave themselves around, and when we see them, we say.. “That must have belonged to a movement?”

we can call it The Tidy Bowel Moevment!!

(od maybe not!!)

106 Barrett Brown  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:10:25am

re: #88 Gus 802

They worship the one true god, Lolki.

107 imherefromtheinternet  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:11:03am

re: #98 cenotaphium

I think Fox news does the best reporting on Anonymous, in that it is the funniest.

Remember this?


[Video]Hackers on steroids! Close the curtains and get a dog!

Yeah. That is just… wow. Boggles my mind every time I see it.

108 shutdown  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:11:54am

re: #98 cenotaphium

I think Fox news does the best reporting on Anonymous, in that it is the funniest.

Remember this?


[Video]

Hackers on steroids! Close the curtains and get a dog!

21st Century equivalent of reporting on dangerous long-hairs loitering in public parks.

109 Barrett Brown  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:12:11am

re: #90 Killgore Trout

Yes, libertarians are worse than fascism, which is merely a gateway to “libertarian extremism.” Finally, some measured commentary!

110 Gus  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:12:57am

re: #94 Charles

No - I’m doing some work on the database to fix some small problems.

The usual suspects are already paranoid about that and are running with a conspiracy theory already.

111 cenotaphium  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:13:13am

re: #104 Fozzie Bear

Well, that’s the thing. There are people who are active, but that doesn’t make them leaders. I wouldn’t use the term leader to describe them, unless you are talking about Moot, who has a special place there.

Poor Moot has been hounded by reporters trying to get in touch with Anonymous ever since this began. I sympathized with his exasperated “would the real Anonymous please stand up” thread.

Well, all of 4 posts until it turned to the usual garbage.

112 b_sharp  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:13:42am

BBL I have a 2 hour drive home that will take 3 hours.

113 imherefromtheinternet  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:13:55am

re: #103 Charles

Somehow, I don’t think the people who track down and arrest these disorganized non-entities see that quite the same way.

I wonder if they can apply RICO laws? What are the legal standards for racketeering and conspiracy?

And if they arrest a low-ranking ‘member’ will he be able to move them up the chain by rolling on ‘crackmonkey666?’

What a (hilarious) mess.

114 shutdown  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:14:20am

re: #103 Charles

Somehow, I don’t think the people who track down and arrest these disorganized non-entities see that quite the same way.

In fact, this form mirrors the perfect “cell”, in which people act in concert toward a common goal, but no single individual can point to another known “member”, or participant. I would compare this to an internet flash mob, where individuals are culpable at the moment they act, but it might be difficult to identify an organization beyond the actual organizers.

115 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:14:33am

re: #103 Charles

Somehow, I don’t think the people who track down and arrest these disorganized non-entities see that quite the same way.

In German jurisprudence, there is a felony called creation of a criminal association (“Bildung einer kriminellen Vereinigung”, § 129 StGB). I doubt scriptkiddies getting busted for DDoS attacks and charged under cybercrime laws would get charged (or even convicted) with § 129. It would certainly be interesting to see the prosecution try to make that case.

116 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:16:07am

re: #113 imherefromtheinternet

I wonder if they can apply RICO laws? What are the legal standards for racketeering and conspiracy?

And if they arrest a low-ranking ‘member’ will he be able to move them up the chain by rolling on ‘crackmonkey666?’

What a (hilarious) mess.

HAHAHAHA

I would love to see what would happen if someone tried to “bust” anon.

117 shutdown  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:17:00am

re: #115 000G

In German jurisprudence, there is a felony called creation of a criminal association (“Bildung einer kriminellen Vereinigung”, § 129 StGB). I doubt scriptkiddies getting busted for DDoS attacks and charged under cybercrime laws would get charged (or even convicted) with § 129. It would certainly be interesting to see the prosecution try to make that case.

The hangup would be in proving the necessary intent in “forming” the criminal association. Responsibility for the actions of others is difficult to establish in this context.

118 Kragar  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:17:15am

And it begins,

A Call for a Federal Office to Guide Online Privacy

A Commerce Department task force, seeking to develop a framework for online privacy that would benefit both consumers and businesses, called Thursday for the creation of an office within the department that would work to strengthen privacy policies in the United States and coordinate initiatives with other countries.

The Privacy Policy Office, proposed by the department’s Internet Policy Task Force, would work with the administration, the Federal Trade Commission and other agencies on issues surrounding international and commercial data privacy issues. The office would not have enforcement authority.

“America needs a robust privacy framework that preserves consumer trust in the evolving Internet economy while ensuring the Web remains a platform for innovation, jobs and economic growth,” the commerce secretary, Gary F. Locke, said in a statement. “Self-regulation without stronger enforcement is not enough. Consumers must trust the Internet in order for businesses to succeed online.”

119 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:17:50am

re: #116 Fozzie Bear

HAHAHAHA

I would love to see what would happen if someone tried to “bust” anon.

Well, individuals can still get apprehended and charged (in Germany probably § 303b StGB — computer sabotage) but probably not for crimes that mainly depend on the indicted having participated in a criminal group.

120 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:17:55am

re: #117 imp_62

The hangup would be in proving the necessary intent in “forming” the criminal association. Responsibility for the actions of others is difficult to establish in this context.

Or the more important question, is “lulz” a motive consistent with “malice”?

121 Charles Johnson  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:18:00am

There’s one way I’m definitely old-fashioned, and not very meta at all.

I don’t find anything amusing about vandals. Whether they’re vandalizing someone’s property or vandalizing a website. Not funny. No lulz.

122 Gus  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:18:36am

re: #120 Fozzie Bear

Or the more important question, is “lulz” a motive consistent with “malice”?

Tell that to the judge.

123 jamesfirecat  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:19:32am

re: #120 Fozzie Bear

Or the more important question, is “lulz” a motive consistent with “malice”?

Isn’t that sort of inherent in the fact that they’re lulz in the first place?

124 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:19:33am

You can’t put out a fire by drowning it in wood.

125 shutdown  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:19:45am

re: #116 Fozzie Bear

HAHAHAHA

I would love to see what would happen if someone tried to “bust” anon.

It is possible to go after the proximate instigators of any particular action or activity, regardless of the existence of any formal group. And any participants, whether they are longtime “anon” or one-timers, is also possible. Law enforcement would investigate the act to arrive at the actors, not vice versa.

126 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:20:29am

re: #117 imp_62

The hangup would be in proving the necessary intent in “forming” the criminal association. Responsibility for the actions of others is difficult to establish in this context.

I would also maintain that the prosecution would have to prove key factors of “Anonymous” being an organization which, as I have pointed out above, they lack. And sociology is not pseudo-science: These things can and in a court of law would have to be debated for their actual merits of meaning and truth. I don’t know whether a prosecution would want to go that way, provided one of the people they indict has the time and money to challenge them.

127 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:20:32am

re: #125 imp_62

It is possible to go after the proximate instigators of any particular action or activity, regardless of the existence of any formal group. And any participants, whether they are longtime “anon” or one-timers, is also possible. Law enforcement would investigate the act to arrive at the actors, not vice versa.

Yes, you could get individuals posting things on 4chan. But you can’t “get” anon, cause it isn’t an it.

128 shutdown  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:20:40am

re: #120 Fozzie Bear

Or the more important question, is “lulz” a motive consistent with “malice”?

Like many bad jokes, lulz often implies harm inuring to another party.

129 Kragar  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:21:00am

re: #121 Charles

There’s one way I’m definitely old-fashioned, and not very meta at all.

I don’t find anything amusing about vandals. Whether they’re vandalizing someone’s property or vandalizing a website. Not funny. No lulz.

FBI Memos Reveal Cost of Hacker Attacks

130 Political Atheist  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:22:48am

re: #67 wrenchwench

Doesn’t matter. Anonymous is everyone and no one.

And besides that got all the cool quotes!
///

131 Kronocide  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:22:59am

re: #121 Charles

Vandals are close to thieves. While they don’t steal something they remove the ability to use something by destroying it.

132 cenotaphium  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:25:43am

re: #121 Charles

There’s one way I’m definitely old-fashioned, and not very meta at all.

I don’t find anything amusing about vandals. Whether they’re vandalizing someone’s property or vandalizing a website. Not funny. No lulz.

I kind of enjoyed hammering Hal Turner with prank calls. I guess it’s easier to feel sympathy for the action when the opponent is just an enormous ass. Kind of like how the “dude, you have no Koran” wasn’t right to take the book about to be burned, but might have been morally okay still?

Of course, it’s different with attacking mainstream sites, rather than some douchebag nazis blog. I don’t agree with that.

In a microcosm, this is what goes on every time someone posts a new “call to action”.

133 Political Atheist  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:25:50am

re: #130 Rightwingconspirator

PIMF

They got all the cool quotes”.
//
Sheesh, gotta slow down a bit.

134 Killgore Trout  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:26:55am

re: #127 Fozzie Bear

Yes, you could get individuals posting things on 4chan. But you can’t “get” anon, cause it isn’t an it.

Bullshit. You don’t think the feds aren’t already monitoring Barret Brown’s conversations with the Anon non-leaders? They are collecting evidence and watching for illegal activity. If those people go to jail anon will disappear or have to change tactics. To claim that it can’t be destroyed because it doesn’t exist is a silly fantasy. A few convictions and reality will set in.

135 cenotaphium  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:27:08am

re: #120 Fozzie Bear

Or the more important question, is “lulz” a motive consistent with “malice”?

It’s Schadenfreude. Blame the Germans.

136 Charles Johnson  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:27:13am

re: #110 Gus 802

I’ve been trying to get the comment DB into an easier to use system - with almost 9M comments it’s become unwieldy for some operations I need to do, for searching, etc. And it was designed a long time ago - the indexing and cross-referencing desperately needs a redesign to work smoother. Problem is, a table that large becomes a big PITA to change.

137 wrenchwench  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:27:36am

re: #126 000G

I would also maintain that the prosecution would have to prove key factors of “Anonymous” being an organization which, as I have pointed out above, they lack. And sociology is not pseudo-science: These things can and in a court of law would have to be debated for their actual merits of meaning and truth. I don’t know whether a prosecution would want to go that way, provided one of the people they indict has the time and money to challenge them.

I don’t think sociological definitions would come up in a US court. The laws have definitions of what constitutes a breach of the law, and I think they’ll have enough to go on there. Groups don’t get prosecuted, individuals do. I don’t think they can be prosecuted just for belonging to a group, unless it’s shown that there was a conspiracy to break the law. They already have a definition for conspiracy.

/got my Bachelor of ARTS in sociology, not a Bachelor of SCIENCE.

138 imherefromtheinternet  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:27:39am

re: #129 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

FBI Memos Reveal Cost of Hacker Attacks

Not trying to defend anonymous, but the attacks referred to in the article you posted are NOT like the DDOS attacks Anonymous ‘orchestrated.’ The article refers to malicious worms, probably used by (real life) criminal groups to gain private information. That is theft.

What Anon did was more like forming a giant line of fake customers that a business has to serve, keeping the real customers from having access for awhile.

139 Amory Blaine  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:28:30am
140 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:28:57am

re: #132 cenotaphium

Of course, it’s different with attacking mainstream sites, rather than some douchebag nazis blog. I don’t agree with that.

Of course, the following question would still be legit: What gives them the right? Vigilante justice seems morally satisfying sometimes, like when leaking hundreds of private emails from a neo-nazi BBS like WikiLeaks did last year, but it’s still vigilante justice, i.e. extrajudicial punishment delivered by a mob.

141 SanFranciscoZionist  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:29:33am

re: #139 Amory Blaine

More bloviating from el Rushbo.

Rush: Maybe “we’re fighting the wrong enemy in the Middle East. Maybe the real terrorists … are on Capitol Hill”

Shit, Rush, that’s not what you were sayin’ a few years ago, when a Republican president was pursuing those wars.

142 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:30:29am

re: #134 Killgore Trout

Bullshit. You don’t think the feds aren’t already monitoring Barret Brown’s conversations with the Anon non-leaders? They are collecting evidence and watching for illegal activity. If those people go to jail anon will disappear or have to change tactics. To claim that it can’t be destroyed because it doesn’t exist is a silly fantasy. A few convictions and reality will set in.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Wait… are you serious? Do you actually think convicting a few, or dozens, or hundreds of people will have any effect whatsoever on anon?

143 Gus  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:30:41am

re: #134 Killgore Trout

Bullshit. You don’t think the feds aren’t already monitoring Barret Brown’s conversations with the Anon non-leaders? They are collecting evidence and watching for illegal activity. If those people go to jail anon will disappear or have to change tactics. To claim that it can’t be destroyed because it doesn’t exist is a silly fantasy. A few convictions and reality will set in.

I don’t know what we’re dealing with here but it’s unlike anything I’ve ever seen before. The flippancy about these actions is rather telling. It’s as if though people are approving of hacking.

144 Killgore Trout  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:30:41am

I’ll just dump this here for no reason…
Judge Napolitano: Federal Reserve = The 5th plank of the Communist Manifesto

145 jaunte  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:30:50am

re: #132 cenotaphium

The trouble with mobs is, ‘some douchebag’s blog’ is an extremely flexible definition of a justifiable target.

146 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:31:25am

re: #134 Killgore Trout

If those people go to jail anon will disappear or have to change tactics.

Huh? How so? Other people would just take over. Just like you cannot stamp out Communism by killing all communist leaders or eradicating Al-Qaeda by blasting away their leaders with drone attacks, either. There is too many of them, becoming an active part of the movement is just way too easy and the chances of getting caught and suffering for having participated are very slim (or at least preferable to the status quo).

147 Gus  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:31:59am

Oh brother.

148 S'latch  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:33:07am

I actually found a real picture of this guy on the Internet.

Image: anonymous.jpg

149 Amory Blaine  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:33:41am

Punishment will drive out the casual miscreant and attract more confrontational types.

150 Amory Blaine  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:34:15am

re: #148 Lawrence Schmerel

LOL I remember the unknown comic!!

151 Charles Johnson  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:34:25am

re: #137 wrenchwench

I don’t think sociological definitions would come up in a US court. The laws have definitions of what constitutes a breach of the law, and I think they’ll have enough to go on there. Groups don’t get prosecuted, individuals do. I don’t think they can be prosecuted just for belonging to a group, unless it’s shown that there was a conspiracy to break the law. They already have a definition for conspiracy.

It’s an interesting point - not a lawyer, of course, and I don’t know which laws might apply, but it seems like a case for conspiracy could be made if all these disorganized non-entities were using the same program to attack the same website, coordinating via IRC and Twitter, etc.

How is that not a conspiracy?

152 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:35:19am

re: #137 wrenchwench

I don’t think sociological definitions would come up in a US court. The laws have definitions of what constitutes a breach of the law, and I think they’ll have enough to go on there. Groups don’t get prosecuted, individuals do. I don’t think they can be prosecuted just for belonging to a group, unless it’s shown that there was a conspiracy to break the law. They already have a definition for conspiracy.

I think you are mistaken. Charges on grounds of belonging to criminal groups (without the conspiracy charge) go as far back as the Nuremberg Trials (quick googling). IIRC, that was one of the reasons why the SS was defined as a criminal organization by the Allies.

/got my Bachelor of ARTS in sociology, not a Bachelor of SCIENCE.

I know, I know, the whole english distinctions of science and humanities: my bad! :P

153 Obdicut  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:36:19am

re: #84 Fozzie Bear

THIS.

Fuck lunch, this is hilarious.

I don’t think you’re getting it, either.

Mobs aren’t organized. But they are still identifiable groups. The mob is the group doing the mob thing.

Anonymous is amorphous, to be sure, but at any given moment, you can show that someone posted a target on Anon, and the target was mobbed by members of Anon. When they do so, they really are acting in an ‘organized’ fashion. It doesn’t mean they have to have ranks and a phone tree or know each other’s names. The posting of targets, and methods, is the organizational tool.

The attack on Scientology is a good example. Is everyone in Anon fired up about scientology? Obviously not. There’s was— and is, to a lesser extent— an emphasis in Anon against Scientology because of the actions of some people in Anon who were able to effect the larger group. If you remove those people, you really do affect the behavior of the group.

So:
re: #142 Fozzie Bear

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Wait… are you serious? Do you actually think convicting a few, or dozens, or hundreds of people will have any effect whatsoever on anon?

Yes. Depending on who they are. People matter. What anon targets is not random.

154 wrenchwench  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:36:50am

re: #149 Amory Blaine

Punishment will drive out the casual miscreant and attract more confrontational types.

We can’t go after them! It will only make more!

/where have I heard that before….

155 SpaceJesus  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:37:26am

naw, they’re just a mob

156 Kronocide  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:37:33am

re: #124 Fozzie Bear

You can’t put out a fire by drowning it in wood.

Actually, theoretically you could if you put so much wood on the fire that it displaced all oxygen.

But I get your point!

157 cenotaphium  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:38:09am

re: #140 000G

Of course, the following question would still be legit: What gives them the right? Vigilante justice seems morally satisfying sometimes, like when leaking hundreds of private emails from a neo-nazi BBS like WikiLeaks did last year, but it’s still vigilante justice, i.e. extrajudicial punishment delivered by a mob.

Indeed. And it is “okay” just as far as you agree with the result. For most of us, when pedophiles and racists are exposed for what they are, we don’t truly care as much, even if we should - on principle. That’s kind of what I was trying to say. People choose to join or ignore whatever actions are proposed based on all kinds of reasons. Making the case that WikiLeaks should be “defended” this way, even though it’s fairly obviously contraproductive, isn’t that hard to sell to a bunch of fringe internet users.
But! The people who are “with” Anonymous on one action can be fundamentally opposed to the next, even though it is carried out in the same “name”. As it was in my case.

In a wider sense, I can’t really give a definitive answer. It’d be easy to say it’s a matter of principle that no kind of vigilantism should ever be practiced. In reality, it’s never that easy. To me, at least.

158 wrenchwench  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:38:11am

re: #152 000G

I think you are mistaken. Charges on grounds of belonging to criminal groups (without the conspiracy charge) go as far back as the Nuremberg Trials (quick googling). IIRC, that was one of the reasons why the SS was defined as a criminal organization by the Allies.

I know, I know, the whole english distinctions of science and humanities: my bad! :P

You may not have noticed that I limited my remarks to “US courts”.

159 shutdown  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:38:16am

re: #142 Fozzie Bear

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Wait… are you serious? Do you actually think convicting a few, or dozens, or hundreds of people will have any effect whatsoever on anon?

It would. Why a do you assume that anon is some monolithic bloc of people acting in concert towards a common goal? It is a group of ADHD scriptkiddies who are happy to be motivated on a one-off basis to do something that gets them out of Mom’s basement for a bit. Grab the few organizing minds behind the flashmob, and the mob wanders off to do something else. There is no organising principle which will cause new leaders to emerge. They may find other mayhem to wreak, but it will be of a different nature. It is simple to distinguish between organizers/ideologues and fellow travelers with too much time and computing power on their hands.

160 darthstar  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:38:43am

OT: just adding a shopping item for my gift list here so when I click to buy the thing Charles gets his cut.

[Link: www.amazon.com…]

161 shutdown  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:40:24am

re: #151 Charles

It’s an interesting point - not a lawyer, of course, and I don’t know which laws might apply, but it seems like a case for conspiracy could be made if all these disorganized non-entities were using the same program to attack the same website, coordinating via IRC and Twitter, etc.

How is that not a conspiracy?

Conspiracy carries with it a prerequisite of conscious cooperation, and the definition of conspiracy is not generally met by a number of people doing the same thing at the same time, without a proven element of planning.

162 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:41:00am

re: #158 wrenchwench

You may not have noticed that I limited my remarks to “US courts”.

Well, essentially not the IMT, but the Dachau and the Subsequent Nuremberg Trials happened in U.S. miliary courts. I think my comment still stands that in american jurisprudence there have been cases made against people simply for belonging to a group that was defined as being criminal, without the prosecution having to prove a conspiracy.

163 Charles Johnson  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:41:29am

re: #160 darthstar

OT: just adding a shopping item for my gift list here so when I click to buy the thing Charles gets his cut.

[Link: www.amazon.com…]

Hey, you found a variation on Amazon’s URL that causes my regex replacement great pain. I fixed it, but you’ll have to reload the page to see the fix.

164 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:41:48am

I see people here talking about this is if there is a cure to people being assholes. That’s what’s so funny about this to me. Anonymous isn’t a thing you can go after.

They can, and should, go after people who engage in hacking. But that’s not at all the same thing as going after anon, which is literally impossible.

Don’t confuse individuals with groups, people.

165 Obdicut  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:42:21am
166 Charles Johnson  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:43:16am

re: #161 imp_62

Conspiracy carries with it a prerequisite of conscious cooperation, and the definition of conspiracy is not generally met by a number of people doing the same thing at the same time, without a proven element of planning.

The attacks with the LOIC tool were coordinated via simple JSON files with setup instructions for the program, and they were distributing them via Twitter and IRC. Pretty obviously, this is not only coordination but planning.

167 Obdicut  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:43:35am

re: #164 Fozzie Bear

Targets get posted on Anon, yes? Distributed via the IRCs, the tweets, facebook, and all the other various media?

168 wrenchwench  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:43:45am

re: #162 000G

Military courts are very different from civilian ones. Woe betide any members of “Anon” who are in the military. See: Manning, Bradley.

169 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:43:49am

re: #165 Obdicut

Planning:

Image: Anon-Operation.png

Image: AnonENG.png

Did a collective make those posts, or did individuals?

170 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:44:01am

re: #164 Fozzie Bear

I see people here talking about this is if there is a cure to people being assholes. That’s what’s so funny about this to me. Anonymous isn’t a thing you can go after.

Well, you could go after anonmity and eliminate anonimity on the internet. But I don’t think the people in charge of actually formulating technological internet standards and structure would like that idea too much and I think political leaders (I will just exempt China here, for practical purposes) are too incompetent to understand the issue in order to demand it.

171 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:44:11am

lol wut

172 Obdicut  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:44:20am

re: #169 Fozzie Bear

Did a collective make those posts, or did individuals?

That is exactly my point, Fozzie.

173 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:44:45am

re: #171 WindUpBird

lol wut

Help me out here dude, people are missing the point by miles.

174 Vicious Babushka  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:44:51am

re: #54 Barrett Brown

Fair enough. But I’ve just spoken to Operation Payback folks and they didn’t send it, as had been reported this morning. That’s one of the problems with trying to keep tabs on Anon; anyone can speak for it. Forbes tried to portray my friend Gregg Housh as their “official spokesperson” the other day and he was pretty pissed off.

All 90,000 of them or whatever random “membership” they claim to have?

I thought they didn’t have spokes-folks.

175 Killgore Trout  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:45:36am

re: #165 Obdicut

Planning:

Image: Anon-Operation.png

Image: AnonENG.png

That reminds me that there are probably extra special laws for messing with finical institutions like Visa and Paypal.

176 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:45:41am

re: #142 Fozzie Bear

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Wait… are you serious? Do you actually think convicting a few, or dozens, or hundreds of people will have any effect whatsoever on anon?

INTERNET!!!! :D

177 shutdown  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:45:46am

re: #164 Fozzie Bear

I see people here talking about this is if there is a cure to people being assholes. That’s what’s so funny about this to me. Anonymous isn’t a thing you can go after.

They can, and should, go after people who engage in hacking. But that’s not at all the same thing as going after anon, which is literally impossible.

Don’t confuse individuals with groups, people.

There is no need to go after “anon” as it does not exist. The people committing any particular action at any given time are at that moment the “anon” in question, and as such can be tracked, apprehended and prosecuted.

178 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:46:14am

re: #168 wrenchwench

Military courts are very different from civilian ones. Woe betide any members of “Anon” who are in the military. See: Manning, Bradley.

I understand that. Are they different enough for military courts not being able to set precedent for civilian ones, though?

And yes, Manning got caught and now pays for it. Should’ve been obvious to him not to brag about what he had done after he did it. You cannot have fame AND anonmity.

179 Charles Johnson  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:47:01am

re: #164 Fozzie Bear

I see people here talking about this is if there is a cure to people being assholes. That’s what’s so funny about this to me. Anonymous isn’t a thing you can go after.

They can, and should, go after people who engage in hacking. But that’s not at all the same thing as going after anon, which is literally impossible.

Don’t confuse individuals with groups, people.

I don’t think anyone’s trying to say that “anonymous” can be wiped out. It’s a simple point — those non-members of this non-group who organize into a group that vandalizes websites become a group that can indeed be tracked by authorities and prosecuted. They won’t arrest everyone, of course, they’ll go after the ones who post the information to set up the LOIC, and the most prolific attackers.

180 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:47:13am

re: #173 Fozzie Bear

Help me out here dude, people are missing the point by miles.

Man, I tried to make my points about INTERNET and anon yesterday

I really been trying, but it’s enough to make me just toss my last glass of scotch out into the woods behind my house, pick up a revolver and do the honorable thing :D

181 Killgore Trout  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:47:20am

re: #174 Alouette

All 90,000 of them or whatever random “membership” they claim to have?

I thought they didn’t have spokes-folks.

It’s a fallacy. They’ve convinced themselves that they are safe because they aren’t really a group and have no leaders. They’re just kidding themselves.

182 CuriousLurker  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:47:20am

To me the whole thing has become reminiscent of A Clockwork Orange, and I don’t suppose the eventual outcome will be much different. Depressing. Futile. *shrug*

183 wrenchwench  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:48:01am

re: #178 000G

I understand that. Are they different enough for military courts not being able to set precedent for civilian ones, though?

Yes.

184 jamesfirecat  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:48:30am

re: #178 000G

I understand that. Are they different enough for military courts not being able to set precedent for civilian ones, though?

And yes, Manning got caught and now pays for it. Should’ve been obvious to him not to brag about what he had done after he did it. You cannot have fame AND anonmity.

Mr. X SAVE ME! Oh wait, I’m him!

185 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:48:33am

re: #183 wrenchwench

Yes.

Mkay. Point taken. ;-)

186 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:49:04am

re: #6 Fozzie Bear

This is so funny. You are ALL being trolled.

IAWTC

187 Obdicut  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:49:26am

re: #173 Fozzie Bear

Help me out here dude, people are missing the point by miles.

They’re really not. Or rather, you’re missing an equal number of points.

188 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:49:28am

re: #18 Fozzie Bear

It goes back a lot further than that. I’d argue it started on BBS’s in the 80’s and 90’s.

IAAWTC

189 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:49:59am

re: #39 Fozzie Bear

THATS THE POINT.

IAAWTC

190 cenotaphium  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:50:08am

re: #174 Alouette

All 90,000 of them or whatever random “membership” they claim to have?

I thought they didn’t have spokes-folks.

It shouldn’t be hard to get a hold of people who are stirring the pot on this particular event. Nor is that contradictory to Anonymous, as a group, being without hierarchy or leadership.

Or, if you want, the particular sub-grouping of Anonymous that adheres to what these particular guys are saying about this particular thing *do* have a hierarchy! Sort of.

Yet another way; a local arena is hosting a new show every few weeks. It’s the same arena, but different folks and different acts.

Clear as mud!

191 Usually refered to as anyways  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:50:16am

Wikileaks’ Julian Assange Speaks After Release On Bail (VIDEO)

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange was released on bail today, and said in a press conference afterward: “If justice is not always an outcome, at least it is not dead yet.”

192 shutdown  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:50:30am

re: #166 Charles

The attacks with the LOIC tool were coordinated via simple JSON files with setup instructions for the program, and they were distributing them via Twitter and IRC. Pretty obviously, this is not only coordination but planning.

I am in no way defending the actions of the hackers. As a former defense attorney, I am pointing out that legal definitions and standards are often non-intuitive. In this instance, I would provide the following illustration to the court: leaving a bag of unassembled parts in a public place with instructions on how to assemble them into a bomb is not equivalent to conspiring with the person who happens along and actually assembles the device. The person leaving the bag and instructions would be indictable on a number of offenses, but conspiracy might not be one of them.

193 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:51:28am

re: #116 Fozzie Bear

HAHAHAHA

I would love to see what would happen if someone tried to “bust” anon.

well, it’d be like people being “busted” for filesharing. Millions do it, a few poor college schmucks get sued by the RIAA and get their cars taken away.

194 shutdown  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:51:39am

re: #180 WindUpBird

Man, I tried to make my points about INTERNET and anon yesterday

I really been trying, but it’s enough to make me just toss my last glass of scotch out into the woods behind my house, pick up a revolver and do the honorable thing :D

I have a serious problem with you tossing scotch into the woods.
Oh, and don’t kill yourself, blablabla
//

195 Obdicut  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:51:39am

re: #192 imp_62

If you left those bomb-making parts in the apartment building that you knew contained a lot of people who would use the bombs, though, it might actually amount to ‘conspiracy’.

196 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:53:15am

Years ago I knew a kid who, in the early days of home computers, used a modem to talk to other computer users.

He claimed he had a car battery next to the computer that he would use to send a surge to other computers.*

If it exists, there is someone who wants to destroy it, no matter what.

*My husband has told me this is impossible, and I believe him, as he’s a lot smarter than the sociopathic dude.

197 Obdicut  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:53:36am

re: #193 WindUpBird

That’s not really a great analogy. Filesharing is a constant and passive activity, and participation tends to be equal; people share stuff, they both download and distribute. The targeting of websites for DDOS attacks is a much more acute thing. Someone picks the targets. Those targets are not developed spontaneously, nor are they developed randomly.

People matter. Even in anon.

198 darthstar  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:53:51am

re: #163 Charles

Hey, you found a variation on Amazon’s URL that causes my regex replacement great pain. I fixed it, but you’ll have to reload the page to see the fix.

I see that…didn’t mean to QA your site…then again, that’s my job. I got mad at Amazon for not allowing that link and bought it at Sur La Table, but I’ll try again with my next purchase. Cheers.


[Link: www.amazon.com…]

Testing the link this time just in case some of the other cooks want to surprise their significant lizards.

199 Obdicut  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:54:11am

re: #196 EmmmieG

Yes, that is quite impossible. It would fry your own computer/modem nicely.

200 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:54:34am

re: #179 Charles

I don’t think anyone’s trying to say that “anonymous” can be wiped out. It’s a simple point — those non-members of this non-group who organize into a group that vandalizes websites become a group that can indeed be tracked by authorities and prosecuted. They won’t arrest everyone, of course, they’ll go after the ones who post the information to set up the LOIC, and the most prolific attackers.

The question seems to be whether going after specific individuals of the movement for their individual actions will significantly change the behavior of the movement. It’s basically a deterrence strategy. How do you quantify success with that?

201 shutdown  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:54:35am

re: #195 Obdicut

If you left those bomb-making parts in the apartment building that you knew contained a lot of people who would use the bombs, though, it might actually amount to ‘conspiracy’.

Nope. Conspiracy has a very specific requirement that two or more individuals be knowingly engaged together. Lots wrong with leaving the parts, etc. but conspiracy has a distinct set of requisite elements.

202 darthstar  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:55:08am

re: #198 darthstar

Nope…still messing with me. Assuming that once the cookie’s set, one can go about doing what they need to and still give you credit, here’s the URL split

[Link: www.amazon.com…] Cuisipro-746479-Deluxe-Food-Mill/dp/product-description/B000G18A3W

203 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:55:26am

re: #188 WindUpBird

TYFAWMC

204 Obdicut  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:56:24am

re: #201 imp_62

Are you trying to simply make a technical point about conspiracy requiring agreement?

205 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:57:07am

re: #197 Obdicut

That’s not really a great analogy. Filesharing is a constant and passive activity, and participation tends to be equal; people share stuff, they both download and distribute. The targeting of websites for DDOS attacks is a much more acute thing. Someone picks the targets. Those targets are not developed spontaneously, nor are they developed randomly.

People matter. Even in anon.

When there are tens of millions of people involved, and every single one of them has the same voice as all the others, yes, things happen spontaneously. That’s the part that so many people have spectacularly wrong here. You are talking about a flock, not a hierarchy.

206 Charles Johnson  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:57:42am

re: #192 imp_62

I am in no way defending the actions of the hackers. As a former defense attorney, I am pointing out that legal definitions and standards are often non-intuitive. In this instance, I would provide the following illustration to the court: leaving a bag of unassembled parts in a public place with instructions on how to assemble them into a bomb is not equivalent to conspiring with the person who happens along and actually assembles the device. The person leaving the bag and instructions would be indictable on a number of offenses, but conspiracy might not be one of them.

Yeah, that would be a pretty good defense. But in any case, those who did pick up those parts and make bombs would still be in trouble, just maybe not to the level of conspiracy.

But there would be more evidence than just the circulation of the setup files. There’s undoubtedly more coordination going on behind the scenes than this.

Who knows? I’m just speculating. But I think it’s pretty darned naive and childish for people to think they become amorphous cloud beings by declaring themselves “anonymous.”

207 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:58:15am

re: #199 Obdicut

Yes, that is quite impossible. It would fry your own computer/modem nicely.

That’s what my husband said, or something like that. He’s finally figured out to use analogies to help me understand his electrical engineering stuff.

(My husband designs motherboards for a living. My family refers to him as “tech support.”)

208 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:59:26am

re: #207 EmmmieG

You could set it up so it doesn’t fry your computer pretty easily, but that doesn’t mean it would do anything other than fry your connection at the pole. You can’t push a strong signal that far down a wire that has breakers all along it.

209 jc717  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:59:33am

re: #21 Kreniigh

From the letter:
“Anyone who claims to speak for all of us is, quite frankly, a liar.”

Wait, is this some kind of logic puzzle?

From the comments:
“Secondarily, there is a protectionism of the gay agenda here as well. Manning did this for a reason and DADT is likely the reason. If the focus is on Manning, then so to is it on DADT.”

Wait, are we playing the Illuminati card game now? ‘Manning, with support from the Gay Agenda and the UFOs, launches an attack to destroy the US Army.’

And to think that he could have just used the ‘orbital mind control lasers’.

210 darthstar  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 11:59:42am

It’s beginning to look a lot like Christmas…

Susan Collins calls cops on 9/11 responders who came to visit

Republican senators were so worried about meeting with 9/11 responders who came to Washington today that at least one called the cops on them, the Daily News has learned.

Even before the nine responders had a chance to start visiting senators’ offices - where they intended to stay until meeting with legislators - they were greeted by Capitol Police, who had been called by Sen. Susan Collins (R-Me.).

211 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:00:00pm

re: #205 Fozzie Bear

When there are tens of millions of people involved, and every single one of them has the same voice as all the others, yes, things happen spontaneously. That’s the part that so many people have spectacularly wrong here. You are talking about a flock, not a hierarchy.

The Spontaneity of the Masses is a very old meme… ;-)

212 Obdicut  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:00:40pm

re: #205 Fozzie Bear

When there are tens of millions of people involved, and every single one of them has the same voice as all the others, yes, things happen spontaneously. That’s the part that so many people have spectacularly wrong here. You are talking about a flock, not a hierarchy.

I’m sorry, Fozzie, but that’s not how Anon actually works in practice. The anti-Scientology bent can be actually traced to the actions and efforts of individuals.

There are spontaneous upsurgences in Anon that result in action. But any sustained action in Anon does not come from some sort of flock principle. Those ‘target’ posts don’t spontaneously assemble themselves from pixels.

Why do you believe that it’s actually a spontaneous organizing principle, even when it comes to the large campaigns?

213 shutdown  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:01:18pm

re: #204 Obdicut

Are you trying to simply make a technical point about conspiracy requiring agreement?

The point I am making is entirely technical. Conspiracy is a joint enterprise and only works with more than one individual. Acting alone is an absolute defense to a charge of conspiracy. Failure to communicate, cooperate, coordinate or in any other way plan to act jointly makes a charge of conspiracy difficult to support. There may very well be elements of how the relevant LOIC files/scripts were posted and there existence and purpose communicated to others that meets the charge of conspiracy, but it is not easy to prove in general.

214 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:01:46pm

re: #164 Fozzie Bear

I see people here talking about this is if there is a cure to people being assholes. That’s what’s so funny about this to me. Anonymous isn’t a thing you can go after.

They can, and should, go after people who engage in hacking. But that’s not at all the same thing as going after anon, which is literally impossible.

Don’t confuse individuals with groups, people.

yeah, it’s basically like internet vandalism. Graffiti, but really coordinated.

Cops always try and shut down raves. They pop up in secret, they’re out in the woods, people dance, people do drugs. The thing is up, the event takes place, is finished, dissappears before the police know what’s happened.

Going affter Anonymous is like going after “ravers”. We have to stop the dancing and the drugs! Well, you can’t. there’s too many of them. And it’s too easy and too enjoyable for them to quickly assemble, and nobody can stop them.

Sometimes guys, a phenomenon can’t be stopped. *shrug* Anonymous will probably fall out of style, and some other thing will become a thing. But Anonymous can’t be ended, because anyone can just magically claim themselves to be part of it. And you don’t know who’s involved, or who is merely supporting who’s involved. And even the people who are involved, aren’t doing anything criminal.

It’s like labeling yourself as a member of an outsider political party. People who identify with Anonymous want a simple thing IMHO: freedom of information that is absolute.

That’s their belief.

Much like the belief that everyone has a right to own a gun. A weapon that can easily, quickly and efficiently kill a man, that fits in a pocket. (I support this right BTW).

So whatever guys. If you think they’re terrorists? You missed the point. if you think half the clever young internet pissed off can be arrested in its entirety on conspiracy charges? Missed the point. If you think every smartass teenager who knows their way around can be stopped? No. They’re pissed off young people who think fossilied old farts and politicians and corporations that control media access and internet access will move to squelch free speech on the internet. And free speech INCLUDES WIKILEAKS.

So they fight back! Seems simple to me. Are they moral? doesn’t matter. Are they ethical? Doesn’t matter. Are they organized? I dunno, sorta? Not really? But it’s not your daddy’s protest.

215 Obdicut  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:02:11pm

re: #213 imp_62

But they are communicating. That’s what I’m not getting about your argument. The note is, in fact, a form of communication.

216 shutdown  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:02:45pm

re: #206 Charles

Yeah, that would be a pretty good defense. But in any case, those who did pick up those parts and make bombs would still be in trouble, just maybe not to the level of conspiracy.

But there would be more evidence than just the circulation of the setup files. There’s undoubtedly more coordination going on behind the scenes than this.

Who knows? I’m just speculating. But I think it’s pretty darned naive and childish for people to think they become amorphous cloud beings by declaring themselves “anonymous.”

Agreed. See also my response to Obdi
re: #213 imp_62

The point I am making is entirely technical. Conspiracy is a joint enterprise and only works with more than one individual. Acting alone is an absolute defense to a charge of conspiracy. Failure to communicate, cooperate, coordinate or in any other way plan to act jointly makes a charge of conspiracy difficult to support. There may very well be elements of how the relevant LOIC files/scripts were posted and there existence and purpose communicated to others that meets the charge of conspiracy, but it is not easy to prove in general.

217 Obdicut  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:03:00pm

re: #214 WindUpBird

But there really are promoters who really do organize raves.

218 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:04:31pm

re: #197 Obdicut

That’s not really a great analogy. Filesharing is a constant and passive activity, and participation tends to be equal; people share stuff, they both download and distribute. The targeting of websites for DDOS attacks is a much more acute thing. Someone picks the targets. Those targets are not developed spontaneously, nor are they developed randomly.

People matter. Even in anon.

I think disseminating copyrighted property is less active than DDOS attacks, but man, ask artists who make their living off the internet (I don’t work this way, friends do tho) if they think a guy ripping their locked PDFs that they charge for, that pay their rent, into organized jpegs sorted and put into a folder, then released on torrents is passive, theyll blow a gasket ;-)

And of course people matter, and of course DDOSes are criminal. I gues maybe a different analogy would be coordinated vandalism?

Sort of the problem, it’s a new thing, it’s hard to put into old terms

219 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:04:57pm

re: #217 Obdicut

But there really are promoters who really do organize raves.

When there are tens of millions of people, stopping them involves guessing who will want to be the next organizer, not just who was the last one. The faces change so quickly, it’s impossible to track effectively, and impossible to stop. In a group that large, actions are effectively spontaneous, even if there are in fact individuals who push things along. The group that is in the center of the flock changes so rapidly it can’t be tracked.

220 Gus  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:05:05pm

The threat of jail time never stopped people from murdering either. Pursuing law enforcement and judicial penalties are not always pursued as a means of stamping out a social ill. The same applies with these hackers. No, you won’t be able to stop them but the enforcement will proceed.

221 lawhawk  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:05:35pm

Investigators don’t have to shut down anon or arrest everyone in order to turn the group/entity/collective into a shell of its former self.

Investigators will take their time to determine those individuals who are responsible for directing the most attacks, most important targets, etc. and pick them up on various related charges. Similarly, they would look to those individuals who respond to those requests for attacks (such as the LOIC).

Indictments could be filed on any number of grounds, whether it is RICO, conspiracy (18 USC 373), or racketeering (18 USC 1951 et seq. (such as interfering with interstate commerce, which financial services companies are involved in)), or even unauthorized access to electronic accounts (18 USC 2701), which includes preventing access to same.

222 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:05:41pm

re: #220 Gus 802

The threat of jail time never stopped people from murdering either. Pursuing law enforcement and judicial penalties are not always pursued as a means of stamping out a social ill. The same applies with these hackers. No, you won’t be able to stop them but the enforcement will proceed.

And it should, since hacking is asenine.

223 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:05:43pm

re: #214 WindUpBird

People who identify with Anonymous want a simple thing IMHO: freedom of information that is absolute.


I don’t think so. I think the thing they want is anonimity — something not talked about much here. No names, no accounts, no personas, no responsibilities, nothing being traced back… Of course, there is a lot of delusion going on about these points, especially when it comes to the crucial technical and technological understanding, but still: they want anonimity. And crucially, that is contradictory to the idea of absolute freedom of information because of course they don’t want the information about their actual offline identity to be known.

224 simoom  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:05:52pm

Yikes:
[Link: thehill.com…]

Republicans will paralyze the Senate floor for 50 hours by forcing clerks to read every single paragraph of the 1,924-page, $1.1 trillion omnibus spending bill.

Senate clerks are expected to read the massive bill in rotating shifts around the clock — taking breaks to drink water and pop throat lozenges — to keep legislative business on track, according to a Democratic leadership aide.

If Republicans follow through on their threat, legislative business couldn’t resume until late Saturday in order to give the staff enough time to read the bill aloud, according to a Democratic leadership estimate.

Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), the Senate Republican Steering Committee chairman, vowed not to back down.

“If they bring this up, they’re going to read it. It’ll take them a day or two to read it,” DeMint said on Fox News. “Again, we’re trying to run out the clock. They should not be able to pass this kind of legislation in a lame-duck Congress.”

225 cenotaphium  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:06:08pm

re: #206 Charles

Who knows? I’m just speculating. But I think it’s pretty darned naive and childish for people to think they become amorphous cloud beings by declaring themselves “anonymous.”

There is a bit of precedent in the question of whether an actual arrest and sentencing would deter Anonymous activities - that of the Palin email “hacker”. He did get busted & sentenced, but of course by then nobody really remembered or cared. The turnover rate is enormous. Those who still recalled pretty much said “bummer”, or got upset that what he’d done was judged that hard (he’d gained access to the account by looking up the security question, the answer to which was for anyone to find).
Point being that memory is short and allegiance to others in the same group wafer thin.

That said, I think the use of LOIC could abate slightly, should we see a number of harsh convictions following this. Just a dent, unless we’re talking about thousands of convictions, which I find unlikely.
The next people to step up and do something stupid will do so with the same blissful ignorance of repercussions as have those before them.

Oh, I recall the debates about the “hack” here. People were determined that it was some sort of intricate and arcane thing he’d done..

226 RogueOne  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:06:41pm

The war on Anon is starting to sound a whole lot like the WOT. No matter how many times you cut the head off another one grows back.

227 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:06:48pm

The point here would be the ends, not the means.

Vandalism is wrong, regardless of how it comes about.

Exposing the wrongs of an organization is right, even if you have to wear a mask to do it because of how the organization has behaved in the past.

It’s about what you do, not what you’re using to get it done. Doesn’t that apply to just about everything?

228 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:07:23pm

re: #219 Fozzie Bear

When there are tens of millions of people, stopping them involves guessing who will want to be the next organizer, not just who was the last one. The faces change so quickly, it’s impossible to track effectively, and impossible to stop. In a group that large, actions are effectively spontaneous, even if there are in fact individuals who push things along. The group that is in the center of the flock changes so rapidly it can’t be tracked.

Like, if I was some jerk who hated X company, and I had a bunch of internet friends in some bullcrap chatroom, and I convinced ten of my friends that this company really sucks and we should screw with them. And they all happen to be anonymous. But they’re really just my ten internet geek friends. And we all do a thing. We’re now “anoynmous” We now did that thing, and it’s tagged with anonymous. I’m the organizer that week for those ten guys. And then I go back to class and finish up my boring poli sci coursework.

229 Kronocide  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:07:39pm

re: #206 Charles

Yeah, that would be a pretty good defense. But in any case, those who did pick up those parts and make bombs would still be in trouble, just maybe not to the level of conspiracy.

I think that’s the crux of the biscuit between Foz/WUB and others/me, if I’m not mistaken.

We seem to be arguing specifically how wrong it is and why it’s wrong, but I’m glad we’re not arguing whether it was wrong or not. It’s very wrong.

230 Charles Johnson  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:07:45pm

re: #223 000G

I don’t think so. I think the thing they want is anonimity — something not talked about much here. No names, no accounts, no personas, no responsibilities, nothing being traced back… Of course, there is a lot of delusion going on about these points, especially when it comes to the crucial technical and technological understanding, but still: they want anonimity. And crucially, that is contradictory to the idea of absolute freedom of information because of course they don’t want the information about their actual offline identity to be known.

Cognitive dissonance is the new black.

231 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:08:35pm

re: #230 Charles

Cognitive dissonance is the new black.

It’s not a cognitive thing.

232 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:09:05pm

re: #222 Fozzie Bear

And it should, since hacking is asenine.

What they did with LOIC was not hacking. As Charles rightfully pointed out, it was merely using a script, hence “scriptkiddies”. I think it is an insult to hackers to call scriptkiddies hackers.

233 Obdicut  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:09:13pm

re: #218 WindUpBird

I think disseminating copyrighted property is less active than DDOS attacks, but man, ask artists who make their living off the internet (I don’t work this way, friends do tho) if they think a guy ripping their locked PDFs that they charge for, that pay their rent, into organized jpegs sorted and put into a folder, then released on torrents is passive, theyll blow a gasket ;-)

Sure, the original people who crack and hack are actually the active points. But once something is hacked or cracked, and distributed, it becomes something else. A cracked game and an uncracked game are exactly the same except one has DRM removed. It is entirely dissimilar to downloading an attack program and running it at a specific time.

And of course people matter, and of course DDOSes are criminal. I gues maybe a different analogy would be coordinated vandalism?

Yeah. And there is coordination, otherwise it wouldn’t be a DDOS. It has to be carried off at the right time, and in the right manner, or it doesn’t succeed. It’s like any of the mass protests in history, except this one allows you to remain seated and eating cheetoes.


Sort of the problem, it’s a new thing, it’s hard to put into old terms

It’s not really new. It combines two things: pranking/hoaxes and mass action.

One dedicated guy can achieve a shitload on his own, after all:

[Link: www.museumofhoaxes.com…]

234 Obdicut  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:10:02pm

re: #224 simoom

Oh, but I thought that the lack of room on the schedule was all Harry Reid’s fault!

//

235 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:10:08pm

re: #220 Gus 802

The threat of jail time never stopped people from murdering either. Pursuing law enforcement and judicial penalties are not always pursued as a means of stamping out a social ill. The same applies with these hackers. No, you won’t be able to stop them but the enforcement will proceed.

Oh of course!

it’s just that enforcement is difficult. Kids anywhere in the world can do this stuff, if they have an internet connection. One of my good friends who is sympathetic to anon is in Portugal.

236 lawhawk  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:11:49pm

re: #226 RogueOne

I think a closer example might be the effort to stop the Mafia.

237 Kronocide  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:11:50pm

re: #224 simoom

But there’s no time for DADT before Xmas?

They’ve had months to read this bill (and they should read it). But now? Pure politics.

238 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:11:51pm

If you put every single one of the kids who used the LOIC script in jail, it would take less than a year before a whole new generation of people completely ignorant of what happened last year does something similar. You can’t “teach them a lesson”, because they are /b/tards.

239 Charles Johnson  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:12:12pm

re: #233 Obdicut

It’s not really new.

I’m not seeing anything qualitatively new and different about this at all. It’s just a matter of scale, and speed of communication. The concept itself is as old as homo sapiens.

240 Obdicut  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:12:59pm

re: #238 Fozzie Bear

Can you explain why you feel that the targets are really arrived at spontaneously?

241 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:13:07pm

re: #223 000G

I don’t think so. I think the thing they want is anonimity — something not talked about much here. No names, no accounts, no personas, no responsibilities, nothing being traced back… Of course, there is a lot of delusion going on about these points, especially when it comes to the crucial technical and technological understanding, but still: they want anonimity. And crucially, that is contradictory to the idea of absolute freedom of information because of course they don’t want the information about their actual offline identity to be known.

um yeah no. This makes no sense. They protest not because they dislike what their targets are doing, but because they simply want anonymity? Hell, *I* want anonymity! here! On LGF! I don’t use my name here. I’m pretty careful about who here knows a lot about me.

The average lgf user here is far more giving with their personal details than I am with mine.

242 Usually refered to as anyways  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:13:11pm

Is vandalism the right term to be using here?

If it is the DOS attacks on Anon that we are talking about, isn’t it more akin to ‘blocking the entry’ to a store or premises?

Removing the block is the same as clearing the entry.

I’m seeing vandalism as something which leaves behind damage.

243 shutdown  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:14:06pm

re: #215 Obdicut

But they are communicating. That’s what I’m not getting about your argument. The note is, in fact, a form of communication.

The legal arguments are complex. I am not trying to weasel out of a discussion with you, but there are hours and hours of instruction spent on this issue in law school. The case law is voluminous; all I can comfortably convey in this forum is that you need a knowing second participant for a conspiracy; simply leaving a note without knowing who might find it does not satisfy the requirement. Example: On a desert island, the sole inhabitant, a castaway, writes a note with no particular addressee encouraging the recipient to commit a crime, along with instructions on how best to do so. He tosses the note into the water. Months later, it is found and read by an unrelated third party, who commits the crime in question. Are the parties guilty of conspiracy?

A defense attorney would argue to the contrary, and likely be successful in the circumstances I described. If the recipient knew the sender, and they had discussed the possibility of this scenario arising, the outcome might be different. These are legal arguments and may not be immediately intuitively logical.

244 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:14:11pm

re: #239 Charles

I’m not seeing anything qualitatively new and different about this at all. It’s just a matter of scale, and speed of communication. The concept itself is as old as homo sapiens.

That’s the new part.

What was “new” about television when it was invented? The radio? It was the same stuff we always saw and heard, just a matter of scale and the speed of communication.

245 Kragar  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:14:22pm

Once you establish someone has a right, you can prosecute people for infringing on that right.

Step 1)

Obama Administration calls for ‘Privacy Bill of Rights’

A consumers’ “Privacy Bill of Rights” would create a privacy policy office in the Commerce Department and for the first time would establish clear guidelines for what kind of information can be collected about users and how companies can use the data, a Commerce report says. That framework also gives clearer limitations on data use and would increase audits to hold companies accountable for their practices.

The report, which follows similar guidelines released weeks ago by the Federal Trade Commission, comes amid the growing concerns of lawmakers, consumers and privacy groups that Internet users are increasingly giving more information about their preferences and personal profiles without adequate protections.

“Self-regulation without stronger enforcement is not enough,” said Commerce Secretary Gary Locke in a statement. “Today’s report is a road map for considering a new framework that is good for consumers and businesses.”

246 jamesfirecat  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:14:47pm

re: #242 ozbloke

Is vandalism the right term to be using here?

If it is the DOS attacks on Anon that we are talking about, isn’t it more akin to ‘blocking the entry’ to a store or premises?

Removing the block is the same as clearing the entry.

I’m seeing vandalism as something which leaves behind damage.

On the other hand a store can operate while it has “What a c**k” spray painted on one of its walls, so there are less benign aspects of a DOS attack as well…

247 Obdicut  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:14:49pm

re: #243 imp_62

I think the analogy would be better that someone leaves a note on board a ship they know is crewed by pirates giving the course schedule of a merchantman.

248 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:15:15pm

re: #240 Obdicut

Can you explain why you feel that the targets are really arrived at spontaneously?

It’s not actually spontaneous, it’s effectively spontaneous. There’s 10 million monkeys in a room with typewriters. One of them is going to have an idea.

249 Usually refered to as anyways  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:15:15pm

re: #242 ozbloke

PIMF: s/on Anon/By Anon/1

Not enough coffee yet, apologies.

250 cenotaphium  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:15:50pm

re: #242 ozbloke


I’m seeing vandalism as something which leaves behind damage.

DDoS drains bandwidth = costs. DDoS blocks sites = lost revenue.

Not to mention the cost of the technicians to fix any trouble, possibly relocating the server..

It’s real money.

251 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:16:12pm

The speed and access to the communicaion is what is “new”

it is the difference between me being poor, and me being middle class. That speed of communication gives me access to a market that simply would not exist pre internet. That’s new to me ;-)


Anon is a phenomenon that exists because the internet as a medium allows it to happen. it’s like, you can’t have pirate radio without radio. You can’t have peer-to-peer internet porn without the internet. Porn’s old! The way people can now interact with a porn star over the internet, that’s new!

252 researchok  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:16:32pm

re: #214 WindUpBird

yeah, it’s basically like internet vandalism. Graffiti, but really coordinated.

Cops always try and shut down raves. They pop up in secret, they’re out in the woods, people dance, people do drugs. The thing is up, the event takes place, is finished, dissappears before the police know what’s happened.

Going affter Anonymous is like going after “ravers”. We have to stop the dancing and the drugs! Well, you can’t. there’s too many of them. And it’s too easy and too enjoyable for them to quickly assemble, and nobody can stop them.

Sometimes guys, a phenomenon can’t be stopped. *shrug* Anonymous will probably fall out of style, and some other thing will become a thing. But Anonymous can’t be ended, because anyone can just magically claim themselves to be part of it. And you don’t know who’s involved, or who is merely supporting who’s involved. And even the people who are involved, aren’t doing anything criminal.

It’s like labeling yourself as a member of an outsider political party. People who identify with Anonymous want a simple thing IMHO: freedom of information that is absolute.

That’s their belief.

Much like the belief that everyone has a right to own a gun. A weapon that can easily, quickly and efficiently kill a man, that fits in a pocket. (I support this right BTW).

So whatever guys. If you think they’re terrorists? You missed the point. if you think half the clever young internet pissed off can be arrested in its entirety on conspiracy charges? Missed the point. If you think every smartass teenager who knows their way around can be stopped? No. They’re pissed off young people who think fossilied old farts and politicians and corporations that control media access and internet access will move to squelch free speech on the internet. And free speech INCLUDES WIKILEAKS.

So they fight back! Seems simple to me. Are they moral? doesn’t matter. Are they ethical? Doesn’t matter. Are they organized? I dunno, sorta? Not really? But it’s not your daddy’s protest.

This is not vandalism- this is deliberate destruction in an ongoing and expansive attempt to undermine legal and necessary endeavors.

There is a great difference.

253 sattv4u2  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:16:43pm

re: #243 imp_62

Example: On a desert island, the sole inhabitant, a castaway, writes a note with no particular addressee encouraging the recipient to commit a crime, along with instructions on how best to do so
Tom Hanks,,, is that you!?!?
WILSON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

254 Obdicut  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:16:56pm

re: #244 WindUpBird

It’s new, but it’s not new-new.

255 Obdicut  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:17:18pm

re: #248 Fozzie Bear

It’s not actually spontaneous, it’s effectively spontaneous. There’s 10 million monkeys in a room with typewriters. One of them is going to have an idea.

I understand this is your view, Fozzie, I’m asking why you believe this is the way that Anon chooses targets.

256 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:17:29pm

re: #239 Charles

I’m not seeing anything qualitatively new and different about this at all. It’s just a matter of scale, and speed of communication. The concept itself is as old as homo sapiens.

The scale and speed is what makes it new. This is on a scale way way beyond anything before. 4chan gets approximately 500k unique IP hits per day, average, just in /b/. 4chan isn’t the entirety of anon, not even close. Many users don’t visit every day.

257 Kragar  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:17:30pm

re: #242 ozbloke

Is vandalism the right term to be using here?

If it is the DOS attacks on Anon that we are talking about, isn’t it more akin to ‘blocking the entry’ to a store or premises?

Removing the block is the same as clearing the entry.

I’m seeing vandalism as something which leaves behind damage.

Tell that to the guys who spend a whole weekend fixing servers, restoring backups, then have to find out how the hackers did it, resecure the site, then probably have to shell out for upgraded security.

258 RogueOne  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:17:40pm

re: #237 BigPapa

But there’s no time for DADT before Xmas?

They’ve had months to read this bill (and they should read it). But now? Pure politics.

The ran the risk of not passing a budget and it’s biting them in the ass. Hard to feel sorry for them. They should stick to the things they can get passed now (overturn of DADT, maybe START) take the appropriate credit and prepare themselves for the minority status.

259 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:17:49pm

re: #241 WindUpBird

um yeah no. This makes no sense. They protest not because they dislike what their targets are doing, but because they simply want anonymity?

They protest mainly because they sympathize with WikiLeaks, not neccessarily because they share goals and aims. WikiLeaks are “the good guys” right now because in the media’s narrative, WikiLeaks are the misunderstood, vilified underdogs sticking it to the man — just like how Anonymouses see themselves.

And I do maintain that Anonymouses ARE Anonymouses because that essential function is what they want and have opted for: anonimity. Whether it works that way and the difference between ideal and reality of the movement is another question.

Hell, *I* want anonymity! here! On LGF! I don’t use my name here. I’m pretty careful about who here knows a lot about me.

Using a pseudonym (using a fake name) like you and me do on here with our accounts and everything is not anonimity (using no name).

260 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:17:55pm

re: #252 researchok

This is not vandalism- this is deliberate destruction in an ongoing and expansive attempt to undermine legal and necessary endeavors.

There is a great difference.

Yes, we know you’re very very serious in your attempts to totally not understand this

261 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:18:04pm

re: #256 Fozzie Bear

The scale and speed is what makes it new. This is on a scale way way beyond anything before. 4chan gets approximately 500k unique IP hits per day, average, just in /b/. 4chan isn’t the entirety of anon, not even close. Many users don’t visit every day.

IAWTC

262 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:18:29pm

re: #242 ozbloke

Is vandalism the right term to be using here?

If it is the DOS attacks on Anon that we are talking about, isn’t it more akin to ‘blocking the entry’ to a store or premises?

Removing the block is the same as clearing the entry.

I’m seeing vandalism as something which leaves behind damage.

As I pointed out above, German jurisprudence calls these acts “sabotage”.

263 researchok  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:18:49pm

re: #260 WindUpBird

Yes, we know you’re very very serious in your attempts to totally not understand this

Anything substantive to say?

264 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:18:49pm

re: #255 Obdicut

I understand this is your view, Fozzie, I’m asking why you believe this is the way that Anon chooses targets.

Because i’ve been watching this flock for 20 years, since I had my first BBS.

265 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:19:13pm

I know a lot of people who support anon, guys. People I’ve known for ten years before I ever set foot here. :) Are they part of it? I really don’t know!

Am I consorting with criminals?!?!?!?! Not sure!

266 jamesfirecat  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:19:39pm

re: #258 RogueOne

The ran the risk of not passing a budget and it’s biting them in the ass. Hard to feel sorry for them. They should stick to the things they can get passed now (overturn of DADT, maybe START) take the appropriate credit and prepare themselves for the minority status.

Still doesn’t excuse GOP being assholes by threatening to (or did they actually do it?) make the bill be read from start to finish to them before anything can be done about it.

Democrats are idiots, but they rarely if ever seem to be malicious…

267 shutdown  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:19:42pm

re: #247 Obdicut

I think the analogy would be better that someone leaves a note on board a ship they know is crewed by pirates giving the course schedule of a merchantman.

Being expected to reasonably anticipate the outcome of your action (in your example, piracy) may satisfy a charge of piracy, or intention to engage in an act of piracy, against the note writer, but likely not conspiracy.

268 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:19:52pm

re: #263 researchok

Anything substantive to say?

Already been filling this thread with substantive stuff


perhaps you should read some of it?

269 Usually refered to as anyways  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:20:00pm

re: #250 cenotaphium

DDoS drains bandwidth = costs. DDoS blocks sites = lost revenue.

Not to mention the cost of the technicians to fix any trouble, possibly relocating the server..

It’s real money.

I am not suggesting there is nothing wrong with DOS attacks.
I’m just having difficulties with the work vandalism.

DOS attacks are illegal, so its not being justified.

I might have to think on that last line, as I seem to remember the US Govt using a DOS attack against wikileaks servers.

270 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:20:18pm

re: #265 WindUpBird

I know a lot of people who support anon, guys. People I’ve known for ten years before I ever set foot here. :) Are they part of it? I really don’t know!

Am I consorting with criminals?!?!?!?! Not sure!

The majority of the people I interact with don’t know anon exists. Not kidding.

271 Gus  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:20:26pm

re: #252 researchok

This is not vandalism- this is deliberate destruction in an ongoing and expansive attempt to undermine legal and necessary endeavors.

There is a great difference.

Furthermore, with regards to the corporate entities that were subject to the disruption, the goal of Anonymous was to interfere with the normal operation of their business and to have a negative effect on their profits.

272 Obdicut  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:20:35pm

re: #264 Fozzie Bear

Because i’ve been watching this flock for 20 years, since I had my first BBS.

I’ve been watching it for that long and I disagree with you. I disagree because I’ve seen actual individuals make passionate, coherent, and convincing assertions that have motivated other individuals to join with them, often memetically repeating the arguments used by the initial individuals.

You haven’t seen that happen?

273 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:20:58pm

re: #264 Fozzie Bear

Because i’ve been watching this flock for 20 years, since I had my first BBS.

My nick is blue if you want to rub your temples with me :D

(Ob, you are also invited, I know we don’t precisely see eye to eye on this, but I’m sorta out of discussion gas)

274 lawhawk  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:21:04pm

re: #243 imp_62

This instance is distinguished by the fact that the waters in which the messages are thrown are known to be inhabited by people who are sympathetic/interested/willing to carry out such acts and are purposefully involved in the forum to engage in such activities.

In other words, a prosecutor would claim that the participation in the forum would be more than merely throwing messages in a bottle into the ocean for unknown/unrelated 3d parties to act upon. This is a forum not unlike a physical den of thieves where information/targets are shared and acted upon.

A defense team would still try to categorize the situation as you describe, but the key to a jury would be how they view the forum and its participants.

275 researchok  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:21:06pm

re: #268 WindUpBird

Already been filling this thread with substantive stuff

perhaps you should read some of it?

When you equate anonymous with vandals, you undermine your argument.

276 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:21:08pm

re: #244 WindUpBird

That’s the new part.

What was “new” about television when it was invented? The radio? It was the same stuff we always saw and heard, just a matter of scale and the speed of communication.

Yes: Sometimes, difference in quantity flips over into difference in quality.

Or, as a writer I adore, said it: If The Beatles had only released one album, they would never have achieved the legendary status they have now within musical history.

277 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:21:21pm

A DDOS attack really is more analogous with a crapload of people standing in the street in front of your store, preventing customers from entering, than it is to vandals breaking things. In both cases, it costs real money, but it’s not the same as vandalism. It’s a different thing.

278 Obdicut  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:21:21pm

re: #267 imp_62

Maybe. Maybe not. I’m pointing out that your analogies imply that the person leaving the device/message is doing so in neutral territory, rather than in a place they have reasonable expectation of someone acting on that information.

279 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:22:13pm

re: #272 Obdicut

I’ve been watching it for that long and I disagree with you. I disagree because I’ve seen actual individuals make passionate, coherent, and convincing assertions that have motivated other individuals to join with them, often memetically repeating the arguments used by the initial individuals.

You haven’t seen that happen?

Yes, I have. I have also noticed that almost every single time, it’s different people. You’d have to be able to see the future to control it.

280 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:22:17pm

re: #270 EmmmieG

The majority of the people I interact with don’t know anon exists. Not kidding.

I can believe that. What’s their average age?

281 shutdown  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:22:28pm

re: #274 lawhawk

This instance is distinguished by the fact that the waters in which the messages are thrown are known to be inhabited by people who are sympathetic/interested/willing to carry out such acts and are purposefully involved in the forum to engage in such activities.

In other words, a prosecutor would claim that the participation in the forum would be more than merely throwing messages in a bottle into the ocean for unknown/unrelated 3d parties to act upon. This is a forum not unlike a physical den of thieves where information/targets are shared and acted upon.

A defense team would still try to categorize the situation as you describe, but the key to a jury would be how they view the forum and its participants.

Precisely. Would be an awesome jury trial, would it not?

282 prairiefire  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:22:39pm

re: #270 EmmmieG

The majority of the people I interact with don’t know anon exists. Not kidding.

I would tell my mom, but should probably then smash her I Pad./

283 researchok  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:22:47pm

re: #271 Gus 802

Furthermore, with regards to the corporate entities that were subject to the disruption, the goal of Anonymous was to interfere with the normal operation of their business and to have a negative effect on their profits.

Well, that’s not felonious behavior if it’s in the name of the ‘right’ cause.

It’s just vandalism.

284 Charles Johnson  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:23:12pm

re: #265 WindUpBird

I know a lot of people who support anon, guys. People I’ve known for ten years before I ever set foot here. :) Are they part of it? I really don’t know!

Am I consorting with criminals?!?!?!?! Not sure!

Uh, I’ll repeat — nobody said that everybody who claims to be a non-member of anon is a criminal, and nobody said anon should be shut down, and nobody said everyone in anon should be arrested.

I’m just seeing some very naive assumptions about anonymity going on. I’ve been involved in computer and web technologies for a lot of years now, and please believe me — the illusion of anonymity is exactly that, an illusion.

And if you raise your head above the crowd and do things like the DDOS attacks against major financial organizations, you’ll find out very quickly that it’s an illusion.

285 Randall Gross  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:23:16pm

re: #223 000G

Yes, but they seem to want anonymity for them, but at the same time they take actions to destroy others privacy.

/cognitive dissonance

286 lawhawk  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:23:19pm

re: #281 imp_62

Indeed.

287 RogueOne  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:23:37pm

re: #266 jamesfirecat

Still doesn’t excuse GOP being assholes by threatening to (or did they actually do it?) make the bill be read from start to finish to them before anything can be done about it.

Democrats are idiots, but they rarely if ever seem to be malicious…

I don’t see anything about the repubs refusing to pass an omnibus bill as malicious. If the dems wanted to pass a budget they should have done it ages ago. They intentionally ran the risk and lost.

288 Randall Gross  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:24:21pm

re: #242 ozbloke

Not in the least. It’s more like trying to block the Bay Bridge because you don’t like the BofA branch in San Francisco.

289 shutdown  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:24:27pm

re: #278 Obdicut

Maybe. Maybe not. I’m pointing out that your analogies imply that the person leaving the device/message is doing so in neutral territory, rather than in a place they have reasonable expectation of someone acting on that information.

It is arguable as a matter of law whether this would meet the definition of conspiracy. A prosecutor would make lawhawk’s argument, a defense attorney would lean on mine. A jury would make the final decision.

290 Obdicut  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:24:42pm

re: #279 Fozzie Bear

Yes, I have. I have also noticed that almost every single time, it’s different people. You’d have to be able to see the future to control it.

Really? I’ve noticed, with Scientology, that it’s often the same people.

But yes, obviously one can’t stop anon from Ever Doing Anything Bad Again Ever. But in the context of a sustained campaign, which this is, I do think that a lot of the force comes from individuals. The way that it starts to fragment and then recoheres, I think, shows this rather well. As do the attempts that go nowhere.

291 Gus  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:25:15pm

re: #283 researchok

Well, that’s not felonious behavior if it’s in the name of the ‘right’ cause.

It’s just vandalism.

What’s the rule of law that applies when an organized group takes collective action that interferes with the operation of a business?

I think this clearly points out to the need for new regulations and statutes covering these types of attacks.

292 cenotaphium  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:25:30pm

re: #269 ozbloke

I am not suggesting there is nothing wrong with DOS attacks.
I’m just having difficulties with the work vandalism.

DOS attacks are illegal, so its not being justified.

I might have to think on that last line, as I seem to remember the US Govt using a DOS attack against wikileaks servers.

Like Gus said, these attacks were meant to inflict problems running the sites. It’s not a sit-in peaceful protest. It’s running into the store, blocking the doors with the cash registers and making a damn mess.

And what a government does isn’t always in line with what rules govern its citizens. I doubt this is a new realization for you.

I don’t agree with how Anonymous is presented here, but I’m not ignorant of the effects of what they do either. Let’s try to be sensible.

293 lawhawk  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:25:30pm

re: #281 imp_62

Did you order the Code Red (LOIC)?

You want answers? I think I’m entitled. You want the truth? You can’t handle the truth…

294 Obdicut  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:25:43pm

re: #289 imp_62

Agreed.

295 jamesfirecat  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:26:02pm

re: #287 RogueOne

I don’t see anything about the repubs refusing to pass an omnibus bill as malicious. If the dems wanted to pass a budget they should have done it ages ago. They intentionally ran the risk and lost.

They can refuse to pass it fine that is not malicious they are simply acted in what they see fit.

But do you support the idea of wasting valuable time by making it be read aloud?

296 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:26:05pm

re: #272 Obdicut

I’ve been watching it for that long and I disagree with you. I disagree because I’ve seen actual individuals make passionate, coherent, and convincing assertions that have motivated other individuals to join with them, often memetically repeating the arguments used by the initial individuals.

You haven’t seen that happen?

this is true! But it’s sorta like a fractal. here’s a big cloud of internet guys who I guess have idenitified themselves as anonymous. Within that cloud, you get closer, you see the convincing assertions you describe happen.You see guys making their case, and they all speak each others’ language.

I don’t know if Fozzie means spontaneous precisely so much as it appears spontaneous because a few guys on anon can come up with a thing, execute it, be done with it very quickly, so it looks spontaneous if you’re an observer. it’s not truly spontaneous, it’s just like REALLY FAST. Sorta how when you code a random number generator, it’s not random, it’s what, picking from clock cycles? Anon does this stuff with intent, definitely.

And of course there’s ongoing themes like their hatred of Scientology (which I think is actually a bit misguided, they seem to believe Michael baden was wrong about that girl being killed by The Church. My money is on Baden.)

297 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:26:14pm

re: #280 WindUpBird

I can believe that. What’s their average age?

25-65.

It’s not the average age. It’s their chosen lifestyle. Some blue collar, some white collar. Some educated, some not. They like to read, hunt, fish, hike, watch tv, hang with the kids, crafts, or travel.

The majority of people in this country don’t actually know much about how computers work. They know a few aps, games, word processing, email, some work programs but they don’t program and usually have a friend they call when things go wrong.

298 shutdown  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:26:40pm

re: #294 Obdicut

Agreed.

But I would win ;]

299 Usually refered to as anyways  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:26:58pm

re: #257 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Tell that to the guys who spend a whole weekend fixing servers, restoring backups, then have to find out how the hackers did it, resecure the site, then probably have to shell out for upgraded security.

Hi Krager

I am an ISP.
I have lost many many hours to hackers over nearly 20 years.
DOS attacks are normally referred to an upstream provider, someone who’s bandwidth is being consumed. Most web hosts aren’t the telco’s who’s pipes are being consumed.

300 researchok  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:27:25pm

re: #291 Gus 802

What’s the rule of law that applies when an organized group takes collective action that interferes with the operation of a business?

I think this clearly points out to the need for new regulations and statutes covering these types of attacks.

Yes. The law has to catch up with technology.

New laws and regs ought to make lots of people happy.
/

301 reloadingisnotahobby  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:28:04pm

re: #291 Gus 802

What’s the rule of law that applies when an organized group takes collective action that interferes with the operation of a business?
You mean a Union “Strike” or “Lock out”!
That’s perfectly legal!
/

302 Gus  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:28:24pm

re: #300 researchok

Yes. The law has to catch up with technology.

New laws and regs ought to make lots of people happy.
/

I’ll have a study for you on your desk in about a month. Should cost about 30 billion dollars for the study alone.

//

303 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:28:48pm

re: #300 researchok

Yes. The law has to catch up with technology.

New laws and regs ought to make lots of people happy.
/

I can’t imagine any effort to regulate this ending in anything other than a clusterfuck.

304 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:29:16pm

re: #285 Thanos

Yes, but they seem to want anonymity for them, but at the same time they take actions to destroy others privacy.

/cognitive dissonance

As long as they don’t break down and cry and beg for forgiveness when they are being sent to the gallows for their actions, I think it’s still possible to defend it coherently. Or maybe I am just thinking that because of how Camus wrote about the Russian terrorists in The Rebel

305 Gus  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:29:34pm

re: #303 Fozzie Bear

I can’t imagine any effort to regulate this ending in anything other than a clusterfuck.

That would be a first wouldn’t it.

306 RogueOne  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:29:38pm

re: #295 jamesfirecat

They can refuse to pass it fine that is not malicious they are simply acted in what they see fit.

But do you support the idea of wasting valuable time by making it be read aloud?

I support it not being passed. If that means they have to read every word of it 3 times then someone needs to get reading. The dems lost. They need to learn their lesson, move on, and the next time they take control have a better action plan. Why are you feeling sorry for the party that literally shirked their constitutional duty (not passing a budget) and now that they’re days away from being in the minority decide that their spending bill is all important? If it’s that important why didn’t they get it passed in September?

307 sattv4u2  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:30:04pm

re: #302 Gus 802

I’ll have a study for you on your desk in about a month. Should cost about 30 billion dollars for the study alone.

//

You’ll need at least another half a mil for a new desk too, and throw in 100 grand for a calender! !!

308 Obdicut  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:30:08pm

re: #302 Gus 802

The main problem is really that it’s hard to distinguish, on technical terms, between valid and invalid activity. A lot of anti-DDOS efforts would hit web spiders too, and other such surveying programs. I think the law should mostly be about the intent, since that’s the most difficult thing to mask.

309 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:30:51pm

re: #296 WindUpBird

My point is if you have a large enough sample of people, it’s impossible for some of them not to be instigators. And since ANYONE can instigate anon insto action with just a little creativity, it’s effectively spontaneous. Drawing attention to it just makes the flock larger.

310 researchok  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:30:56pm

re: #303 Fozzie Bear

I can’t imagine any effort to regulate this ending in anything other than a clusterfuck.

To a great extent, I agree.

That said, this can’t go on.

If the victims were groups other than corporate the demand would be universal.

311 Obdicut  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:31:44pm

re: #309 Fozzie Bear

I don’t think that it’s possible to motivate Anon in a sustained manner with ‘just a little creativity’.

312 sattv4u2  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:31:52pm

re: #306 RogueOne

If it’s that important why didn’t they get it passed in September

What ,, and have nobody to blame!?!?!

At least this way, the WORST outcome for them is shared blame!

313 jamesfirecat  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:31:53pm

re: #306 RogueOne

I support it not being passed. If that means they have to read every word of it 3 times then someone needs to get reading. The dems lost. They need to learn their lesson, move on, and the next time they take control have a better action plan. Why are you feeling sorry for the party that literally shirked their constitutional duty (not passing a budget) and now that they’re days away from being in the minority decide that their spending bill is all important? If it’s that important why didn’t they get it passed in September?

Sorry but I don’t support time wasting.

There are important issues to be dealt with, DADT Repeal, START, but Repulbicans just want to run down the clcok they want them to go away without having to vote on them.

Who is really shirking their responsibility here?

Like I said, Dems are idiots, but they’re idiots who are trying.

314 Usually refered to as anyways  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:31:57pm

re: #288 Thanos

Not in the least. It’s more like trying to block the Bay Bridge because you don’t like the BofA branch in San Francisco.

Thanks Thanos, I accept that, the DOS attacks often affect many sites that hang off the same pipe as the destination address.

315 Gus  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:32:15pm

re: #307 sattv4u2

You’ll need at least another half a mil for a new desk too, and throw in 100 grand for a calender! !!

The website should run at least 18 million. Per year.

/

316 Obdicut  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:32:20pm

re: #296 WindUpBird

Oh, I think I emailed your real gmail, not your LGF-specific one.

Forwarding.

317 shutdown  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:32:50pm

See you all later. I have to finish reading a motion for partial summary judgement, and then a trip to the gym would not suck.

318 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:32:53pm

re: #310 researchok

To a great extent, I agree.

That said, this can’t go on.

If the victims were groups other than corporate the demand would be universal.

It’s not that big a deal, really. It’s just not the huge problem people seem to think it is.

319 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:33:32pm

re: #311 Obdicut

I don’t think that it’s possible to motivate Anon in a sustained manner with ‘just a little creativity’.

Nobody has ever motivated anon in a sustained manner, so you are of course correct.

320 RogueOne  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:33:43pm

re: #313 jamesfirecat

Sorry but I don’t support time wasting.

There are important issues to be dealt with, DADT Repeal, START, but Repulbicans just want to run down the clcok they want them to go away without having to vote on them.

Who is really shirking their responsibility here?

Like I said, Dems are idiots, but they’re idiots who are trying.

Idiots who are trying to undo the damage they put themselves in! If they really care about START and repeal of DADT then by all means put those up for a vote. They can get those passed easily. It’s a matter of priorities and their priority is getting their hands on as much money as possible before they’re seated back at the kids table.

321 Obdicut  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:33:51pm

re: #318 Fozzie Bear

It’s just not the huge problem people seem to think it is.

If enough people think something is a huge deal, it is a huge deal.

322 sattv4u2  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:33:59pm

re: #313 jamesfirecat

Sorry but I don’t support time wasting

What was it you said the other day about being the passenger in the “car”?
Who had control of the wheel back then!!?!?!

323 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:34:16pm

re: #284 Charles

Uh, I’ll repeat — nobody said that everybody who claims to be a non-member of anon is a criminal, and nobody said anon should be shut down, and nobody said everyone in anon should be arrested.

I’m just seeing some very naive assumptions about anonymity going on. I’ve been involved in computer and web technologies for a lot of years now, and please believe me — the illusion of anonymity is exactly that, an illusion.

And if you raise your head above the crowd and do things like the DDOS attacks against major financial organizations, you’ll find out very quickly that it’s an illusion.

The “am I consorting” was a joke aimed at the hyperbole and people in a generation above mine who seem to believe we can just arrest ‘em all and shut ‘em down. Anyhow! You are absolutely correct that these guys are often not as anon as they believe themselves to be. Kids aren’t as clever as they think they are. And the older anon are probably at a point in their life where theyr eally don’t want to risk jail time for lulz. A bunch will get arrested, a bunch will possibly be thrown into jail, or make their parents unhappy if they were like me, 14 year old kids in their rooms with their Atari 1040STs looking for forbidden digital thrills. My crimes were pretty banal. Oh crap, a pirated copy of Major Motion.

But I don’t think it’ll make any difference, they’ll keep doing what they do, with different tools, they’ll learn what works (I’m sure that kid who broke into Palin’s email simply with some social engineering was pretty surprised he got nailed) and stuff will go on.

I probably appear more “pro” anon than I am simply because I see it from closer up, it’s interesting to me. I’m interested in how people behave in large weird concert on the internet. I think there’s better ways to protest than DDOS attacks, but probably the ease and speed of a DDOS attack is what makes it work. Just sit at your chair and type, and stuff happens.

324 Gus  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:34:19pm

re: #308 Obdicut

The main problem is really that it’s hard to distinguish, on technical terms, between valid and invalid activity. A lot of anti-DDOS efforts would hit web spiders too, and other such surveying programs. I think the law should mostly be about the intent, since that’s the most difficult thing to mask.

With regards to punishment would suffice. “Any group, or individual, that organizes any internet action that interferes with the normal operation of a business shall…”

325 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:34:34pm

re: #296 WindUpBird

Sorta how when you code a random number generator, it’s not random, it’s what, picking from clock cycles? Anon does this stuff with intent, definitely.

Differences between randomness and chance matter.

I remember once having read a paper that tried to establish a theory of quanitifying randomness by the numbers of calculations you would have to make in order to eradicate it and arrive at something intelligible again. I was just reminded…

326 RogueOne  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:34:34pm

re: #321 Obdicut

If enough people think something is a huge deal, it is a huge deal.

Perception is reality?

327 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:34:59pm

re: #321 Obdicut

If enough people think something is a huge deal, it is a huge deal.

In a week, people will be on to the next thing. There wasn’t much damage done.

328 jamesfirecat  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:35:25pm

re: #322 sattv4u2

Sorry but I don’t support time wasting

What was it you said the other day about being the passenger in the “car”?
Who had control of the wheel back then!!?!?!

What kind of point are you trying to make?

329 Obdicut  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:35:26pm

re: #319 Fozzie Bear

Nobody has ever motivated anon in a sustained manner, so you are of course correct.

I’m sorry, but this is an example of a sustained effort by Anon, as is Project Chanology.

330 Usually refered to as anyways  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:35:52pm

re: #292 cenotaphium

Like Gus said, these attacks were meant to inflict problems running the sites. It’s not a sit-in peaceful protest. It’s running into the store, blocking the doors with the cash registers and making a damn mess.

And what a government does isn’t always in line with what rules govern its citizens. I doubt this is a new realization for you.

I don’t agree with how Anonymous is presented here, but I’m not ignorant of the effects of what they do either. Let’s try to be sensible.

A DOS attack is designed to limit the ability of the destination servers to respond to requests by drowning them with requests.

Nothing more.

It is illegal. I do not justify either Anon or the Government doing it.

331 sattv4u2  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:36:18pm

re: #328 jamesfirecat

What kind of point are you trying to make?

I’ll take it up with you later

I have an emergency here

BBL

332 CaptainMongles  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:36:34pm

Is this some kind of gay space demon slang?

333 Obdicut  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:36:50pm

re: #327 Fozzie Bear

In a week, people will be on to the next thing. There wasn’t much damage done.

Maybe, maybe not. We’ll see.

334 jamesfirecat  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:36:51pm

re: #331 sattv4u2

I’ll take it up with you later

I have an emergency here

BBL

Sounsd good to me.

335 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:36:52pm

re: #297 EmmmieG

25-65.

It’s not the average age. It’s their chosen lifestyle. Some blue collar, some white collar. Some educated, some not. They like to read, hunt, fish, hike, watch tv, hang with the kids, crafts, or travel.

The majority of people in this country don’t actually know much about how computers work. They know a few aps, games, word processing, email, some work programs but they don’t program and usually have a friend they call when things go wrong.

This “hunting” and “fishing” thing. I’ve seen this in bars! Or did you mean the kind where you go outside? :D

And yeah, you’re exactly correct. There is a tech culture, and one can live their life and not be involved with it.

As for me, I watch so little TV and so few movies now as to be effectively cut off from mainstream media unless I see it being made fun of on a satirical show. And I LOVE IT. And I hate travelling, and like making art indoors. So yeah, my demographic and your friends’ would probably never cross.

336 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:37:11pm

re: #329 Obdicut

I’m sorry, but this is an example of a sustained effort by Anon, as is Project Chanology.

Is visa.com still down? It’s not sustained. Anon has the attention span of a highly caffeinated flea.

337 Kronocide  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:37:17pm

re: #332 CaptainMongles

Uh, what?

338 jamesfirecat  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:37:24pm

re: #320 RogueOne

Idiots who are trying to undo the damage they put themselves in! If they really care about START and repeal of DADT then by all means put those up for a vote. They can get those passed easily. It’s a matter of priorities and their priority is getting their hands on as much money as possible before they’re seated back at the kids table.

I think we’ve had this same argument more or less 3 times today Rouge. I’m going to stop bringing it up because neither of us is accomplishing anything…

339 researchok  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:37:35pm

re: #318 Fozzie Bear

It’s not that big a deal, really. It’s just not the huge problem people seem to think it is.

As Obdi noted, it is all in the eye of the beholder.

Also, a lot has to do with who the victims are.

If Palin sites gets attacked, we laugh.

What if were some progressive sites were attacked? I suspect we’d not see the same irreverence.

In any event, the law has to catch up with technology.

340 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:38:17pm

re: #335 WindUpBird

This “hunting” and “fishing” thing. I’ve seen this in bars! Or did you mean the kind where you go outside? :D

And yeah, you’re exactly correct. There is a tech culture, and one can live their life and not be involved with it.

As for me, I watch so little TV and so few movies now as to be effectively cut off from mainstream media unless I see it being made fun of on a satirical show. And I LOVE IT. And I hate travelling, and like making art indoors. So yeah, my demographic and your friends’ would probably never cross.

You would also have to have children or go to a church. I’m guessing neither?

341 RogueOne  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:38:19pm

re: #334 jamesfirecat

Sounsd good to me.

His having an emergency sounds good to you? WTF man…

//

342 shutdown  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:38:19pm

re: #337 BigPapa

Uh, what?

I predict a short and uneventful existence of CaptainMongles on LGF

343 Obdicut  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:38:25pm

re: #324 Gus 802

Heh. It’s worth noting at this point the recursiveness of some of this:

The MPAA used a DOS attack on the Pirate Bay because the Pirate Bay was torrenting their shit. Anon launched Operation Payback is a Bitch and DDOS-ed the MPAA and the RIAA.

344 researchok  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:39:07pm

re: #327 Fozzie Bear

In a week, people will be on to the next thing. There wasn’t much damage done.

That depends on you define damage.

I suspect the credit card companies spent a small fortune, globally, to recover from the attacks and to further safeguard their sites.

345 Kragar  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:39:11pm

re: #339 researchok

As Obdi noted, it is all in the eye of the beholder.

Also, a lot has to do with who the victims are.

If Palin sites gets attacked, we laugh.

What if were some progressive sites were attacked? I suspect we’d not see the same irreverence.

In any event, the law has to catch up with technology.

Laugh? Yes.

Expect whoever did it get investigated and possibily charged with a crime? Yes

346 RogueOne  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:39:24pm

re: #338 jamesfirecat

I think we’ve had this same argument more or less 3 times today Rouge. I’m going to stop bringing it up because neither of us is accomplishing anything…

We’re both attempting to place blame. I prefer to place it with the party that had the control and set the agenda. The blame always starts at the top.

347 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:39:37pm

re: #326 RogueOne

Perception is reality?

Sneakers!

Cosmo: While in prison, I learned everything in this world, including money, operates not on reality… - But the perception of reality.
Posit: people think a bank might be financially shaky.
Bishop: Consequence: people start to withdraw their money.
Cosmo: Result: pretty soon it is financially shaky.
Bishop: Conclusion: you can make banks fail.
Cosmo: Bzzt. I’ve already done that. Maybe you’ve heard about a few? Think bigger.
Bishop: Stock market?
Cosmo: Yes.
Bishop: Currency market?
Cosmo: Yes.
Bishop: Commodities market?
Cosmo: Yes.
Bishop: Small countries?
Cosmo: With luck, I might even be able to crash the whole damned system. Destroy all records of ownership. Think of it, Marty. No more rich people, no more poor people, everybody’s the same, isn’t that what we said we always wanted?

Nobody get in my grill, it’s just a great movie quote, I don’t agree with it

348 Randall Gross  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:40:10pm

re: #323 WindUpBird

The “am I consorting” was a joke aimed at the hyperbole and people in a generation above mine who seem to believe we can just arrest ‘em all and shut ‘em down. Anyhow! You are absolutely correct that these guys are often not as anon as they believe themselves to be. Kids aren’t as clever as they think they are. And the older anon are probably at a point in their life where theyr eally don’t want to risk jail time for lulz. A bunch will get arrested, a bunch will possibly be thrown into jail, or make their parents unhappy if they were like me, 14 year old kids in their rooms with their Atari 1040STs looking for forbidden digital thrills. My crimes were pretty banal. Oh crap, a pirated copy of Major Motion.

But I don’t think it’ll make any difference, they’ll keep doing what they do, with different tools, they’ll learn what works (I’m sure that kid who broke into Palin’s email simply with some social engineering was pretty surprised he got nailed) and stuff will go on.

I probably appear more “pro” anon than I am simply because I see it from closer up, it’s interesting to me. I’m interested in how people behave in large weird concert on the internet. I think there’s better ways to protest than DDOS attacks, but probably the ease and speed of a DDOS attack is what makes it work. Just sit at your chair and type, and stuff happens.

Remember how the ‘Le3t! dudes and their warez pretty much destroyed two popular and ahead of their times gaming platforms? (Atari ST and Amiga?) Everything that was old is new again, “My Name is Legion” was ancient the second Roger Zelazny’s publisher opened the box containing the manuscript…

349 Killgore Trout  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:40:10pm

Oh, noes! Why won’t people respect his privacy?
The Creepy, Lovesick Emails of Julian Assange

Julian Assange, the founder of the world’s most notorious secret-sharing operation, has some embarrassing documents in his own past. We’ve obtained a series of emails detailing his stalkery courtship of a teenager in his pre-Wikileaks days.

Elizabeth (not her real name) met Assange one night in April 2004, about two years before Assange started his now-infamous whistle-blowing website Wikileaks. She was 19 at the time; Assange was 33 and a student at the University of Melbourne studying physics and mathematics. Elizabeth spotted Assange at a bar near Melbourne and approached the older man with the long white hair because he seemed different than other guys she’d met.

350 Obdicut  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:40:25pm

re: #336 Fozzie Bear

Have all the attacks related to Wikileaks stopped, then?

351 Gus  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:40:44pm

re: #330 ozbloke

A DOS attack is designed to limit the ability of the destination servers to respond to requests by drowning them with requests.

Nothing more.

It is illegal. I do not justify either Anon or the Government doing it.

It’s interfering with the operations of the target business and it interferes with the internet providers. Basically they’re taking money from a cash register and burning it. If I form a group of people to prevent people from entering a store that store will suffer financially.

352 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:42:00pm

re: #351 Gus 802

It’s interfering with the operations of the target business and it interferes with the internet providers. Basically they’re taking money from a cash register and burning it. If I form a group of people to prevent people from entering a store that store will suffer financially.

Plus, I’m going to be mad if I want to go shopping there.

353 researchok  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:42:24pm

re: #345 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Laugh? Yes.

Expect whoever did it get investigated and possibily charged with a crime? Yes

I agree. They should be prosecuted.

In a way, it is yet another version of the ‘terror tax’.

A few events have changed the way we travel and airport security. We have to show up hours before a flight (think of that cost!), submit to intrusive searches and pay for entirely new security apparatuses.

The damage and ongoing and future costs of cyber crime cannot be understated.

354 RogueOne  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:42:57pm

Nite everyone.

Satt, hope your emergency wasn’t anything serious.

355 Gus  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:42:57pm

re: #339 researchok

As Obdi noted, it is all in the eye of the beholder.

Also, a lot has to do with who the victims are.

If Palin sites gets attacked, we laugh.

What if were some progressive sites were attacked? I suspect we’d not see the same irreverence.

In any event, the law has to catch up with technology.

So true.

356 Charles Johnson  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:43:04pm

re: #349 Killgore Trout

Oh, noes! Why won’t people respect his privacy?
The Creepy, Lovesick Emails of Julian Assange

Yeesh.

357 Obdicut  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:43:06pm

re: #353 researchok

Especially if they result in security measures as counterproductive as the ones at airports.

358 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:43:10pm

re: #340 EmmmieG

You would also have to have children or go to a church. I’m guessing neither?

Nope!

Parents never went to church either when I was a kid. We did family stuff! We had an almost Mormon-like family fun night where we tossed dice, played Trivial Pursuit, card games, board games. We had a weird focus as a family. Everyone had Projects. Everyone had some creative weird thing they were working on. dad wrote a novel, mom was a crafty/builder/miniatures type, I do my thing (art, game dev, some music) my brother did his thing (music, some film) and none of us got out much :D

359 jamesfirecat  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:43:49pm

re: #346 RogueOne

We’re both attempting to place blame. I prefer to place it with the party that had the control and set the agenda. The blame always starts at the top.

And I see “control” as an much harder thing to pin down in a body as undemocratic as the Senate is at the end of the day and that’s all I’m going to say on the issue…

360 Charles Johnson  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:44:11pm

re: #349 Killgore Trout

Oh, noes! Why won’t people respect his privacy?
The Creepy, Lovesick Emails of Julian Assange

Looking at these emails, the rape allegations seem a lot more credible. This is pretty creepy behavior.

361 Usually refered to as anyways  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:44:34pm

re: #343 Obdicut

Heh. It’s worth noting at this point the recursiveness of some of this:

The MPAA used a DOS attack on the Pirate Bay because the Pirate Bay was torrenting their shit. Anon launched Operation Payback is a Bitch and DDOS-ed the MPAA and the RIAA.

Not unlike the US Govt. against wikileaks.

Lets not forget no matter who preforms the attack, it is illegal.
The users of the internet who are using the same pipe as the destination address are paying a price.

The smaller players who lease pipes off larger players are paying for the data.

The larger telcos have do deal with the carnage.

DOS attacks are just wrong no matter who does it.

362 Kragar  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:44:40pm

Mummified forest provides climate change clues

On a remote island in the Canadian Arctic where no trees now grow, a newly unearthed mummified forest is giving researchers a peek into how plants reacted to ancient climate change.

That knowledge will be key as scientists begin to tease out the impacts of global warming in the Arctic.

The ancient forest found on Ellesmere Island, which lies north of the Arctic Circle in Canada, contained dried out birch, larch, spruce and pine trees. Research scientist Joel Barker of Ohio State University discovered it by chance while camping in 2009.

“At one point I crested a small ridge and the cliff face below me was just riddled with wood,” he recalled.

Armed with a research grant, Barker returned this past summer to explore the site, which was buried by an avalanche 2 million to 8 million years ago. Melting snow recently exposed the preserved remains of tree trunks, leaves and needles.

363 cenotaphium  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:44:53pm

re: #329 Obdicut

I’m sorry, but this is an example of a sustained effort by Anon, as is Project Chanology.

You have to look at Chanology as an offshoot or a sub-sub-group. There are at least an equal amount of people who loathe the anti-scientology campaign and everyone in it, also belonging to Anonymous. If we just call all of it Anonymous it just makes the term unusable (even worse than it is now!).

It’s the same thing with Payback and whatever else.

Maybe there is some fundamental thing that divides the way you see it? I would have said it was how close you were to the phenomenon, but since you say you’ve been studying it for 20 years.. I don’t know.

In the end, it probably matters little. The majority will continue to “not get” Anonymous. It will lead to strange contortions in the narrative, and it will be entertaining. Like the Glenn Beck thing (come full circle).
People will get punished, but not enough and not in a timely manner, so it will continue. The change will probably be scale. More media spotlight, bigger targets, and so on. Whatever happens will be interesting.

364 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:45:12pm

WUB, your nic just links to gmail.com, rather than something@gmail.com. I tried to email you, but alas, poof.

365 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:45:48pm

re: #358 WindUpBird

Nope!

Parents never went to church either when I was a kid. We did family stuff! We had an almost Mormon-like family fun night where we tossed dice, played Trivial Pursuit, card games, board games. We had a weird focus as a family. Everyone had Projects. Everyone had some creative weird thing they were working on. dad wrote a novel, mom was a crafty/builder/miniatures type, I do my thing (art, game dev, some music) my brother did his thing (music, some film) and none of us got out much :D

We try to get our family games at Rainy Day Games. Better games.

I had to ban Settlers of Catan for a while. There was a mooning. Not going to give more details than that.

366 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:46:27pm

re: #348 Thanos

Remember how the ‘Le3t! dudes and their warez pretty much destroyed two popular and ahead of their times gaming platforms? (Atari ST and Amiga?) Everything that was old is new again, “My Name is Legion” was ancient the second Roger Zelazny’s publisher opened the box containing the manuscript…

They were dead in the water, Apple had a stranglehold on that shit ;-) I had an A500 and an ST, and it wasn’t l33t guys destroying the platform, it was the fact that neither machine got a mainstream foothold. The Mac was a sensation, it was legitimzed by education, the IBM was Just What people Had, it was legitmized by business.

My uncle, and old crotchety engineer type, dismissed my ST as a “games machine” even after I was making animations in it, making art in it, 3d design, coming up with my own little hypercard games, staying up late at night trying to figure out the mysteries of degas Elite, Spectrum 512, CAD 3D. hacking sprites in other games, all that shit. Nope, it was a “toy”.

I don’t talk to him much ;-)

367 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:46:56pm

re: #364 Fozzie Bear

WUB, your nic just links to gmail.com, rather than something@gmail.com. I tried to email you, but alas, poof.

balls! it worked for Sizzle!

369 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:47:12pm

Putin’s view of democracy (direct quote from today’s Q&A):

[Link: www.gazeta.ru…]

The state exists exactly in order to to protect the majority’s interests.

370 Obdicut  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:48:03pm

re: #363 cenotaphium

I haven’t been studying it, I’ve just been a part of it. I mean, not a part of any of the hacks or attempts, but cruising along at the chans, in IRC channels, etc.

And yeah, I know that a lot of anon is sick and tired of Chanology. It’s a very fractured place. Which is why I strongly feel that when it does cohere, it’s due to a lot of effort on the part of individuals, overcoming that inertia.

371 Gus  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:48:33pm

re: #361 ozbloke

Not unlike the US Govt. against wikileaks.

Lets not forget no matter who preforms the attack, it is illegal.
The users of the internet who are using the same pipe as the destination address are paying a price.

The smaller players who lease pipes off larger players are paying for the data.

The larger telcos have do deal with the carnage.

DOS attacks are just wrong no matter who does it.

In general. But the government can go next door and shoot up the drug dealer’s house and be justified in doing so. I can’t go next door to that same drug dealer’s house and do the same. Otherwise we’d start questioning ourselves about infecting Iranian computers with Stuxnet no? So I don’t think it’s always wrong.

372 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:48:58pm

re: #364 Fozzie Bear

look at my user profile instead *_*

373 CaptainMongles  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:49:32pm

What kind of ethnicity is he anyway? Where does the name “Assange” come from? In Ian Fleming’s James Bond novels the villains were always of mixed/dubious ancestry.

374 Gus  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:49:34pm

It’s like this…

DDOS attack against Iran: Good
DDOS attack against Pay Pay: Bad

375 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:49:39pm

re: #368 000G

More pictures…

Wait, different one. The one I linked was discovered on Axel Heiberg Island in 1985, the one you linked on Ellesmere Island in 2009.

376 Gus  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:49:54pm

re: #374 Gus 802

It’s like this…

DDOS attack against Iran: Good
DDOS attack against Pay Pay PAL: Bad

Grrr.

377 lawhawk  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:49:55pm

re: #360 Charles

I’d say it’s definitely in stalker-ish territory, but I wouldn’t go much beyond that based on only one-half of the email conversation.

Assange appears to be too clever for his own good (the bit about the license plate, adding to get her phone number)… it’s an approach to show intellectual superiority, but that he will pursue people far beyond what is normally considered reasonable.

378 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:50:17pm

re: #374 Gus 802

It’s like this…

DDOS attack against Iran: Good
DDOS attack against Pay Pay: Bad

Ahem. DDOS attack against the Iranian government. I would like to get to know the people better, based on the one Persian I know.

379 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:50:41pm

re: #364 Fozzie Bear

I’ve just realized I have no earthly idea how to change the blue nick thing

:P

380 Gus  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:50:46pm

re: #378 EmmmieG

Ahem. DDOS attack against the Iranian government. I would like to get to know the people better, based on the one Persian I know.

I was going to add more detail.

381 researchok  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:51:00pm

re: #371 Gus 802

See my 353.

We’re in this now, whether we know it or not.

382 Usually refered to as anyways  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:51:40pm

re: #371 Gus 802

In general. But the government can go next door and shoot up the drug dealer’s house and be justified in doing so. I can’t go next door to that same drug dealer’s house and do the same. Otherwise we’d start questioning ourselves about infecting Iranian computers with Stuxnet no? So I don’t think it’s always wrong.

I’ll guess then you are also not surprised by groups that want to put out information about that sort of thing happening.

383 Gus  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:52:51pm

re: #382 ozbloke

I’ll guess then you are also not surprised by groups that want to put out information about that sort of thing happening.

No, I wouldn’t. Guess that would be expected.

384 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:53:23pm

re: #370 Obdicut

I haven’t been studying it, I’ve just been a part of it. I mean, not a part of any of the hacks or attempts, but cruising along at the chans, in IRC channels, etc.

And yeah, I know that a lot of anon is sick and tired of Chanology. It’s a very fractured place. Which is why I strongly feel that when it does cohere, it’s due to a lot of effort on the part of individuals, overcoming that inertia.

I see what you are getting at, and agree to some extent. I am however, extremely wary of any steps that could actually change the culture by force. Frankly, I rather like the wild west feel of it. It’s what I grew up with.

As to the commenter who said warez trading killed the Amiga, nothing could be further from the truth. Platform wars killed it. Warez trading occurred on all platforms without exception.

385 Kragar  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:53:33pm

re: #383 Gus 802

No, I wouldn’t. Guess that would be expected.

Also to be expected, the Government attempting to stop them.

386 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:54:57pm

re: #384 Fozzie Bear

I see what you are getting at, and agree to some extent. I am however, extremely wary of any steps that could actually change the culture by force. Frankly, I rather like the wild west feel of it. It’s what I grew up with.

As to the commenter who said warez trading killed the Amiga, nothing could be further from the truth. Platform wars killed it. Warez trading occurred on all platforms without exception.

yes *_*

Anyway Fozzie, click on the ICON, it’s in my profile

387 Vicious Babushka  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:55:03pm

re: #378 EmmmieG

Ahem. DDOS attack against the Iranian government. I would like to get to know the people better, based on the one Persian I know.

Stuxnet specifically targeted the rods in Iranian nuclear reactors.

388 Gus  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:55:19pm

re: #385 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Also to be expected, the Government attempting to stop them.

That too.

389 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:55:53pm

re: #387 Alouette

Stuxnet specifically targeted the rods in Iranian nuclear reactors.

which is really one of the most amazing things

In 30 years people will still be talking about what a gamechanger Stuxnet was!

390 Gus  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:56:53pm

I wonder what the unemployment rate would be like if everyone on Earth behaved themselves.

/

391 Obdicut  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:57:30pm

re: #384 Fozzie Bear

I see what you are getting at, and agree to some extent. I am however, extremely wary of any steps that could actually change the culture by force. Frankly, I rather like the wild west feel of it. It’s what I grew up with.

Wariness is fine; what I was getting at is that the culture is changeable by going after individuals, and those individuals are not actually anonymous. If attacks of this scale become routine, then we can expect to see the people putting up the targets start being taken down very quickly.

The Wild West died. The Man Who Shot Liberty Valence is a great movie.


As to the commenter who said warez trading killed the Amiga, nothing could be further from the truth. Platform wars killed it. Warez trading occurred on all platforms without exception.

Agreed. And still does. And I’ve never seen one whit of proof that piracy impacts game sales in any significant manner.

392 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:57:42pm

re: #389 WindUpBird

of course, hacking re: #390 Gus 802

I wonder what the unemployment rate would be like if everyone on Earth behaved themselves.

/

I know it’d go up in Portland, there’s a lot of contraband being sold in this town

393 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:58:13pm

re: #379 WindUpBird

I’ve just realized I have no earthly idea how to change the blue nick thing

:P

Message sent.

394 Gus  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 12:59:57pm

Hasta later.

395 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 1:00:40pm

re: #394 Gus 802

Hasta later.

Until luego.

396 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 1:01:32pm

re: #393 Fozzie Bear

Message sent.

sennnt you one baaack

397 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 1:03:36pm

re: #396 WindUpBird

sennnt you one baaack

Got it. The first line of the second paragraph begins with “and FUCK YES”. All is well in the world.

398 Charles Johnson  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 1:04:21pm

re: #379 WindUpBird

I’ve just realized I have no earthly idea how to change the blue nick thing

:P

Leave the “Web site” field blank, but check the box that says “Show email.” Then your username becomes a link to our email obfuscating script that lets people send you an email after they do some stuff to prove they’re not a bot.

399 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 1:05:51pm

re: #398 Charles

Leave the “Web site” field blank, but check the box that says “Show email.” Then your username becomes a link to our email obfuscating script that lets people send you an email after they do some stuff to prove they’re not a bot.

Yagh, thank you. You’d think I’d have this down by now *_*

400 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 1:08:35pm

re: #397 Fozzie Bear

Got it. The first line of the second paragraph begins with “and FUCK YES”. All is well in the world.

yeha baby!

401 Usually refered to as anyways  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 1:12:34pm

Yesterday I recall people discussing the residence that Assange would be staying as whilst on bail.

Here is some updated information on this:

As a condition of his release, Mr Assange will have to reside at Ellingham Hall, a mansion on the 600-acre country estate of Vaughan Smith, an ex-British army officer who founded the Frontline Club, the media club in London that is the British base of WikiLeaks’ operations.
He must stay there between the hours of 10:00pm and 6:00am and between the hours of 10:00am and 2:00pm.
The judge ordered Mr Assange to report regularly to police and be confined to a certain room in the mansion during his curfew hours for fear that his electronic monitoring tag might not work elsewhere on the sprawling estate.


Also I found this interesting:
The decision to challenge Mr Assange’s bail was taken by British prosecutors acting on behalf of the Swedish authorities, but they were forced to defend this decision after the Swedes said they had not been consulted.

“The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) acts here as agents of the government seeking extradition, in this case the Swedish government,” Britain’s chief state prosecutor Keir Starmer told the BBC.

Sorry about posting on a dead thread.

402 Randall Gross  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 1:19:53pm

re: #366 WindUpBird

They were dead in the water, Apple had a stranglehold on that shit ;-) I had an A500 and an ST, and it wasn’t l33t guys destroying the platform, it was the fact that neither machine got a mainstream foothold. The Mac was a sensation, it was legitimzed by education, the IBM was Just What people Had, it was legitmized by business.

My uncle, and old crotchety engineer type, dismissed my ST as a “games machine” even after I was making animations in it, making art in it, 3d design, coming up with my own little hypercard games, staying up late at night trying to figure out the mysteries of degas Elite, Spectrum 512, CAD 3D. hacking sprites in other games, all that shit. Nope, it was a “toy”.

I don’t talk to him much ;-)

Yeah, I remember those days. :)

403 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 1:50:22pm

Charles, I want you to know you are a mensch for hosting a place where fuckwads like me can disagree with you, get angry, even troll you a bit, and you keep calm.

Thank you for some of the best discussions of my life.

404 Fozzie Bear  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 1:54:16pm

You too Obdi.

405 Obdicut  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 1:55:14pm

re: #404 Fozzie Bear

Oh, you muppet, you.

406 reine.de.tout  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 3:09:49pm

re: #349 Killgore Trout

Oh, noes! Why won’t people respect his privacy?
The Creepy, Lovesick Emails of Julian Assange

How weird. He tracks her down and calls her, which bothers her, then he insults her when her attitude toward him isn’t as friendly as he would like it to be.

Good grief, what an asshole.

407 KayInMaine  Thu, Dec 16, 2010 4:22:42pm

Do we really know if this letter is real or not? Glenn Beck is behind The Blaze, so it wouldn’t surprise me if his minions created this letter to attack themselves to Wikileaks/Assange. Palin seems to do this sort of thing as well…


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh