Anonymous

Not so weird when you know what Guy Fawkes is about.

Oh dear god, no! Not our social networking outlets! Whatever shall the world do without their social networking outlets!?!? =/ How about go out and socialize? I'm pretty sure I read on Reuters that SOPA/PIPA was indefinitely suspended.

Personally it wouldn't really matter if they went ahead with shutting down FB, but I think you're going a little too far in saying pandemonium. It's a damned site, and if you're that upset about it getting shut down you should probably get off the computer. Just saying.

I don't particularly like Anonymous. The quotes you posted are good examples of why. There are plenty of ways to go about doing what you want without harming/harassing other people. Primarily it seems more/less like bully tactics.

An online war between Anon, the People, and the Gov. really shouldn't even be considered that. Is it really that hard to give people their due respects which they're entitled to? It's more like a disagreement with one side threatening to use harsh techniques if one moves they way they want (this is to all three groups not just a single one).

I don't know why Anon would need to say something along the lines of "we're not playing" when I'm sure more than over half the world may not even know what their goal is. For all I care they could shut down the whole internet and do a favor to us all.

The only reason for the internet (imo) is because other technologies cannot advance any further without the progression of computers. It allows for an open space for people to work just like a person's home. And like a home there really should be some rules as to how conduct should go about.

 

Sarcasm is pretty necessary when debating stuff about the internet.

I believe what you meant is underestimating the behavior. But let's use an example.

Say all of a sudden, without warning, and due to a unconnected reason, KH Planet goes down. It cannot be brought back by administrators or the host site vBulletin. Would their be pandemonium? No. There would be a lot of angry fans who enjoyed the leisure the site provided, and that's on a small site with a fairly dedicated group.

When you take down something like FB, who has hundreds upon thousands of customers, you're just going to have a lot of very angry people directed at the attackers. No one is going to start running down the streets screaming the world is ending, or tossing themselves out of their office windows because they cannot "Like" something their friends said over the internet.

There are other social network outlets (such as Twitter, Tumblr for example) who do very similar things. All FB has done was provide a working marketing scheme and started adding features that made it more presentable.

So, no, saying there would not be pandemonium is not an underestimation of peoples behavior. Unless you inject fear tactics by media who cover things immediately as their happening you won't create that big of an effect. Rather you'll heighten the peoples awareness and security measures in which they take while on the internet.

Those are three fields where a majority of the people you deal with are liars, criminals, or enemy combatants. People who are already using aggressive and deceitful tactics to undermine you and or kill you.

As for other methods working, yes, they do. What Anonymous does for hacking I don't know. If it's anything like movies (doubtful but an example) then it would stand to reason they are breaking computer encryption and such which could be done using written software on closed networks between friends or peers. You don't have to do it to other peoples computers. Hell if they focused on helping to increase internet defenses there'd be a lot less problems.

Some people, maybe, but not tens of thousands. The internet provides a lot of things. Lucrative ways to advertise, get information across, and such, but there are those things in real life too. As far as regressing 20 years, I wouldn't be so certain of that. Have you noticed what all our advances nowadays do? They're mainly entertainment in value.

 

This is my bad. I misread what you typed. I saw "understanding" for some reason, haha.

It's called a control in experimenting. You take a small number of people and an idea (your hypothesis), and perform a very small and contained example.

The point is to take a small, believable number, and then after the test is done understand trends and causes which would essentially spider-web on larger scales. The age range of KHP varies anywhere from 12 (this is an estimate) to 24 (again, an estimate) so while very narrow, this would also be an age range of very emotionally (read chemically) imbalanced people who are still maturing, to those that are just settling into their maturity.

Facebook, believe it or not has a specific interest for which we all subscribe. It's staying connected. As you say people want to feel apart of something, much like here where we join to discuss KH and other video games or media.

While I do not dismiss the fact that these type of people exist, their numbers would be low. Maybe it's just my own thinking, but if you have friends and family around you who can provide that sense of belonging, you are not doomed. If you are missing that there are places you can go to hang out where you'll find people of similar interest.

I can understand what you're trying to say with this, but the truth is had there been a motivational speaker they could rally behind as a leading figure, the people in Egypt would name their children in respect of them. It's not an uncommon thing, people still do it with Biblical names.

The mother and daughter thing is heartwarming, but not impossible to do with effort and time. The rest is a good example of how too much information can be a bad thing, and what people will do in the heat of the moment.

Here you're using a very narrow scope of people again. You forget that websites go down all the time for various reasons such as maintenance, bad signal, etc. FB dropping would certainly cause complaints, of that there is no doubt, however if it were unable to be brought back that would more or less encourage another entrepreneur to develop a more stable and harder to bring down site (however you would do that. My computer experience is limited.)

Those emotionally disturbed folk you talked about very well come out of the woodwork, but I have confidence that a more rational part of the human brain would stop them from doing anything ludicrous over something so silly.

Your finally comment here is based on the human factor of being easily fooled. Stating the world will end usually has religious ties to it (on this let's not delve too far please, as the debate will undoubtedly be derailed). People of faith are more inclined to believe the word of their pastors or religious head or just a very convincing speaker preying on the gullible.

Eh. Doesn't make them right/likeable.

But what did those advance? I see convenience to a generation that doesn't want to study like the older, or is too busy running around that they can't just stop and relax outside with friends. People who don't want to dig out text books from libraries and present their own opinions of areas.

 

First,since we already have seen that FB was not takin down that day,the person who said Anon was going to do that also said they were going to do it laster year on Nov 5. They used a different voice and was mostly likely not Anon,or atleast the ones we are talking about.

One thing to remember is that almost anyone can claim to be Anon,and technically they are right,if we dont know who they are. For this Anon,while they do things similar to the rumored FB attack,it is generally to certain people and their websites,not against a place like FB.

Also,just to show that Anon can do something other then taking down sites that might or might not make us like/dislike them, Project Chanology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

We are anonymous
We are Legion
We do not forgive
We do not forget
Expect us.