[nonseq]

Askquestionsfirst, on 06 April 2012 - 12:03 PM, said:

TheOldTopkick, on 06 April 2012 - 11:47 AM, said:

Annonymous lives for this kind of recognition. The only answer is to ignore them. I am sorry that any site is maliciously defaced. Doing what may appear to be good does not excuse malicious hacking.

MALICIOUS HACKERS! SOMEONE SHOULD STOP THEM! WAAAA! go home and cry to mommy. You live in a country where your fore fathers fought against laws and tyranny of oppressive government for the freedoms you exercise. Just because you take them for granted and all is neat and orderly (for now) on your street, don't knock those who are suppressed or you will be next.

Oh bunk. Sophomoric drivel.

So, now I ask you, please provide evidence that Anonymous's have effected just one positive change. I'm betting that you, like the others throughout these threads can not do so.

[Fisticuffs]

chosenson, on 08 April 2012 - 12:33 PM, said:

nonseq said:

Please share with us just one positive change in corporate and/or public policy that has come from the antics of Anonymous or other group of cowardly vandals.

nonseq asked for PROOF of one positive change. They may have had good intentions when they struck at the child porn sites, but they certainly didn't change a thing.

Um -- the removal of child pornography from the internet is proof positive of a good thing, right? Or do you think there's some form of proof that 1+1=2 rather than it simply being self evident? Also I wasn't striking at out at the old man's pseudonym. I was saying it was self-reflective of his own behavior. Unless of course nonseq doesn't mean non sequitur.

[nonseq]

Fisticuffs, on 08 April 2012 - 12:11 PM, said:

Because all heroes are martyrs right? Or better yet all heroes have faces. You know like the Washington memorial of the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier. As far as satisfying your challenge of identifying "one good thing" Anonymous has done. Well, if you notice in the right margin under "Similar Articles" there's an editorial titled, "Hacker Collective Anonymous Strikes at Child Porn Sites." Only a pedophile wouldn't consider this to be a good thing. You sure live up to your name sir -- nonseq.

The tomb of the unknown is hallowed ground, not for someone hiding in the basement of the House of Lords in an attempt at anonymous terrorism, or modern day script kiddies prancing around in the dark wearing their Guy Fawkes and pretending to give a dam' about the downtrodden. The unknown soldier(s) are those who actually gave themselves up for their neighbors, communities, and nation but could not be identified. It is extremely offensive to the memory of the unknowns that you might try to equate the two. Shame on you.

As for the child porn sites, in the final analysis, we only have Anonymous's word (supported by PR provided by tech bloggers) that they actually did anything . But if you want to make that argument, can you provide just one bit of documentation that child porn was damaged at all by the script kiddies?

Finally, is it fair to assume that you support vigilantism and are willing to give up your moral judgement and personal responsibility to punks too cowardly to identify themselves? I assume that you oppose the rule of law and embrace anarchy? For extra credit, please cite one example where anarchy has been successful and protected those whom you claim Anonymous are championing. Just one little example is all I ask. (Here's a hint, you won't be able to find one.)

This post has been edited by nonseq: 08 April 2012 - 01:11 PM

[chosenson]

Fisticuffs, on 08 April 2012 - 12:51 PM, said:

chosenson, on 08 April 2012 - 12:33 PM, said:

nonseq said:

Please share with us just one positive change in corporate and/or public policy that has come from the antics of Anonymous or other group of cowardly vandals.

nonseq asked for PROOF of one positive change. They may have had good intentions when they struck at the child porn sites, but they certainly didn't change a thing.

Um -- the removal of child pornography from the internet is proof positive of a good thing, right? Or do you think there's some form of proof that 1+1=2 rather than it simply being self evident? Also I wasn't striking at out at the old man's pseudonym. I was saying it was self-reflective of his own behavior. Unless of course nonseq doesn't mean non sequitur.

All you can provide is words. Just because someone said they have struck at the child porn sites doesn't mean they brought about any change; not one.

For all anyone knows, the parties responsible for the child porn site attacks may now be sitting on their cash of ill-gotten child porn selling it to the highest bidders. I may be making assumptions here, but Anonymous has proved on more than one occasion that when they hack a site, they take whatever they deem useful, worthy for their own gain.

But you still haven't proved that they have ever brought about one positive change with their actions.

[Fisticuffs]

nonseq, on 08 April 2012 - 12:56 PM, said:

... modern day script kiddies prancing around in the dark wearing their Guy Fawkes and pretending to give a dam' about the downtrodden.

It's amusing that you presume to know the truth about everything and everyone. I guess old age brings with it unsurpassed wisdom rather than what's more commonly recognized as senility. Here lets see you try to spin this one. What purpose would Anonymous have for attacking child pornography sites other than to get rid of the filth and expose the people behind it? In what possible way could this "enrich" them when they don't even get personal recognition for their action? Answer me that.

Quote

As for the child porn sites, in the final analysis, we only have Anonymous's word (supported by PR provided by tech bloggers) that they actually did anything.

Ah yes, the "if I can't find fault with the argument deny the source" trick. Basically this is like saying, "We only have the word of a group doctors that a particular medical drug actually solves an ailment. So because it's only been verified by doctors we can't trust it." Well, yes, it only makes sense that those who aren't medical practitioners defer to those who *do* know something about it to "peer-review" the content.

Quote

Finally, is it fair to assume that you support vigilantism and are willing to give up your moral judgement and personal responsibility to punks too cowardly to identify themselves. I assume that you oppose the rule of law and embrace anarchy?

We're talking about Anonymous attacking the Chinese government here. That's what the article is about, right? Or do you want to have an existential debate about the values of gerontocracies and theocracies rather than keeping on point? When a government oppresses it's people, damn right--I'm all for vigilante actions against the government. I'm not for people defacing businesses or other people on the sidelines who have done nothing wrong. Next time don't try to conflate the argument into something that it isn't about. You'll look more intelligent and have more of a leg to stand on.

This post has been edited by Fisticuffs: 08 April 2012 - 02:02 PM

[DeonRobinson]

nonseq, on 07 April 2012 - 03:05 PM, said:

KevinFowler, on 07 April 2012 - 07:24 AM, said:

You are heroes. Keep up the excellent work.

Please share with us just one positive change in corporate and/or public policy that has come from the antics of Anonymous or other group of cowardly vandals. Just one. I'll bet you can't do it. As for calling them heros, what's heroic about skulking in the shadows and hiding their identities? To rise to the level of heroic shouldn't there be some risk involved? It appears to me that your heros come cheap.

Well they were a major force behind fight sopa, they run wikileaks that show misjustice in the world, they fought the zeta cartel, they uncovered the US secret miltary so yes they are heroes. There is risk to many have gone to jail, drug cartels took one capture, they are being turn against there own. They are villians because you dont agree with there cause, but grumpy old man for the internet age they are heroes.

[nonseq]

DeonRobinson, on 08 April 2012 - 01:43 PM, said:

nonseq, on 07 April 2012 - 03:05 PM, said:

KevinFowler, on 07 April 2012 - 07:24 AM, said:

You are heroes. Keep up the excellent work.

Please share with us just one positive change in corporate and/or public policy that has come from the antics of Anonymous or other group of cowardly vandals. Just one. I'll bet you can't do it. As for calling them heros, what's heroic about skulking in the shadows and hiding their identities? To rise to the level of heroic shouldn't there be some risk involved? It appears to me that your heros come cheap.

Well they were a major force behind fight sopa, they run wikileaks that show misjustice in the world, they fought the zeta cartel, they uncovered the US secret miltary so yes they are heroes. There is risk to many have gone to jail, drug cartels took one capture, they are being turn against there own. They are villians because you dont agree with there cause, but grumpy old man for the internet age they are heroes.

Actually they were NOT a major force in opposing SOPA. Their contribution was minimal at best, despite their claims otherwise. In fact, I would suggest that they had zero impact in getting SOPA postponed (and that's the best we can do so far) Sure the blackout got news space but the real factors had nothing to do with puppet show politics. At least that's my opinion. Real names, real faces, and real voices got SOPA postponed.

So, I ask you. Would you prefer to have democratically elected lawmakers and executives make policy or would you prefer to have some faceless guy, sitting in subsidized housing in NYC lower east side while ratting out his compatriots making your decisions for you? What if you don't agree with ole Xavier? What is your recourse then.

[deepsand]

You, Fisticuffs, are long of words, but very, very short of facts. So, let's itemize the known facts.

Actions attributable to Anon and its ilk:

• Vandalized the web sites of countless legitimate enterprises;
• Disrupted the legitimate activities of countless legitimate enterprises;
• Stolen and published private information about LEO, putting them and their families at risk of physical harm;
• Stolen and published private information about countless individuals, putting them at risk of loss from fraud;
• Engaged in vehicular theft;
• Stolen more credit card data than has organized crime.

Beneficial results attributable to Anon and its ilk:

• None.

That's a whole lot of collateral damage with nothing to show for it other than the stroking of the egos of a few.

[nonseq]

Fisticuffs, on 08 April 2012 - 01:38 PM, said:

We're talking about Anonymous attacking the Chinese government here. That's what the article is about, right?

Which explains why you posted...

Fisticuffs, on 08 April 2012 - 12:51 PM, said:

Um -- the removal of child pornography from the internet is proof positive of a good thing, right? Or do you think there's some form of proof that 1+1=2 rather than it simply being self evident? Also I wasn't striking at out at the old man's pseudonym. I was saying it was self-reflective of his own behavior. Unless of course nonseq doesn't mean non sequitur.

Hoist on your own petard?

[Fisticuffs]

nonseq, on 08 April 2012 - 03:02 PM, said:

Fisticuffs, on 08 April 2012 - 01:38 PM, said:

We're talking about Anonymous attacking the Chinese government here. That's what the article is about, right?

Which explains why you posted...

Fisticuffs, on 08 April 2012 - 12:51 PM, said:

Um -- the removal of child pornography from the internet is proof positive of a good thing, right? Or do you think there's some form of proof that 1+1=2 rather than it simply being self evident? Also I wasn't striking at out at the old man's pseudonym. I was saying it was self-reflective of his own behavior. Unless of course nonseq doesn't mean non sequitur.

Hoist on your own petard?

Ah yes, lets ignore the fact that you set up a goal post and then threw it in the ocean.

nonseq, on 07 April 2012 - 03:05 PM, said:

KevinFowler, on 07 April 2012 - 07:24 AM, said:

You are heroes. Keep up the excellent work.

Please share with us just one positive change in corporate and/or public policy that has come from the antics of Anonymous or other group of cowardly vandals. Just one. I'll bet you can't do it. As for calling them heros, what's heroic about skulking in the shadows and hiding their identities? To rise to the level of heroic shouldn't there be some risk involved? It appears to me that your heros come cheap.

I'm sure integrity is a word that's very dear to you. Either that or you have a very short memory.

[deepsand]

Just the facts, if you will.

[TheOldTopkick]

The longer this argument goes on the wider the grin Annonymouse gets. Hacking may do some small of good. It may even be necessary, but it is never right to deface another person's property..