Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

(Reporter ambushing MM Jr. as he steps out of his house for a jog to the pub. )
"Why did you kill your dad?"
"What? off you er"
(MM Sr. leaning out the window above them )
"Right! I'm not dead you daft cow! Now off you er!"

daedalus wrote:
I told myself that I would posting in this thread until I was away from work's (probably monitored) internet connection, but life's too short to not point out just how ironic your avatar is at this EXACT moment.

I know. It's glorious, right

Emperors Faithful wrote:I think you entirely missed the point of that saying.

I'm well aware of the point. My point is that people often use that statement to suggest that the difference between the two is purely a subjective matter and ignores the fact that you can in fact be both at the same time.

It's a teenagers argument. If you're trying to examine the usefulness of a groups actions (or the inherent nature of their goals), debating semantics and perspective is worthless when examining the matter actually at hand when one can be both a freedom fighter and a terrorist at the same time.

In other words:

Kanluwen wrote:
This axiom is so ridiculously overused in the wrong context and is so flawed to begin with that words cannot describe.

QFT.

4M2A wrote:Terrorist is often used as a negative term to describe armed organisations that attack governments. Whether they actually use terror is often overlooked. Cyberterrorists aren't causing terror they are just being disruptive.

A terrorist is someone who seeks to insight fear or 'terror' in order to coerce action from the victim (the term itself is applied strictly to groups that do this to achieve political aims separate from nationality but this criteria is not part of the actual definition of the term which has no clear or agreed definition). Effectively, many of the most recent actions taken by Anonymous boarder on cyber-terrorism (The Operation Payback attacks for example). I don't really want to chalk them up as cyber terrorists (they are but they're a pathetic example), because they're using DDoS attacks, which is like Al Queda throwing rocks at sky scrappers. it doesn't scare anyone. Just annoys the crap out of them.

Now, Anonymous could be said to support internet freedom, but that idea itself isn't necessarily good and not all of Anonymous' actions really support the cause. If anything, Anonymous is the Taliban of the internet (loosely speaking using a weak analogy). If they escalate their attacks like they've been doing (along with other groups) governments the world over will bring the hammer down on the internet and crush them and likely destroy the internet freedom the original Anonymous groups were trying to support.

Wolfun wrote:Anonymous aren't a group, more like a selection of groups.

People just use them as a scapegoat, but I know plenty of anons that don't do anything massively lawbreaking.

I would separate Anonymous into three distinct sub-groups.

The original Anonymous that appeared in 2007 may not actually be a group at all but separate internet based whistle blowers who all simply used the same alias, either as a result of the actions of the others or by chance. Anonymous appeared as a coherent entity/movement in 2008 with Project Chanology and organized protests against the Church of Scientology. This got them a lot of media attention. As a result the second group of Anonymous appeared, the griefers (youtube porn day, hacking the Epilepsy Foundation), who simply commit cyber-crime for fun and then use the Anonymous name. The most dangerous one is the new group, the actual cyber-terrorists. These are the guys who launched attacks against Operation Payback, support pirating, and attack anti-pirating as well as launch attacks with political agendas and actually are organized a lot like terrorist groups with a cell structure (attacks on Fine Gael, a conservative political group). They've also begun engaging in retaliation against law enforcement.

Now, the griefers seem less active now, probably they're organizing into newer groups like LulzSec.

I don't think Anonymous ever had much credibility. Most people think of hackers as being pimple faced nerds or thirty year old fat kids in their parent's basements (and of course a name like Anonymous doesn't help this misconception). Anonymous' failure to separate itself from the extremists using their name to commit cyber-crimes and cyber-terrorism killed any other credibility they might gain outside of the politically un/misinformed or their own circles. By not saying "these guys aren't us" they're playing bad PR or they really are united in those particular ends.

EDIT: And come people. Lets face the truth. DDoSing servers and stealing account information and griefing do no good to anyone and bring about no change (especially when the most obvious goal that can be attributed to Anonymous today is being pro-piracy). It's juvenile. Anonymous was at its best years ago when they were still largely playing the whistle blower game. The day has passed.

Anonymous is a public curiosity. Many people have called it a successor to wikileaks which I think is a misconception. Rather Anonymous is a lot like the early Tea Party. It's a mashed up mess of groups operating under a name with no real clear objective or goals. Likely Anonymous will die off along the same lines and result in more mature organizations.

They are a bit like the Norse god Loki.

A**holes who are good for lulz.

Miraclefish wrote:"One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter."-George Carlin

Fixed that for ya

Frazzled wrote:

Karon wrote:Good people doing good things. Many claim to be Anonymous, but aren't, this is why they are untraceable. They are Legion, anyone can be Anonymous, nobody is Anonymous, while everyone is Anonymous.

They go after a lot of terrible things that need to be shut down like Scientology.

I seriously lol'd at the "Hacking is illegal, so Hacking is bad"

Wow I am shocked just shocked you support identity theft, fraud, and a dozen other crimes. Shocked, just shocked.

Its ashame they don't crack DAKKA and post all your personal information on the internet so that the Nigerian Prince and his epic crew can get to know you better.

What if the theft is done for a good cause like stealing food to feed your starving family.

Cheesecat wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

Karon wrote:Good people doing good things. Many claim to be Anonymous, but aren't, this is why they are untraceable. They are Legion, anyone can be Anonymous, nobody is Anonymous, while everyone is Anonymous.

They go after a lot of terrible things that need to be shut down like Scientology.

I seriously lol'd at the "Hacking is illegal, so Hacking is bad"

Wow I am shocked just shocked you support identity theft, fraud, and a dozen other crimes. Shocked, just shocked.

Its ashame they don't crack DAKKA and post all your personal information on the internet so that the Nigerian Prince and his epic crew can get to know you better.

What if the theft is done for a good cause like stealing food to feed your starving family.

Oh like DDoS attacking Scientology websites? Or hacking the PSN (not the big hack, there was a hack a few weeks before) because Playstation sued someone who broke End User agreement contract by jailbreaking a ps3.

Wardragoon wrote:

Cheesecat wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

Karon wrote:Good people doing good things. Many claim to be Anonymous, but aren't, this is why they are untraceable. They are Legion, anyone can be Anonymous, nobody is Anonymous, while everyone is Anonymous.

They go after a lot of terrible things that need to be shut down like Scientology.

I seriously lol'd at the "Hacking is illegal, so Hacking is bad"

Wow I am shocked just shocked you support identity theft, fraud, and a dozen other crimes. Shocked, just shocked.

Its ashame they don't crack DAKKA and post all your personal information on the internet so that the Nigerian Prince and his epic crew can get to know you better.

What if the theft is done for a good cause like stealing food to feed your starving family.

Oh like DDoS attacking Scientology websites? Or hacking the PSN (not the big hack, there was a hack a few weeks before) because Playstation sued someone who broke End User agreement contract by jailbreaking a ps3.

Don't compare it to crap like that, all I'm saying is in certain situations doing something criminal is sometimes the morally just thing to do.

Cheesecat wrote:

Wardragoon wrote:

Cheesecat wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

Karon wrote:Good people doing good things. Many claim to be Anonymous, but aren't, this is why they are untraceable. They are Legion, anyone can be Anonymous, nobody is Anonymous, while everyone is Anonymous.

They go after a lot of terrible things that need to be shut down like Scientology.

I seriously lol'd at the "Hacking is illegal, so Hacking is bad"

Wow I am shocked just shocked you support identity theft, fraud, and a dozen other crimes. Shocked, just shocked.

Its ashame they don't crack DAKKA and post all your personal information on the internet so that the Nigerian Prince and his epic crew can get to know you better.

What if the theft is done for a good cause like stealing food to feed your starving family.

Oh like DDoS attacking Scientology websites? Or hacking the PSN (not the big hack, there was a hack a few weeks before) because Playstation sued someone who broke End User agreement contract by jailbreaking a ps3.

Don't compare it to crap like that, all I'm saying is in certain situations doing something criminal is sometimes the morally just thing to do.

The problem is generally thats Anon's actions, not hacking for the poor and downtrodden, just their viewpoints.

From Lulzsec's Twitter

Lulz Security, where the entertainment is always at your expense, whether you realize it or not. Wrecking your infrastructures since 2011.

Wardragoon wrote:

Cheesecat wrote:

Wardragoon wrote:

Cheesecat wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

Karon wrote:Good people doing good things. Many claim to be Anonymous, but aren't, this is why they are untraceable. They are Legion, anyone can be Anonymous, nobody is Anonymous, while everyone is Anonymous.

They go after a lot of terrible things that need to be shut down like Scientology.

I seriously lol'd at the "Hacking is illegal, so Hacking is bad"

Wow I am shocked just shocked you support identity theft, fraud, and a dozen other crimes. Shocked, just shocked.

Its ashame they don't crack DAKKA and post all your personal information on the internet so that the Nigerian Prince and his epic crew can get to know you better.

What if the theft is done for a good cause like stealing food to feed your starving family.

Oh like DDoS attacking Scientology websites? Or hacking the PSN (not the big hack, there was a hack a few weeks before) because Playstation sued someone who broke End User agreement contract by jailbreaking a ps3.

Don't compare it to crap like that, all I'm saying is in certain situations doing something criminal is sometimes the morally just thing to do.

The problem is generally thats Anon's actions, not hacking for the poor and downtrodden, just their viewpoints.

I never stated that I agree with Anon, I was responding to Frazzled's about how crime can be justified.

Cheesecat wrote:
I never stated that I agree with Anon, I was responding to Frazzled's about how crime can be justified.

Except in almost every Western society, there's programs in place to feed those who are unable to afford food for themselves or their families or provide them with funds for affording food for themselves or their families.

Your justification falls flat in that case.

Kanluwen wrote:

Cheesecat wrote:
I never stated that I agree with Anon, I was responding to Frazzled's about how crime can be justified.

Except in almost every Western society, there's programs in place to feed those who are unable to afford food for themselves or their families or provide them with funds for affording food for themselves or their families.

Your justification falls flat in that case.

It was an example not every thing I say can apply to every country. In Canada assisted suicide is considered illegal but what if the person was suffering from a major, debilitating disease is it the morally right thing to

let he/she suffer for the rest of their life?

Cheesecat wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

Cheesecat wrote:
I never stated that I agree with Anon, I was responding to Frazzled's about how crime can be justified.

Except in almost every Western society, there's programs in place to feed those who are unable to afford food for themselves or their families or provide them with funds for affording food for themselves or their families.

Your justification falls flat in that case.

It was an example not every thing I say can apply to every country. In Canada assisted suicide is considered illegal but what if the person was suffering from a major, debilitating disease is it the morally right thing to

let he/she suffer for the rest of their life?

Nope. send them with the Penal Legionaires or DKoK

Cheesecat wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

Cheesecat wrote:
I never stated that I agree with Anon, I was responding to Frazzled's about how crime can be justified.

Except in almost every Western society, there's programs in place to feed those who are unable to afford food for themselves or their families or provide them with funds for affording food for themselves or their families.

Your justification falls flat in that case.

It was an example not every thing I say can apply to every country. In Canada assisted suicide is considered illegal but what if the person was suffering from a major, debilitating disease is it the morally right thing to

let he/she suffer for the rest of their life?

The argument for why "assisted suicide" is considered illegal is a relatively simple one and similar as to the arguments for why the mentally ill have to be considered "fit for trial".

Namely: are they capable of understanding the consequences of their actions/requests.

Many debilitating diseases attack the mental state of a person and erode their ability to make decisions. It's why some states do not allow a decision for termination of life support to be made by the individual on life support(even if they're full conscious).

So once again: your point is invalid. Assisted suicide has nothing, whatsoever, to do with this particular set of circumstances. Nor does stealing food to feed your family, or any number of the common talking points used to justify illegal acts.

This is simply wonton deviancy for the sake of deviancy in a great many cases.

Kanluwen wrote:

Cheesecat wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

Cheesecat wrote:
I never stated that I agree with Anon, I was responding to Frazzled's about how crime can be justified.

Except in almost every Western society, there's programs in place to feed those who are unable to afford food for themselves or their families or provide them with funds for affording food for themselves or their families.

Your justification falls flat in that case.

It was an example not every thing I say can apply to every country. In Canada assisted suicide is considered illegal but what if the person was suffering from a major, debilitating disease is it the morally right thing to

let he/she suffer for the rest of their life?

The argument for why "assisted suicide" is considered illegal is a relatively simple one and similar as to the arguments for why the mentally ill have to be considered "fit for trial".

Namely: are they capable of understanding the consequences of their actions/requests.

Many debilitating diseases attack the mental state of a person and erode their ability to make decisions. It's why some states do not allow a decision for termination of life support to be made by the individual on life support(even if they're full conscious).

So once again: your point is invalid. Assisted suicide has nothing, whatsoever, to do with this particular set of circumstances. Nor does stealing food to feed your family, or any number of the common talking points used to justify illegal acts.

This is simply wonton deviancy for the sake of deviancy in a great many cases.

All I'm trying to say is that morality and the law are not the same thing.

There's a reason that a great many moral aspects of society are also laws. Things like "don't kill people" or "don't steal" aren't considered societal norms for no real reason.

The argument of "morality and the law are not the same thing" is a fallacy. It, more often than not, is true--but it's not a definitive statement and it's more often than not true simply because a great many societal norms that are imposed upon us through laws are creations of a government to ensure that order is maintained and the 'system' doesn't fall apart.

Kanluwen wrote:There's a reason that a great many moral aspects of society are also laws. Things like "don't kill people" or "don't steal" aren't considered societal norms for no real reason.

The argument of "morality and the law are not the same thing" is a fallacy. It, more often than not, is true--but it's not a definitive statement and it's more often than not true simply because a great many societal norms that are imposed upon us through laws are creations of a government to ensure that order is maintained and the 'system' doesn't fall apart.

Agreed.

Ketara wrote:

Blitza da warboy wrote:Hacking is illegal. Anonymous is bad.

If you set your moral code by what is legal and what isn't, the world must constantly be a disappointment to you.

It isn't my opinion if anonymous is bad or not, rather its the law. Plus the fact that the FBI is investigating on who is anoymous is costing tax dollars; that just annoys me. I break the law (hell I listen to judas priest too) and I know its bad.

Cheesecat wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

Karon wrote:Good people doing good things. Many claim to be Anonymous, but aren't, this is why they are untraceable. They are Legion, anyone can be Anonymous, nobody is Anonymous, while everyone is Anonymous.

They go after a lot of terrible things that need to be shut down like Scientology.

I seriously lol'd at the "Hacking is illegal, so Hacking is bad"

Wow I am shocked just shocked you support identity theft, fraud, and a dozen other crimes. Shocked, just shocked.

Its ashame they don't crack DAKKA and post all your personal information on the internet so that the Nigerian Prince and his epic crew can get to know you better.

What if the theft is done for a good cause like stealing food to feed your starving family.

OOO ooo I have one too. What if the theft was intended to release the spirit of zombie Hitler and start the 4th Reich?

Scientology needs to be opposed by mass process because of their insidious means of propogation and negatiing opposition. Anonymous became a manifestation of that mass process, but its a movement that has a beginning and an initial direction but no planned journey or end point. ?everything that has happened regarding Anonymous since inception could be summed up by three words 'created a monster.'

Orlanth wrote:Scientology needs to be opposed by mass process because of their insidious means of propogation and negatiing opposition. Anonymous became a manifestation of that mass process, but its a movement that has a beginning and an initial direction but no planned journey or end point. ?everything that has happened regarding Anonymous since inception could be summed up by three words 'created a monster.'

+5 I completely agree

Frazzled wrote:

Cheesecat wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

Karon wrote:Good people doing good things. Many claim to be Anonymous, but aren't, this is why they are untraceable. They are Legion, anyone can be Anonymous, nobody is Anonymous, while everyone is Anonymous.

They go after a lot of terrible things that need to be shut down like Scientology.

I seriously lol'd at the "Hacking is illegal, so Hacking is bad"

Wow I am shocked just shocked you support identity theft, fraud, and a dozen other crimes. Shocked, just shocked.

Its ashame they don't crack DAKKA and post all your personal information on the internet so that the Nigerian Prince and his epic crew can get to know you better.

What if the theft is done for a good cause like stealing food to feed your starving family.

OOO ooo I have one too. What if the theft was intended to release the spirit of zombie Hitler and start the 4th Reich?

Cheesecat wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

Cheesecat wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

Karon wrote:Good people doing good things. Many claim to be Anonymous, but aren't, this is why they are untraceable. They are Legion, anyone can be Anonymous, nobody is Anonymous, while everyone is Anonymous.

They go after a lot of terrible things that need to be shut down like Scientology.

I seriously lol'd at the "Hacking is illegal, so Hacking is bad"

Wow I am shocked just shocked you support identity theft, fraud, and a dozen other crimes. Shocked, just shocked.

Its ashame they don't crack DAKKA and post all your personal information on the internet so that the Nigerian Prince and his epic crew can get to know you better.

What if the theft is done for a good cause like stealing food to feed your starving family.

OOO ooo I have one too. What if the theft was intended to release the spirit of zombie Hitler and start the 4th Reich?

I think Frazzled just compared problems that effect real people, and many die from, to something a mentally handicapped war veteran would think of.

Karon wrote:

Cheesecat wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

Cheesecat wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

Karon wrote:Good people doing good things. Many claim to be Anonymous, but aren't, this is why they are untraceable. They are Legion, anyone can be Anonymous, nobody is Anonymous, while everyone is Anonymous.

They go after a lot of terrible things that need to be shut down like Scientology.

I seriously lol'd at the "Hacking is illegal, so Hacking is bad"

Wow I am shocked just shocked you support identity theft, fraud, and a dozen other crimes. Shocked, just shocked.

Its ashame they don't crack DAKKA and post all your personal information on the internet so that the Nigerian Prince and his epic crew can get to know you better.

What if the theft is done for a good cause like stealing food to feed your starving family.

OOO ooo I have one too. What if the theft was intended to release the spirit of zombie Hitler and start the 4th Reich?

I think Frazzled just compared problems that effect real people, and many die from, to something a mentally handicapped war veteran would think of.

Cheesecat wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

Karon wrote:Good people doing good things. Many claim to be Anonymous, but aren't, this is why they are untraceable. They are Legion, anyone can be Anonymous, nobody is Anonymous, while everyone is Anonymous.

They go after a lot of terrible things that need to be shut down like Scientology.

I seriously lol'd at the "Hacking is illegal, so Hacking is bad"

Wow I am shocked just shocked you support identity theft, fraud, and a dozen other crimes. Shocked, just shocked.

Its ashame they don't crack DAKKA and post all your personal information on the internet so that the Nigerian Prince and his epic crew can get to know you better.

What if the theft is done for a good cause like stealing food to feed your starving family.

Ah, so stealing food from another person's family is morally just because you need to feed your own family? Taking from others is morally justifiable because you need it more? That, my good sir, is a very slippy slope.

"We are Anonymous.
We are Legion.
We do not Forgive.
We do not Forget.
Expect us."

They are not hackers, they are harmless poets!

Seriously speaking, Anonymous´s splintergroup, Backtrace Security, says that Anonymous is a real threat.

Sgt_Scruffy wrote:

Cheesecat wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

Karon wrote:Good people doing good things. Many claim to be Anonymous, but aren't, this is why they are untraceable. They are Legion, anyone can be Anonymous, nobody is Anonymous, while everyone is Anonymous.

They go after a lot of terrible things that need to be shut down like Scientology.

I seriously lol'd at the "Hacking is illegal, so Hacking is bad"

Wow I am shocked just shocked you support identity theft, fraud, and a dozen other crimes. Shocked, just shocked.

Its ashame they don't crack DAKKA and post all your personal information on the internet so that the Nigerian Prince and his epic crew can get to know you better.

What if the theft is done for a good cause like stealing food to feed your starving family.

Ah, so stealing food from another person's family is morally just because you need to feed your own family? Taking from others is morally justifiable because you need it more? That, my good sir, is a very slippy slope.

If it's a matter of need I wouldn't think so. If one starving family stole food from another family becuase they needed it, I don't you could reasonably consider that immoral. After all, what's their alternative? Remain law-abiding and starve?
More often than not though in most Western societies, criminal activity isn't committed over basic necessities like food. You're far more likely to have someone shoplifting a piece of jewelery or technology than pocketing a loaf of bread.

Your still putting your need over theirs. While I wouldn't look down on people for it (I can understand them justifying it) how far do you take the argument? Can I steal a car from a worldwide company because my need of it is greater than theirs? Where to draw the line is a personal decision. The decisions that they should be allowed to steal to save their lives is an emotion decision based on empathising with the starving individual. Someone who can emotionally justify stealing a car can use exactly the same argument as you are come to the conclusion it is ok.

The Law needs to remain firm and people should be punished regardless of whether they were doing it for the right reasons otherwise people will believe it is ok the break the law for good. As good is subjective some people will be allowed to break the law to do what they want and others won't, which doesn't seem fair.

Blitza da warboy wrote:Hacking is illegal. Anonymous is bad.

It is absurd to divide people into good and bad. People are either charming or tedious.
Anyway, the attacks on Habbo Hotel were hilarious.

Emperors Faithful wrote:

Sgt_Scruffy wrote:

Cheesecat wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

Karon wrote:Good people doing good things. Many claim to be Anonymous, but aren't, this is why they are untraceable. They are Legion, anyone can be Anonymous, nobody is Anonymous, while everyone is Anonymous.

They go after a lot of terrible things that need to be shut down like Scientology.

I seriously lol'd at the "Hacking is illegal, so Hacking is bad"

Wow I am shocked just shocked you support identity theft, fraud, and a dozen other crimes. Shocked, just shocked.

Its ashame they don't crack DAKKA and post all your personal information on the internet so that the Nigerian Prince and his epic crew can get to know you better.

What if the theft is done for a good cause like stealing food to feed your starving family.

Ah, so stealing food from another person's family is morally just because you need to feed your own family? Taking from others is morally justifiable because you need it more? That, my good sir, is a very slippy slope.

If it's a matter of need I wouldn't think so. If one starving family stole food from another family becuase they needed it, I don't you could reasonably consider that immoral. After all, what's their alternative? Remain law-abiding and starve?
More often than not though in most Western societies, criminal activity isn't committed over basic necessities like food. You're far more likely to have someone shoplifting a piece of jewelery or technology than pocketing a loaf of bread.

You're full of gak. I need a car, house and stuff. I think I'll take yours. Its ok. I need it more.