SovareZza said:
[quote author=Vodkush]
They fail to realize that by hacking these companies and causing problems around the net, only gives congress more fuel for their censorship machine. They show the white house that they need to have a noose put on the neck of the internet to allow the government a chance to stop them before anything happens.
They only do what's right for the people (because the government clearly does not). But what do you think would happen if the government did place "a noose on the neck of the internet", as you put it? I think, personally, there'd be a revolution of sorts on your American governments hands. The government couldn't stop them with Internet censorship. You can only censor what you can find, and Anonymous would make it difficult to find them, but they'd still have their word going around. You can't kill Anonymous, they are one and they are many. We're all Anonymous.
I feel quite the opposite, they act out of their own interests but those interests are shared with the people. DDoS large companies is nothing but a headache, nothing more, its not damaging to them because in the thousand dollars of bandwidth they probably ran up, that's less than pennies to them, nothing. There would be protests, but it would further allow the US to enforce a police state in a complete blackout. Look at China, that is what you can expect from a blackout and police state. Anonymous is a bunch of tech savvy kids who know how to use computers to a decent extent. A government, especially one like the united states doesn't consider them a threat as they know they have the ability to make them disappear.
[quote author=Vodkush]
... and the government has much much MUCH more advanced technology ...
[/quote]
Yes, but Anonymous have people who literally have nothing better to do than DDoS websites and learn as much as they can about technology, learning and excelling at coding. They work with nothing and create beauty through chaos. Just because of the government has advanced technology, doesn't mean it's perfect. Anonymous will just keep poking and prodding until they find a problem, and they will exploit the living hell out of it.
[quote author=Vodkush]
Do these people not fucking think with their heads the consequences of what they do? Surely for something so coordinated there has to be someone with some sense of strategic knowledge.
[/quote]
They work together, so few for the benefit of so many. They all have varying opinions, ideas, etc. and those that are most beneficial to either their cause or the cause of the people is what they go with. The people who organise Anonymous and their ideas are the smartest out of the lot and understand fully what the repercussions of their actions could entail. Yet they proceed anyway, for you should not fear your government, your government should fear you and all it's people.
That's the downfall of the group, with so many differences, conflicts of ideology leaves the ability to start so much internal conflict, you don't know whose on your side, and who is willing to sell you out when they get caught. Reality kicks in real fucking fast when you hear the loud thud on your door and someone screaming Police search warrant. I don't believe they do understand the repercussions of their actions because to do something like that so close to the day the internet organized the SOPA protest, is again only fuel for the fire. It's still a largely debated topic, and could very well be the actions that cause some opposition to the bill to change back to support, because they realize exactly how volatile the net has become.
However, in some cases, you are correct. Their actions allow for congress to give The White House reasons to censor the internet and essentially destroy it, yet Obama is smart and wants a compromise between the Technology companies and Hollywood for both bills. SOPA & PIPA, for, however unlikely, those unaware.
I'll see if I can find the link, but it may have already been posted here.
[/quote]
When someone does something you don't like, do you act like an idiot and jump straight to punching them, or do you sit back and try to talk them down or intimidate them? The latter is generally better, because the first only escalates the problem.
