Hacktivist Group Anonymous Attacks USSC Website

[Kaleredar]

To put it more plainly: When the government starts to overstep its bounds or stops doing its duty, that's where the Second Amendment comes in.

Full scale civil war usually requires at least half of the public's approval to successfully execute.

*insert various burn comments here*


As for "I support the message but I don't support the actions" crowd hovering around, well, that honestly means you don't support what they're doing. Case in point:

I think that if you get past all the fluff and power trip, their intentions are sincere.

Be aware that if you sort through the "fluff and power trip" of any organization, evil or benign, you'll find some form of "sincere" intention at its root. Consider that problems come not from those that do evil for evil's sake, but from those that do evil and believe they're doing good


And as for any information they have, they might as well release it. The US isn't going to buckle to a gaggle of hackers with too much time on their hands. If the information is incriminating to Government individuals, then the country will be better for knowing it. If it's nuclear codes, well, the black helicopters will close down on the so called "anonymous" soon enough. How well does a 33 year old computer programmer hold up to Waterboarding? My premonition is "not very well."

[Ntimidate]

'Taking over' ussc.gov is akin to stealing a STOP sign...

Like I said before, I have no idea about how they do this or how difficult it is or isn't. I would appreciate your wealth of knowledge on the matter, seriously.

[Dillon]

As for "I support the message but I don't support the actions" crowd hovering around, well, that honestly means you don't support what they're doing.

Civil disobedience is a personal choice to make. It isn't one that I refuse to take part in, just one that I personally don't feel is necessary at this time, so I won't be doing it. If the time comes for me to engage in civil disobedience, I shall. I don't yet feel that legal recourse has been fully exhausted.

However, nothing stops me from giving the nod to civil disobedience, especially for an important cause. I don't think I could ever look at someone too harshly for civil disobedience if they didn't cause harm to someone.

[RadasNoir]

Ultimately, it comes down to whether or not Anonymous actually has information that is as damaging as they claim it to be. Either it is, and they might be able to blackmail certain elements of the government into complying with their wishes (seems unlikely) or it isn't, and all this might do is make the government even more adamant about cracking down on the Internet, as some have already suggested.

Actually, the most likely result is a temporary uproar, followed by the whole thing eventually being swept under the rug and forgotten, until the next "hacktivism" attempt.

[Kaleredar]

Ultimately, it comes down to whether or not Anonymous actually has information that is as damaging as they claim it to be. Either it is, and they might be able to blackmail certain elements of the government into complying with their wishes (seems unlikely) or it isn't, and all this might do is make the government even more adamant about cracking down on the Internet, as some have already suggested.

Actually, the most likely result is a temporary uproar, followed by the whole thing eventually being swept under the rug and forgotten, until the next "hacktivism" attempt.

The reason it's unlikely is because there really is no physical "the government." The government isn't a person, or tribunal of select individuals. There are a lot of damn people in "the government," and aside from key political officials like the president... people really don't care about the actions of random bureaucrats, for better or worse. If Anonymous discovers that some congressman from Idaho did some blow back in the 90s, do you think the entire country is going to go into a sudden crapstorm? Probably not.

Moreover, half of "the government" hates the other half. Anonymous can't turn up anything about anyone without one half using it as political fodder to further fuel partisan politics, which as we all know, accomplishes very little. Turn up stuff about both? They start slinging mud at each other. If this is the kind of information Anonymous has, their efforts would, for lack of a better term really, only serve to feed the machine. They'd be playing directly into pointlessness.

The problems the United States political system has stem from money floating around and the Democrats and Republicans constantly taking pot shots at one another. The only, hear, ONLY information that Anonymous could have that would mean much of anything to anyone would be straight revelations of illegal actions incriminating large numbers of political officials... which of course would never be accepted in a court of law, as it's unlawfully obtained evidence, legally tantamount to "I heard it on the internet."

[Vanamman]

Ultimately, it comes down to whether or not Anonymous actually has information that is as damaging as they claim it to be. Either it is, and they might be able to blackmail certain elements of the government into complying with their wishes (seems unlikely) or it isn't, and all this might do is make the government even more adamant about cracking down on the Internet, as some have already suggested.

Actually, the most likely result is a temporary uproar, followed by the whole thing eventually being swept under the rug and forgotten, until the next "hacktivism" attempt.

It will all depend on how Anon follows this up. Letting it linger too long with no action will do exactly that. It will be forgotten until next time. If they actually have something and release it, then I will be watching every second of what happens with much interest.

[Rim]

Sad little nerds thinking their great people,man up.

If you wanted limelight just walk infront of a train,you'll on your local news.

[Giants41]

Sad little nerds thinking their great people,man up.

If you wanted limelight just walk infront of a train,you'll on your local news.

Cruel but true lol

[RadasNoir]

The reason it's unlikely is because there really is no physical "the government." The government isn't a person, or tribunal of select individuals. There are a lot of damn people in "the government," and aside from key political officials like the president... people really don't care about the actions of random bureaucrats, for better or worse. If Anonymous discovers that some congressman from Idaho did some blow back in the 90s, do you think the entire country is going to go into a sudden crapstorm? Probably not.

Moreover, half of "the government" hates the other half. Anonymous can't turn up anything about anyone without one half using it as political fodder to further fuel partisan politics, which as we all know, accomplishes very little. Turn up stuff about both? They start slinging mud at each other. If this is the kind of information Anonymous has, their efforts would, for lack of a better term really, only serve to feed the machine.

Exactly. That's why I said "elements of the government" instead of just "the government", and even that statement was a generously hypothetical sentiment. As you say, beyond the initial outrage perhaps, most don't really care or are even surprised anymore when it turns out a politician is corrupt, and is often only used as fuel for one political machine or another, if any use comes of it at all.

That said, I watched the video linked a page back, and I have to admit, I had not heard of Aaron Shwartz until now. Perhaps the most that will come of this is a few more people being made aware of his story and the concern it generates regarding certain practices within our justice system, particularly when it comes to the Internet. It might not be the "revolutionary" response Anonymous and those that support them are hoping for, but the more people know about an issue, the greater chance there is that something might be done about it in the future. It will come slowly, and perhaps imperceptibly, but slower change is often surer changer, especially when compared to, again, the sort of outrage that eventually blows itself out after a load of sound and fury that eventually signifies nothing.

[DeltrusDisc]

I liked the part in the video when they kept quoting and showing off War Games, fit well with the message.

I whole-heartedly support the message they are pushing, but I have to wonder if the method they are using is correct.

Adequate to get a response for sure, but appropriate for what message they push, not sure.

Also, the music they are using is from Two Steps From Hell, I think, for the most part.

Unfortunately, it's not the best way to make the American people think highly of them, because the media will paint Anonymous as evil-doers "omg they hacked our precious government's website!" and people will rally behind the government. =/

[VanillaO]

Hopefully this ends up as interesting as it appears at first glance.

[N-7]

Is that a sequel for V for Vendetta? It sounds really interesting... when is the release date?

[Kaleredar]

Exactly. That's why I said "elements of the government" instead of just "the government", and even that statement was a generously hypothetical sentiment. As you say, beyond the initial outrage perhaps, most don't really care or are even surprised anymore when it turns out a politician is corrupt, and is often only used as fuel for one political machine or another, if any use comes of it at all.

That said, I watched the video linked a page back, and I have to admit, I had not heard of Aaron Shwartz until now. Perhaps the most that will come of this is a few more people being made aware of his story and the concern it generates regarding certain practices within our justice system, particularly when it comes to the Internet. It might not be the "revolutionary" response Anonymous and those that support them are hoping for, but the more people know about an issue, the greater chance there is that something might be done about it in the future. It will come slowly, and perhaps imperceptibly, but slower change is often surer changer, especially when compared to, again, the sort of outrage that eventually blows itself out after a load of sound and fury that eventually signifies nothing.

Do be aware that the following response isn't at "you," but at the thread in general

The honest truth is... online outrage really doesn't "do" anything. Someone can like a facebook page as much as they want, but the government doesn't "do things" based on facebook page likes. If you want to impact change, you MARCH for change. You ACT on change. Suffragists and Civil rights leaders didn't enact change by just circulating articles in newspapers of the time and hoping people would generally get uppity enough and then people would take note of the uppityness and stuff would happen that they like. They DID things about it. They didn't hide behind false facades, poking and prodding with "we're gonna tell!" And you know what, despite marching and protesting and suffering by the thousands in the face of injustice much more apparent than something locked away in an old document, it still took these groups DECADES to achieve what they wanted. So I'll have to beg forgiveness if I don't think that efforts like those of Anonymous will really do much of anything if these sorts of activities continue to be the extent of their action.

That people DON'T do these things, like stage sit-ins, or protests, or whatever, really only exemplifies their own manifested disinterest in enacting change as a whole. Maybe they're scared, maybe they don't have the time, maybe they just truly don't care enough, but THAT'S the way it is.

/soapbox

Unfortunately, it's not the best way to make the American people think highly of them, because the media will paint Anonymous as evil-doers "omg they hacked our precious government's website!" and people will rally behind the government. =/

Not really. The media =/= the government.

"The media" is (are) a business. They LIVE off of sensational reports. In that respect, things like Anonymous are great for the media. It allows them to rant and rave and conjecture all they want, because so little is known. The media gets a nice little dog and pony show out of every one of these stories. As for the US as a whole, I'd actually say they as a whole don't like Anonymous, not because they take shots at the government, but because they "lurk in the shadows" hiding behind their computers, cowering from the reach of authority and martyrdom. If I might simplify, they basically don't "comport" with the American ideals of heroism and social change established by revolutionary war generals, civil rights leaders, and all the other happy people we get holidays for.

[DeltrusDisc]

Is that a sequel for V for Vendetta? It sounds really interesting... when is the release date?

hahahaahaha

I think I love you. <3 That was clever.

---------- Post added 2013-01-26 at 10:18 AM ----------

Not really. The media =/= the government.

"The media" is (are) a business. They LIVE off of sensational reports. In that respect, things like Anonymous are great for the media. It allows them to rant and rave and conjecture all they want, because so little is known. The media gets a nice little dog and pony show out of every one of these stories. As for the US as a whole, I'd actually say they as a whole don't like Anonymous, not because they take shots at the government, but because they "lurk in the shadows" hiding behind their computers, cowering from the reach of authority and martyrdom. If I might simplify, they basically don't "comport" with the American ideals of heroism and social change established by revolutionary war generals, civil rights leaders, and all the other happy people we get holidays for.

Last I checked the media and government kind of work together in cases of some events... The media can essentially be an outlet for the government to be able to slander the Anonymous.

[Deleted]

I have been collecting bottle caps for the last 10 years and i'm loaded. Who's laughing now?

[Kezotar]

Cruel but true lol

Not true. In our current system these would be stopped by any means. The government may say democracy etc, but they wouldn't allow it.

[Kaleredar]

Last I checked the media and government kind of work together in cases of some events... The media can essentially be an outlet for the government to be able to slander the Anonymous.

In that their can be a news report of a government official saying "these actions are X Y and Z?" Yeah, I suppose, that's kind of how things work for anything. But like I said, sensationalism is what the baser media strives for; it drives ratings and therefore drives profits. They don't lightly take to shutting themselves up because the government asks it, and if one media outlet did, the other media outlets would be on top of it to report on it.

[RadasNoir]

Do be aware that the following response isn't at "you," but at the thread in general

I'm too tired to adequately add on to what you said, but I do wholeheartedly agree with everything you said, and I'm particularly glad you brought up the civil rights movements, as they are perfect examples of the long struggle it often takes to achieve true change and right injustice. And even then, the struggle for civil rights goes on for some groups in America, and even among those who have gained much in the past decades through such movements, there is the concern that true equality has not yet been obtained.

Anyway, at least I'll go to bed knowing there's a halfway sane and practical voice in this thread, even if it is a bit prone to soapboxing as well. :P

[Yunru]

Well it sounds like they will infect the whole usa justice and goverment system with virus that deletes all data.
If you remove the proff and all info the system fails.

[Frozenbeef]

They need to seriously just go away.

Do they really think people would see attacks like that and think "by gosh maybe we should give more internet freedoms to people so they can do more stuff like this!"