Slashdot Mirror
Anonymous Speaks About Australian Gov't. Attacks
daria42 writes "The loose-knit collective of individuals known as 'Anonymous' has broken its silence about the distributed denial of service attacks on the Australian government. An individual (who insisted he or she is not a spokesperson for the group) said the attacks were more effective at stopping the government's Internet filtering project than signing a petition, and that the attacks could go on for months." The site where some members of Anonymous are said to hang out, 4chan, got a visibility boost yesterday when its founder moot spoke at the TED conference.
We are legion.
Let's just check this box to post as AC and...
I've never heard of this site, "fourchan". It seems like its a pretty cool activist site. Can someone tell me more about it? I'd go there, but my ISP is blocking it :(
It's more of an activity. Possibly a culture. It certainly doesn't have anyone who speaks for the group as a whole.
Pool's Closed.
Yeah, let me know when you see Anonymous on there. They're totally a bunch of black shadowy figures hanging out in /b/. Also, last time I checked, this was 4chan rule #4:
4chan has a reputation for being a launchpad for this sort of thing, but it's not, at least, not any more. Go blame IRC, go blame any of the dozen clone boards, but it's not 4chan now.
--- Mr. DOS
Wooosh.
There aren't any spokespeople for anonymous, because there isn't any structure to the group. By definition, everyone in it is a "nobody." That's kind of the point.
Except "Anonymous" is the bastard hybrid of a punch of bored 14 year old script kiddies, an unholy horde of angry-at-the-world genuinely decent at coding 20 somethings, and a frightning legion of bored in-it-for-the-lulz near or middle aged men.
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
So, basically, a nobody commented.
This is Anonymous -- if they weren't a nobody, then their opinion would be invalid. As it is, they are the most appropriate person to ask.
I mod down anyone who says "I will be modded down for this", regardless of the rest of their comment
It is an appropriate response to a figurehead politician making these rules, because it is a bunch of anonymous peons that are implementing them. The peons hide behind the facade of a government which they don't have to take responsibility for their actions.
Governments love when an individual speaks out, because they can release a bureaucratic horde of government employees to crush them. An individual who cannot be expected to address numerous rules, regulations and pressures a government can bring against them.
So Anonymous vs the government, as far as I am concerned is a fair fight.
I told it to myself. Now what?
Summary says:
"An individual (who insisted he or she is not a spokesperson for the group) said..."
TFA says exactly the opposite:
"...received a reply from an individual claiming to be a spokesperson."
Authenticity of said spokesperson: YMMV.
Sig matters not. Judge me by my sig, do you?
Hello, I am a middle aged man but in it for the CP.
DDOS is civil disobedience. They're just loading a site a bunch of times, making the site useless. It's no scarier than protesters having a sit-in, making the area they occupy useless. In fact, it's very similar.
Belief? Hope? Preference?The Existential Vortex
If your response to a DDOS attack on the a few websites is "a state of intense fear", you need to get out more.
Except "Anonymous" is the bastard hybrid of a punch of bored 14 year old script kiddies
Wrong, because this would be a blatant violation of 4chan rules:
If you are under the age of 18, or it is illegal for you to view the materials contained on this website, discontinue browsing immediately.
So it is obvious that 14 year olds (along with people from Australia and Iran) are not allowed to access 4chan because of the rules.
Ref: 4chan roolz!
of the stupidest lamest waste of time on the internet
comes the most effective force for progressive change
the one thing that an idiot has, that a wise man does not seem to have, is freedom to act
when your education acclimates you to acceptance of a lame status quo, then your education is worth less than being an idiot
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
The will of the people is the true purpose of democracy. Regardless of the fact that people are doing this anonymously, this is similar in line to the rebellion against a tyrannical government. Just because the tyranny is not as bad (censorship of porn), and the attack by the people (DDoSing government websites) does not make it a "joke" or an immature prank. If the government was actively rounding up thousands of people from a certain ethnic group for "cleansing", you could expect everyone to gather guns to kill them. Since it is not that serious, you get a less serious, albeit effective response. It made them realize what the public wants. And I don't believe this is a symptom of the "vocal minority" simply because people don't get involved with something for no financial gain, unless they genuinely believe in it, and while it could be the act of a few, it is most likely the act of many. Even if it were a vocal minority, in the US, the constitution was created to protect the freedom of the minority. I don't know how Australia views it's minorities, but I would hope a country that everyone considers "western" holds the same ideal. Anonymous is the true unhindered will of the people. It does not give in to socially acceptable norms, or anything that hides what someone truly wants. If people want porn, they will do so under anonymous. Anonymous is legion.
Except "Anonymous" is the bastard hybrid of a bunch of bored 14 year old script kiddies, an unholy horde of angry-at-the-world genuinely decent at coding 20 somethings, and a frightning legion of bored in-it-for-the-lulz near or middle aged men... all united by the fact that none of them have gotten laid recently.
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Actually its a bit more than that. You could say that slashdot is the "Bastard hybrid of a punch of bored 18 year old CS students, a completely misinformed group of editors, and a legion of bored in-IT-for-the-money near or middle aged men. The only difference between Slashdot readers and Anonymous is that Anonymous makes an impact on the world.
So - whatever your views about them are, positive or negative, realize that they do earn some merit.
Don't make a false dichotomy here.
Many Slashdot readers are also Anonymous members.
while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
I'm glad you pointed out the definition of 'terrorism'. Those particular words were well thought out, I believe.
How much real fear in instilled in you, the Australian people, the Australian government, or the target site's admins as a result of this event? Any fear at all? Is this fear a reasonable response to this event? It's just computer systems and public websites, after all. Do you equate 'inconvenience' with 'danger'?
We're being conditioned to experience fear when we're told, on demand. We're told that an attack against a server is an attack on the people and therefore the expected response is fear, nee 'Terror'. As an individual, I ask you if you choose what you are afraid of? Do you hold in yourself the determination behind your actions, your beliefs, and your responses to external events? Do events out of your control cause you to fear them and their instigators because you believe that you are truly in danger, or because you have been conditioned to respond as if it were so by people who have a specific interest and benefit by your fearful response?
If you want to call these events 'Acts of Terrorism', if you want to be afraid, please do so on your own terms and not those handed to you along with the blindfold and handcuffs. You are a powerful individual, my friend, and you are capable of deciding for yourself what is right if you will only objectively view the events and effects that you experience. Keep that power to yourself, instead of simply handing it off to those who would manipulate you for their gain.
-write unit tests, or else.
Like the sibling post says, many slashdotters ARE 4channers.
I never really said they were bad, I don't consider 4chan any more evil than I do a hurricane. If anything I think of Anonymous as a sort of physical collective superego and id for the internet with no mediating ego, they're more like a force of nature than anything else.
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
By making attacks like this, they can grab headlines. Any good news reporter tries to get input from both sides, which means anonymous can potentially get their complaints into mainstream newspapers. Obviously, attacking a few websites will not make politicians back down, as they would look weak. Raise enough public interest in the issue, and politicians will listen. Like with most tech-related issues, I do not realistically expect a large public response, but you cant say anonymous isn't trying.
My webcomic
Many Slashdot readers are also Anonymous members.
I can confirm that this is 100% false. No member of Slashdot is now or has ever been involved with the terrorist organization known as Anonymous.
"BZZZZZZZT have you ever used a proxy that wasn't slow as balls? I haven't."
That's what you get for not setting up your own dedicated proxies from a reliable data-hosting center.
"I know that it's possible to DDoS through proxies... but does it work in practice? It does not."
Most DDoS attacks are done via high-bandwidth proxies - IE rootkitted/zombified machines. You simply send one command out (assuming you've got the bandwidth to simultaneously contact every proxy to send the flood command) and away you go.
Don't understand what PROXY means, do you?
Go get a REAL IT job and maybe then you can talk, eh?
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
I guess I better leave then.
Anything can be found funny, from a certain point of view.