And in the new version of Anonymous they need to agree on a process or methodology for deciding which ops to take and not to take, on deciding which principles to adopt and which not. Basic concepts like decision theory, a weighing of pros and cons, or benefit and risk, a set of principles from which to base everything around in language which is more concise, specific.
Anonymous is a good idea but unless it's continuously updated it's going to become outdated real fast if it isn't already.
I put it to you that their loose system is ever changing and evolving already, and that your assessment was invalid before even contemplated writing it down.
I see that despite everyone's brains being a loose collection of self organizing neurons, you're still shackled by the antiquated concept of top down structural design. Are you a Moron, or merely a Fool?
Version numbers allow people to track the progress of revision in case something goes wrong and we want to know who was responsible for those revisions. To avoid math and science is to shy away from the truth of the matter and to call me a fool is to offer nothing of contribution.
the established powers that be in finance & govt need a nemesis to keep them in check, because the checks & balances meant to minimize corruption in the banking & investment and govt has failed miserably.
Kudos to Anonymous!
The problem with Anonymous's design and I'll say it again, they need to thoroughly separate the think tank philosophical ethical debate theoretical portion from the practical operative coding hacking portion. Meaning if an Anonymous Cyber Constitution were to be developed then everyone should be able to Facebook like it to approve of it and it should be on a wiki so it can be continuously updated and debated as new information comes in. There should be constant debate about certain subjects regarding philosophical principles. Also they need to develop standardization of processes, best practices, that sorta stuff because right now Anonymous has very little discipline on the practical operative hacker end of the spectrum even though that is the end of the spectrum making most of the noise in the media.
Right now they are hit and miss. Sometimes they do something which seems to hit the nail on the head and other times they do really stupid ops which make people question why Anonymous should even exist.
the organization simply has an overall vision and flavor. Its members carry out acts based on that mission. And it has enjoyed a great deal of success — in part due to the lack of central control. Compare this to the level of control in many corporate development organizations. Some of that control is necessary, but often it's taken to gratuitous lengths. If you hire great developers, set general goals for the various parts of the project, and collect metrics, you probably don't need to exercise a lot of control to meet your requirements
This is standard common sense, and the negative effects of over/micro-managing and red tape are recognized (and felt) not just in software but in all endeavours (even within families.) We know what to do about that in all forms of organizations and projects.
That people and project still fall far from the well-known solutions, that has more to do with human behavior, team dynamics and the economics of the incentives/rewards, disinsentives/penalties, (whether tangible or psychological, subjective or objective) than anything else.
Anonymous, with its faceless nature (that precludes the realities of disinsentives and penalties), and incoherent goals, has nothing to teach us or anyone engaged in a real-life project or mission subject to incentives and disinsentives, and the realities of identifiable human relations.
The article might be good to drive traffic (ZOMG, Anonymous in teh titl3!), I'll give the author that </journalistic-attention-whoring>
Micro-management shouldn't be the object. The object should be to develop a system to distribute best practices. This could apply to Anonymous or to software development where more experienced workers can share their best practices with less experienced workers. The other is to focus on the process of making critical decisions. The problem of decision making can only be solved by developing a methodology of decision making along with some basic rules to follow when making certain types of decisions.
If this is Anonymous then it's what is a legitimate vs illegitimate op. Emphasis should be on the process of decision making so that there is a standard process or guideline for choosing an op. If it's software development then developers need to know when to use certain designs and when not to use them or when certain tools work best and not others.
It's not a matter of control or not, it's a matter of separation of duties. The people who design the software don't necessarily have to be the people coding it. The design team could simply just design. The same could be said about Anon-ops, the people who develop the philosophical/ethical theory do not have to be the people who do the ops. The problem in my opinion with Anonymous is you have a lot of people involved who are doers but not very deep thinkers. As a result the ops are often successful but completely miss the point.
Separate the philosophical debate, decision making process, and theory from the coding, ops, and direct action. Same with development, separate the theoretical design from the development and programming. Let the best designers design whether they are the best developers or not as those are two different jobs and not all skilled developers are skilled at software design.
And in the new version of Anonymous they need to agree on a process or methodology for deciding which ops to take and not to take, on deciding which principles to adopt and which not. Basic concepts like decision theory, a weighing of pros and cons, or benefit and risk, a set of principles from which to base everything around in language which is more concise, specific.
Anonymous is a good idea but unless it's continuously updated it's going to become outdated real fast if it isn't already. The same could be said of any software in development, it has to be properly designed from the start (Anonymous wasn't well designed at the foundation), and it has to be continuously updated.
Here is my idea, how about starting a project for an Anonymous Cyber Constitution? Some rules could be put into place to avoid collateral damage for instance so that stuff LulzSec was doing exposing innocent gamers private information could never be done in the name of Anonymous because it could be specifically outlawed in the Cyber Constitution.
Tribes accept memes, but when they're incredible (root word: cred), the tribe doesn't accept them. There are as many conspiracy theories as opinions, meaning a myriad of them. Some people are pathological liars and try to pass of their theories as fact, or sew enough seemingly truthful things together so as to build a case.
As correlation != causation, facts have to emerge to disprove the meme.
That said, you'd knock me over with a feather if you told me that Lance Armstrong would lose all seven wins, or that Apple could convince a jury of its patents' worthiness and application to the litigation with Samsung. If you then implied that Lance Armstrong was an alien, and was in cahoots with Bob Dole over ED meds, I'd start to wonder, as its when there are two people doing something, it becomes a conspiracy rather than a tuple of data regarding an individual to decide the merits of.
If enough people believe in Aliens then it becomes credible just like God is credible to adults as Santa, the cookie monster or the tooth fairy was credible to children. A lot of things seem credible but credibility doesn't really mean very much because it's determined by the status quo. The tribe? You never defined what the tribe is.
They want to tell people the acceptable modes of thinking and acceptable belief systems and label the free thinkers with schizophrenia for not thinking about things in the standard way.
How is this different than the church labeling people for not believing in the proper interpretation of the scripture?
When it should be the reverse.If you're an atheist then you shouldn't believe in any conspiracy theory government sanctioned or not.
So why haven't we detained every religious marine in America? Why that marine? A lot of marines believe in God, Allah, etc. Who decides if a belief is crazy or not? The government? The government of Christians?
Belief in God based around conspiracy theories. Yet somehow it's okay to be Christian and a marine and not be classified as having some mental disease. Why? If you believe in anything you can't see with your 5 senses then you're no different in your schizophrenia than the guy who believes Bush is an alien or Obama is the antichrist.
Can anyone tell me why some conspiracy theories are sanctioned and others are banned?
That smacks of Illuminati conspiracy theories. The Internet is a complete cesspool of half baked conspiracy theories that the mentally stressed or ill should not be exposed to. Information overload.
The military really needs to deprogram these guys and integrate them back into the population. I would propose a type of "Combat Engineering" program, to shift these guys into some good paying, hard working jobs back home, via prepping them for things like road construction. We need to rework the infrastructure, unless we are just going to let the country fall into a vast wasteland. I present to you the concept of a Trans Americas Highway system, to tie the entire continents of North and South America together. A big project, but very handy for developing this part of the world. It's what advanced civilizations do.
That or something like it, to burn off a decade of war stress, by building something. Let's build it here, fuck them. They need to build something.
Beliefs don't translate into actions. Believing in God could be considered a conspiracy theory so why don't we treat all believers in God as mentally ill?
I don't know if this guy was ever a real threat to anyone or not, but he certainly isn't some super-patriot or free speech hero. He's mentally ill, and really does need help (even if you can't force it). The guy seriously believes that George W. Bush is living in a secret castle in Colorado where he rapes and sacrifices children. He also believes that Bush not only planned 9-11, but serves a world shadow government who also seem to spend most of their time raping and sacrificing children (when they're not planning world domination, I guess).
Whatever you think of the free speech issues involved, please don't celebrate this dude. He's very sick and needs help.
Why does it matter what he believes? What matters is what he does not what he thinks.
If you read his entire post he absolutely contradicts himself however also answers your comment in his post.
He said clearly that stuff that are out of accident does not bother him, while out of spite does.
The good and evil thing can be disputed, if you know enough about psychology you understand that there is no "good" or "evil" it's just how you percieve things, you and me thinks that killing out of spite is evil, however a person born into this world raised where killing out of spite is just and right - they would think its a "good" thing to do.
It's all in the eye of the beholder, it's not "deluding yourself". I personally believe that everyone who kills another human for fun, pleasure or revenge even love are mentally damaged somehow in some way, doesn't mean they're "evil" just means their reality differs from ours.
I'm saying pretty much the same thing. There is no good and evil, but some people are more dangerous to our health than others and that can be objectively measured. But in my opinion an industrial polluter is as dangerous as a serial killer because the consequences of their actions are often the same yet in our society we don't treat it as the same.
I don't think killing is always wrong, it's wrong most of the time because it's unnecessary. In most cases the problem can be solved non-lethally, whether it's self defense or a means to an end situation most of the time no one has to die, and the consequences of killing people if it is discovered that you did it are pretty bad as well.
Basically I think it's stupid to kill people just because you feel like it. If you'll die if you don't kill them then it's a very different decision, or if you have no other option because all prior options have been exhausted it's a different decision than the person who kills to satisfy an emotion which while I don't consider evil I do consider it weak and stupid.
I don't believe in good and evil, just ignorant and wise, smart and dumb, people who don't know what they are doing will do "evil" inane violent shit.
Then you're deluding yourself. Has it not occurred to you that there exist people in this world who kill merely for their own pleasure? In fact, not only do they enjoy killing but they know exactly what they're doing and even that society considers it to be "wrong" and yet they do it anyway. What else would you call that if not "evil"? If you don't believe in evil, then why not play the Ouija board just for the hell of it (pun intended) because evil doesn't exist, right? What could possibly go wrong, it's all fake right? Wrong.
I don't believe they are evil. I don't believe in the concept of evil. Psychopaths aren't evil, they simply don't have the same brain structure as others. They are emotionally retards but not evil. The fact that you think they are evil shows you have an ignorance of neuroscience.
Their brains are defective. The consequence of their mental illness is that they like to torture animals and they don't have the ability to resist their urges because their brain never developed in a way to allow them to be able to have that level of self control.
Do we call a child evil for acting like a child? If we are the adults in the room it doesn't help if we believe in anachronistic concepts like Good and Evil when we know better. If you don't know better do some research and look up James Fallon on Youtube.
but you're worried that the people who had to watch it on TV might have been affected?
Yes. Watching graphic violence on video affects people. If it is a real event (as opposed to fiction), it will affect them even more. Watching such an event in real life is undoubtedly even more traumatic. You don't seriously believe that a normal person could watch a video of a man sodomizing a toddler, then slicing the kid open with a butcher knife and not be affected by it, do you?
I watched that 1 lunatic 1 icepick video and it hasn't affect me. I haven't lost any sleep of experienced any PTSD. That being said I recognize that the lunatic in the video is a sick fuck, and is probably the same lunatic sick fuck who was torturing cats to death. It's called detachment, some people can do it better than others.
So people who work as EMTs or as nurses who have to actually talk to and care for victims, don't you think they'd have the worst PTSD of all? What about people who have to do autopsies?
You're incredibly naive. I'm an emergency physician. I'll bet I've seen more fucked up shit in one week than you will in your lifetime, unless you've served in the military in active combat, and even then I doubt you've seen the outcome of child abuse.
Why are you responding to me saying I'm incredibly naive when I was making the exact same point?
People in my line of work do get burned out, do get PTSD, and do require counseling from time to time, and we only see the aftermath. And we don't actually see the bad deeds happen. It's much easier to distance yourself from the events when you only have to deal with comforting the injured. I've been mugged at gunpoint and been struck on the head multiple times in the mugging, and that had me looking over my shoulder for years. It affected me more than all the other shit I've seen in my life combined.
Autopsies are pretty sterile things. I've been in on a few. Not a big deal. Dead body? Seen lots of those.
I hunt, fish and have been on scene for a few automobile accidents. I've seen what happens when a guy falls from 15 stories onto cement in a construction accident. I've gutted and eaten my share of game. I've familiar with the story of Timothy Treadwell. I know what bears can do to a skeleton, and I can imagine pretty well what that camp looked like. I've seen fire photos.
It's grisly, but it doesn't stay with me because -- and I know I'm venturing into the domain of poets here -- it wasn't Evil. I didn't hate the deer. No one pushed the construction worker. His coworkers mourned for him, and it seemed sad, but proper. Carnivorous predation -- including my own -- and accidents don't "haunt" me. They seem "natural," as poor as that word choice is. I've experienced accidents -- some that put me in a hospital bed with stitches -- but they didn't --- I don't know -- "stain my soul." How's that for florid prose?
I wish I had never seen the Daniel Pearl video. Not that I wish I could have remained ignorant, but I wish I lived in a world where it just didn't happen. That video stuck with me. That video bothered me. I've met grizzled old firemen who were disfigured in a fire while they saved lives. I've shaken the hands of the men, and the burn scars shine like God's own merit badges.
I've seen photos of women disfigured by jealous men. Context seems to be everything. Just looking at the photos of those poor girls twists my guts into a knot. Maybe it's because I'm a parent, but those kiddie porn photos the cops published where all the people were removed and only the background shown make me wish God had personally appointed me to Go Smite Someone. I know the rage is just a cover for the anguish those photos of Best Western hotel rooms cause me.
If I had to spend a year, eight hours a day, looking at the worst the world had to show me, I'd need a padded cell at the end of it, and I'm a man with some scars and some grey in his hair. Shame on Google for doing this to some kid fresh out of school and then flushing him like toilet paper at the end of it. When you're the Boss, you're responsible for your people, and anyone who could do this is a reprehensible human being.
Not everyone believes in god and evil. I don't believe in good and evil, just ignorant and wise, smart and dumb, people who don't know what they are doing will do "evil" inane violent shit. If you believe in good and evil you probably shouldn't be watching people because most everyone is bad and evil just as most everyone is good.
because people will think they don't need it until it's a lot harder to deal with.
The schedule should include therapy once a week as part of the regular paid schedule. Just like police officer need to go to therapy after certain events they encounter.
No one is capable of objectively evaluating their own mental health.
Then make it an option but don't force it on people you fascist.
It might affect you at first, but it's not real life.
So all those snuff videos of decapitations, stonings, etc., and all that hardcore CP (where the kid is getting raped, not just nudie shots), all those gore videos of traffic accidents, none of that is real? What a relief.
They are historical records, not events happening in real time. Watch a lynching, or watch the history of black people during the civil rights movement. People actually had to watch their friends get hung from ropes by racists, had dogs put on them, rocks thrown at them, but you're worried that the people who had to watch it on TV might have been affected?
I'm a moderator for furry art community Inkbunny in my spare time, and I've seen depictions of everything mentioned in the article and much more besides. However, most of it is permitted under our terms of service - instead, we don't allow human in sexual situations/showing genitals (which are what the laws are targeted at), or general photography (which thankfully avoids most realistic and graphic shock pictures). So the diaper porn stays.
Does it change you? Yeah, I guess. Some of the fetishes are pretty crazy. Rape followed (or preceded) by torture, impalement, or beheadings. People being turning into dirty diapers. Art for those who like to fantasize about eating others - or being eaten. Tentacles galore. Over time you start to blank it out; most just gets a glance as I check it off for humans or other policy violations. All in a day's work. Of course, I can stop any time I like, since I'm not being paid.
(This isn't the experience of every Inkbunny user. We have great tag-based blocking features, but of course as a moderator I can't use them while doing my job.)
This proves my point. We have people doing this work for free who receive no therapy at all and no pay yet we give our empathy to people working for Google probably getting paid too?
The 2-year old article I linked also explains that all Google content reviewers are on one-year contract because of the nature of the work and have access to counseling. From TFA it seems many of these reviewers got the false impression that they would be hired fulltime after completing the one year. Considering that Google seem to have pretty tough hiring process, I'm not surprised that very few of these reviewers get hired fulltime. Their managers must be filthy liars though.
Not getting hired full time would probably piss me off more than anything else. If I had to sacrifice doing a job like that and got duped then I would be pissed. I guess that means I have empathy for the employees.
I worked for a very large company and analysed data from network packet capture devices that would sift through data and find interesting items. It was quite a head job after awhile. So many people doing dumb things at work and getting caught. Reasonable seeming people looking at fucked up porn (men and women coworkers), people hooking up with random strangers in public restrooms (facilitating this online on their work computers, it happens alot), people having groupsex and viewing the photos at work (via web email), total perverts preying on teenagers (stockholm syndrome in full effect), really anything wrenched or nasty you hear about in the news is like the tip of the iceberg when given a large enough sample size of the general able populous. It may have tweaked my view of people in retrospect, basically it was a really long course in human psychology. I wouldn't ever do that shit again, or anything close to it, but I have respect for people who do.
This is the problem. We want to hide ourselves from what humanity truly is but at the same time we want to act like we want to be open and accepting and to actually study humanity. You cannot ignore the fact that the vast majority of people on this planet if not all people on this planet have some really ugly behavior. If we are ever going to truly know ourselves we have to know not just the good side but the dark side as well. So the fear of the darkside actually hinders us in understanding our species.
It's a job, it's not for everyone, but someone has to do these sorts of jobs. It's necessary for the progress of our species. It's also necessary in an age of surveillance and open transparency that we are going to see more and more gross, disgusting, obscene content, so it's about time we either develop the mental faculties to handle it, or we stop the surveillance all together but to try to have unlimited surveillance all over the place but then expect the people behind the monitor watching it all to cover their eyes and seek help it just isn't going to work.
Obscene content is definitely going to spread and the best we can do is hide it from the children. Adults however are going to have to get used to the real world and seeing the real humanity which isn't always whatever they thought it was growing up. In real life people hurt each other, and if people look closely enough they'd see this sort of abuse all the time, it's not just something they'd see in their job looking at obscene pictures for Google or Facebook but the abusers are essentially everywhere and abusing everybody. It's just a situation where people who somehow were sheltered from it, protected from it or who don't believe things like that can happen to them or in their town, they get shell shocked. Also it's understandable if someone has actually experienced the kind of abuse they see in the image that could cause them great trauma.
So I don't want to lead people to think I have no concern or empathy for people who might be in these positions who aren't prepared to see what they have to see. I just think people who are shocked about pictures on the internet probably should look around them and pay more attention to how humans actually treat each other. Humans aren't nice, and are obscene in general, those pictures are snapshots in time of humans acting like humans, and what can be learned? Humans are some of the most beautiful creatures on this earth but at the same time some of the most hideous all depending on the context.
You can filter it out when you get to see it every now and then.
Imagine having to watch one video after the other of people being maimed or killed, animals being abused, children being abused, most of them with a laugh track attached, and you have to do this for an average of forty hours a week for a year.
No, I doubt you would be able to just 'filter it out' in the long run, and if you ARE able to do that you're seriously not someone I want to know IRL. Humans are supposed to have emotions and empathy; a lack of both would be shown by being completely unaffected by such a job.
So people who work as EMTs or as nurses who have to actually talk to and care for victims, don't you think they'd have the worst PTSD of all? What about people who have to do autopsies?
Agreed with a little help afterwards, you could pull ahead of it such that "nothing can shock you ever again". They do it in the Military all the time, though in a more physical style.
PTSD is a problem but in the military it's PTSD because their friends and people they know are getting their heads blown off or blown up in front of their face. All 5 senses, it's a lot more intense. This job weare talking about is just viewing images and possibly video online.That is not real and very easy to compartmentalize for a large number of people.
If you can watch violent movies, snuff films and go to Rotten.com you can do the job. If you have nightmares after watching some stuff then perhaps you cannot do the job but there are ways to condition yourself for the job. Watch a lot of films about animals and watch animals hunt and kill their prey over and over again, eventually you can get used to seeing the death process. Does that mean you enjoy death? Hell no. Does it mean you like killing or that you even hunt? No.
It simply means you're good at viewing that particular kind of content and staying focused on your training. People who work as EMT's have to literally save peoples lives, people die in their arms, they have to deal with victims face to face, their job is harder in my opinion than dealing with pictures on the internet.
Agreed with a little help afterwards, you could pull ahead of it such that "nothing can shock you ever again". They do it in the Military all the time, though in a more physical style.
I would argue that if you take the most bad-assed military, police, or what have you... unless someone has some serious issues of their own already which would make them enjoy it (which pretty much disqualifies them from doing the job), this kind of stuff 8 hours/day for a year is going to seriously fuck you up.
Unless you really want your military made up of vicious sadists, I completely fail to see how this kind of thing wouldn't cause lasting damage -- or at least the need for some heavy duty counseling and support.
That much exposure to every single horrible thing that ever gets filmed is bound to wear down anybody. And anybody it doesn't, likely scores in the very scary end of humanity.
You;'re logic is typical and its broken. Either they gotta be extremely white innocent or extremely black predator enjoying it. It's not usually either extreme. A lot of people simply can be paid to do a job and do it and condition themselves not to let it affect them. People do it all the time in many other jobs. Do people who work doing autopsies enjoy cutting people up like Dexter? Do you really believe this?
It's more people learn how to do their job and part of the job is compartmentalizing and learning how how to feel. It requires a lot of focus but you can shut empathy off. Doctors wouldn't be able to cut you open if they couldn't.
Slashdot Mirror
And in the new version of Anonymous they need to agree on a process or methodology for deciding which ops to take and not to take, on deciding which principles to adopt and which not. Basic concepts like decision theory, a weighing of pros and cons, or benefit and risk, a set of principles from which to base everything around in language which is more concise, specific.
Anonymous is a good idea but unless it's continuously updated it's going to become outdated real fast if it isn't already.
I put it to you that their loose system is ever changing and evolving already, and that your assessment was invalid before even contemplated writing it down.
I see that despite everyone's brains being a loose collection of self organizing neurons, you're still shackled by the antiquated concept of top down structural design. Are you a Moron, or merely a Fool?
Version numbers allow people to track the progress of revision in case something goes wrong and we want to know who was responsible for those revisions. To avoid math and science is to shy away from the truth of the matter and to call me a fool is to offer nothing of contribution.
the established powers that be in finance & govt need a nemesis to keep them in check, because the checks & balances meant to minimize corruption in the banking & investment and govt has failed miserably.
Kudos to Anonymous!
The problem with Anonymous's design and I'll say it again, they need to thoroughly separate the think tank philosophical ethical debate theoretical portion from the practical operative coding hacking portion. Meaning if an Anonymous Cyber Constitution were to be developed then everyone should be able to Facebook like it to approve of it and it should be on a wiki so it can be continuously updated and debated as new information comes in. There should be constant debate about certain subjects regarding philosophical principles. Also they need to develop standardization of processes, best practices, that sorta stuff because right now Anonymous has very little discipline on the practical operative hacker end of the spectrum even though that is the end of the spectrum making most of the noise in the media.
Right now they are hit and miss. Sometimes they do something which seems to hit the nail on the head and other times they do really stupid ops which make people question why Anonymous should even exist.
the organization simply has an overall vision and flavor. Its members carry out acts based on that mission. And it has enjoyed a great deal of success — in part due to the lack of central control. Compare this to the level of control in many corporate development organizations. Some of that control is necessary, but often it's taken to gratuitous lengths. If you hire great developers, set general goals for the various parts of the project, and collect metrics, you probably don't need to exercise a lot of control to meet your requirements
This is standard common sense, and the negative effects of over/micro-managing and red tape are recognized (and felt) not just in software but in all endeavours (even within families.) We know what to do about that in all forms of organizations and projects.
That people and project still fall far from the well-known solutions, that has more to do with human behavior, team dynamics and the economics of the incentives/rewards, disinsentives/penalties, (whether tangible or psychological, subjective or objective) than anything else.
Anonymous, with its faceless nature (that precludes the realities of disinsentives and penalties), and incoherent goals, has nothing to teach us or anyone engaged in a real-life project or mission subject to incentives and disinsentives, and the realities of identifiable human relations.
The article might be good to drive traffic (ZOMG, Anonymous in teh titl3!), I'll give the author that </journalistic-attention-whoring>
Micro-management shouldn't be the object. The object should be to develop a system to distribute best practices. This could apply to Anonymous or to software development where more experienced workers can share their best practices with less experienced workers. The other is to focus on the process of making critical decisions. The problem of decision making can only be solved by developing a methodology of decision making along with some basic rules to follow when making certain types of decisions.
If this is Anonymous then it's what is a legitimate vs illegitimate op. Emphasis should be on the process of decision making so that there is a standard process or guideline for choosing an op. If it's software development then developers need to know when to use certain designs and when not to use them or when certain tools work best and not others.
It's not a matter of control or not, it's a matter of separation of duties. The people who design the software don't necessarily have to be the people coding it. The design team could simply just design. The same could be said about Anon-ops, the people who develop the philosophical/ethical theory do not have to be the people who do the ops. The problem in my opinion with Anonymous is you have a lot of people involved who are doers but not very deep thinkers. As a result the ops are often successful but completely miss the point.
Separate the philosophical debate, decision making process, and theory from the coding, ops, and direct action. Same with development, separate the theoretical design from the development and programming. Let the best designers design whether they are the best developers or not as those are two different jobs and not all skilled developers are skilled at software design.
And in the new version of Anonymous they need to agree on a process or methodology for deciding which ops to take and not to take, on deciding which principles to adopt and which not. Basic concepts like decision theory, a weighing of pros and cons, or benefit and risk, a set of principles from which to base everything around in language which is more concise, specific.
Anonymous is a good idea but unless it's continuously updated it's going to become outdated real fast if it isn't already. The same could be said of any software in development, it has to be properly designed from the start (Anonymous wasn't well designed at the foundation), and it has to be continuously updated.
Here is my idea, how about starting a project for an Anonymous Cyber Constitution? Some rules could be put into place to avoid collateral damage for instance so that stuff LulzSec was doing exposing innocent gamers private information could never be done in the name of Anonymous because it could be specifically outlawed in the Cyber Constitution.
Tribes accept memes, but when they're incredible (root word: cred), the tribe doesn't accept them. There are as many conspiracy theories as opinions, meaning a myriad of them. Some people are pathological liars and try to pass of their theories as fact, or sew enough seemingly truthful things together so as to build a case.
As correlation != causation, facts have to emerge to disprove the meme.
That said, you'd knock me over with a feather if you told me that Lance Armstrong would lose all seven wins, or that Apple could convince a jury of its patents' worthiness and application to the litigation with Samsung. If you then implied that Lance Armstrong was an alien, and was in cahoots with Bob Dole over ED meds, I'd start to wonder, as its when there are two people doing something, it becomes a conspiracy rather than a tuple of data regarding an individual to decide the merits of.
If enough people believe in Aliens then it becomes credible just like God is credible to adults as Santa, the cookie monster or the tooth fairy was credible to children. A lot of things seem credible but credibility doesn't really mean very much because it's determined by the status quo. The tribe? You never defined what the tribe is.
They want to tell people the acceptable modes of thinking and acceptable belief systems and label the free thinkers with schizophrenia for not thinking about things in the standard way.
How is this different than the church labeling people for not believing in the proper interpretation of the scripture?
When it should be the reverse.If you're an atheist then you shouldn't believe in any conspiracy theory government sanctioned or not.
So why haven't we detained every religious marine in America? Why that marine? A lot of marines believe in God, Allah, etc. Who decides if a belief is crazy or not? The government? The government of Christians?
Can you prove God exists without a conspiracy theory?
If you believe in God, an atheist logically could conclude you have schizophrenia.
Belief in God based around conspiracy theories. Yet somehow it's okay to be Christian and a marine and not be classified as having some mental disease. Why? If you believe in anything you can't see with your 5 senses then you're no different in your schizophrenia than the guy who believes Bush is an alien or Obama is the antichrist.
Can anyone tell me why some conspiracy theories are sanctioned and others are banned?
That smacks of Illuminati conspiracy theories. The Internet is a complete cesspool of half baked conspiracy theories that the mentally stressed or ill should not be exposed to. Information overload.
The military really needs to deprogram these guys and integrate them back into the population. I would propose a type of "Combat Engineering" program, to shift these guys into some good paying, hard working jobs back home, via prepping them for things like road construction. We need to rework the infrastructure, unless we are just going to let the country fall into a vast wasteland. I present to you the concept of a Trans Americas Highway system, to tie the entire continents of North and South America together. A big project, but very handy for developing this part of the world. It's what advanced civilizations do.
That or something like it, to burn off a decade of war stress, by building something. Let's build it here, fuck them. They need to build something.
Beliefs don't translate into actions. Believing in God could be considered a conspiracy theory so why don't we treat all believers in God as mentally ill?
I don't know if this guy was ever a real threat to anyone or not, but he certainly isn't some super-patriot or free speech hero. He's mentally ill, and really does need help (even if you can't force it). The guy seriously believes that George W. Bush is living in a secret castle in Colorado where he rapes and sacrifices children. He also believes that Bush not only planned 9-11, but serves a world shadow government who also seem to spend most of their time raping and sacrificing children (when they're not planning world domination, I guess).
Whatever you think of the free speech issues involved, please don't celebrate this dude. He's very sick and needs help.
Why does it matter what he believes? What matters is what he does not what he thinks.
If you read his entire post he absolutely contradicts himself however also answers your comment in his post.
He said clearly that stuff that are out of accident does not bother him, while out of spite does.
The good and evil thing can be disputed, if you know enough about psychology you understand that there is no "good" or "evil" it's just how you percieve things, you and me thinks that killing out of spite is evil, however a person born into this world raised where killing out of spite is just and right - they would think its a "good" thing to do.
It's all in the eye of the beholder, it's not "deluding yourself". I personally believe that everyone who kills another human for fun, pleasure or revenge even love are mentally damaged somehow in some way, doesn't mean they're "evil" just means their reality differs from ours.
I'm saying pretty much the same thing. There is no good and evil, but some people are more dangerous to our health than others and that can be objectively measured. But in my opinion an industrial polluter is as dangerous as a serial killer because the consequences of their actions are often the same yet in our society we don't treat it as the same.
I don't think killing is always wrong, it's wrong most of the time because it's unnecessary. In most cases the problem can be solved non-lethally, whether it's self defense or a means to an end situation most of the time no one has to die, and the consequences of killing people if it is discovered that you did it are pretty bad as well.
Basically I think it's stupid to kill people just because you feel like it. If you'll die if you don't kill them then it's a very different decision, or if you have no other option because all prior options have been exhausted it's a different decision than the person who kills to satisfy an emotion which while I don't consider evil I do consider it weak and stupid.
I don't believe in good and evil, just ignorant and wise, smart and dumb, people who don't know what they are doing will do "evil" inane violent shit.
Then you're deluding yourself. Has it not occurred to you that there exist people in this world who kill merely for their own pleasure? In fact, not only do they enjoy killing but they know exactly what they're doing and even that society considers it to be "wrong" and yet they do it anyway. What else would you call that if not "evil"? If you don't believe in evil, then why not play the Ouija board just for the hell of it (pun intended) because evil doesn't exist, right? What could possibly go wrong, it's all fake right? Wrong.
I don't believe they are evil. I don't believe in the concept of evil. Psychopaths aren't evil, they simply don't have the same brain structure as others. They are emotionally retards but not evil. The fact that you think they are evil shows you have an ignorance of neuroscience.
Their brains are defective. The consequence of their mental illness is that they like to torture animals and they don't have the ability to resist their urges because their brain never developed in a way to allow them to be able to have that level of self control.
Do we call a child evil for acting like a child? If we are the adults in the room it doesn't help if we believe in anachronistic concepts like Good and Evil when we know better. If you don't know better do some research and look up James Fallon on Youtube.
but you're worried that the people who had to watch it on TV might have been affected?
Yes. Watching graphic violence on video affects people. If it is a real event (as opposed to fiction), it will affect them even more. Watching such an event in real life is undoubtedly even more traumatic. You don't seriously believe that a normal person could watch a video of a man sodomizing a toddler, then slicing the kid open with a butcher knife and not be affected by it, do you?
I watched that 1 lunatic 1 icepick video and it hasn't affect me. I haven't lost any sleep of experienced any PTSD. That being said I recognize that the lunatic in the video is a sick fuck, and is probably the same lunatic sick fuck who was torturing cats to death. It's called detachment, some people can do it better than others.
So people who work as EMTs or as nurses who have to actually talk to and care for victims, don't you think they'd have the worst PTSD of all? What about people who have to do autopsies?
You're incredibly naive. I'm an emergency physician. I'll bet I've seen more fucked up shit in one week than you will in your lifetime, unless you've served in the military in active combat, and even then I doubt you've seen the outcome of child abuse.
Why are you responding to me saying I'm incredibly naive when I was making the exact same point?
People in my line of work do get burned out, do get PTSD, and do require counseling from time to time, and we only see the aftermath. And we don't actually see the bad deeds happen. It's much easier to distance yourself from the events when you only have to deal with comforting the injured. I've been mugged at gunpoint and been struck on the head multiple times in the mugging, and that had me looking over my shoulder for years. It affected me more than all the other shit I've seen in my life combined.
Autopsies are pretty sterile things. I've been in on a few. Not a big deal. Dead body? Seen lots of those.
I hunt, fish and have been on scene for a few automobile accidents. I've seen what happens when a guy falls from 15 stories onto cement in a construction accident. I've gutted and eaten my share of game. I've familiar with the story of Timothy Treadwell. I know what bears can do to a skeleton, and I can imagine pretty well what that camp looked like. I've seen fire photos.
It's grisly, but it doesn't stay with me because -- and I know I'm venturing into the domain of poets here -- it wasn't Evil. I didn't hate the deer. No one pushed the construction worker. His coworkers mourned for him, and it seemed sad, but proper. Carnivorous predation -- including my own -- and accidents don't "haunt" me. They seem "natural," as poor as that word choice is. I've experienced accidents -- some that put me in a hospital bed with stitches -- but they didn't --- I don't know -- "stain my soul." How's that for florid prose?
I wish I had never seen the Daniel Pearl video. Not that I wish I could have remained ignorant, but I wish I lived in a world where it just didn't happen. That video stuck with me. That video bothered me. I've met grizzled old firemen who were disfigured in a fire while they saved lives. I've shaken the hands of the men, and the burn scars shine like God's own merit badges.
I've seen photos of women disfigured by jealous men. Context seems to be everything. Just looking at the photos of those poor girls twists my guts into a knot. Maybe it's because I'm a parent, but those kiddie porn photos the cops published where all the people were removed and only the background shown make me wish God had personally appointed me to Go Smite Someone. I know the rage is just a cover for the anguish those photos of Best Western hotel rooms cause me.
If I had to spend a year, eight hours a day, looking at the worst the world had to show me, I'd need a padded cell at the end of it, and I'm a man with some scars and some grey in his hair. Shame on Google for doing this to some kid fresh out of school and then flushing him like toilet paper at the end of it. When you're the Boss, you're responsible for your people, and anyone who could do this is a reprehensible human being.
Not everyone believes in god and evil. I don't believe in good and evil, just ignorant and wise, smart and dumb, people who don't know what they are doing will do "evil" inane violent shit. If you believe in good and evil you probably shouldn't be watching people because most everyone is bad and evil just as most everyone is good.
The problem is that the job makes normal people suicidal.
Being suicidal isn't normal.
because people will think they don't need it until it's a lot harder to deal with.
The schedule should include therapy once a week as part of the regular paid schedule.
Just like police officer need to go to therapy after certain events they encounter.
No one is capable of objectively evaluating their own mental health.
Then make it an option but don't force it on people you fascist.
It might affect you at first, but it's not real life.
So all those snuff videos of decapitations, stonings, etc., and all that hardcore CP (where the kid is getting raped, not just nudie shots), all those gore videos of traffic accidents, none of that is real? What a relief.
They are historical records, not events happening in real time. Watch a lynching, or watch the history of black people during the civil rights movement. People actually had to watch their friends get hung from ropes by racists, had dogs put on them, rocks thrown at them, but you're worried that the people who had to watch it on TV might have been affected?
I'm a moderator for furry art community Inkbunny in my spare time, and I've seen depictions of everything mentioned in the article and much more besides. However, most of it is permitted under our terms of service - instead, we don't allow human in sexual situations/showing genitals (which are what the laws are targeted at), or general photography (which thankfully avoids most realistic and graphic shock pictures). So the diaper porn stays.
Does it change you? Yeah, I guess. Some of the fetishes are pretty crazy. Rape followed (or preceded) by torture, impalement, or beheadings. People being turning into dirty diapers. Art for those who like to fantasize about eating others - or being eaten. Tentacles galore. Over time you start to blank it out; most just gets a glance as I check it off for humans or other policy violations. All in a day's work. Of course, I can stop any time I like, since I'm not being paid.
(This isn't the experience of every Inkbunny user. We have great tag-based blocking features, but of course as a moderator I can't use them while doing my job.)
This proves my point. We have people doing this work for free who receive no therapy at all and no pay yet we give our empathy to people working for Google probably getting paid too?
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/19/technology/19screen.html
The 2-year old article I linked also explains that all Google content reviewers are on one-year contract because of the nature of the work and have access to counseling. From TFA it seems many of these reviewers got the false impression that they would be hired fulltime after completing the one year. Considering that Google seem to have pretty tough hiring process, I'm not surprised that very few of these reviewers get hired fulltime. Their managers must be filthy liars though.
Not getting hired full time would probably piss me off more than anything else. If I had to sacrifice doing a job like that and got duped then I would be pissed.
I guess that means I have empathy for the employees.
I worked for a very large company and analysed data from network packet capture devices that would sift through data and find interesting items. It was quite a head job after awhile. So many people doing dumb things at work and getting caught. Reasonable seeming people looking at fucked up porn (men and women coworkers), people hooking up with random strangers in public restrooms (facilitating this online on their work computers, it happens alot), people having groupsex and viewing the photos at work (via web email), total perverts preying on teenagers (stockholm syndrome in full effect), really anything wrenched or nasty you hear about in the news is like the tip of the iceberg when given a large enough sample size of the general able populous. It may have tweaked my view of people in retrospect, basically it was a really long course in human psychology. I wouldn't ever do that shit again, or anything close to it, but I have respect for people who do.
This is the problem. We want to hide ourselves from what humanity truly is but at the same time we want to act like we want to be open and accepting and to actually study humanity. You cannot ignore the fact that the vast majority of people on this planet if not all people on this planet have some really ugly behavior. If we are ever going to truly know ourselves we have to know not just the good side but the dark side as well. So the fear of the darkside actually hinders us in understanding our species.
It's a job, it's not for everyone, but someone has to do these sorts of jobs. It's necessary for the progress of our species. It's also necessary in an age of surveillance and open transparency that we are going to see more and more gross, disgusting, obscene content, so it's about time we either develop the mental faculties to handle it, or we stop the surveillance all together but to try to have unlimited surveillance all over the place but then expect the people behind the monitor watching it all to cover their eyes and seek help it just isn't going to work.
Obscene content is definitely going to spread and the best we can do is hide it from the children. Adults however are going to have to get used to the real world and seeing the real humanity which isn't always whatever they thought it was growing up. In real life people hurt each other, and if people look closely enough they'd see this sort of abuse all the time, it's not just something they'd see in their job looking at obscene pictures for Google or Facebook but the abusers are essentially everywhere and abusing everybody. It's just a situation where people who somehow were sheltered from it, protected from it or who don't believe things like that can happen to them or in their town, they get shell shocked. Also it's understandable if someone has actually experienced the kind of abuse they see in the image that could cause them great trauma.
So I don't want to lead people to think I have no concern or empathy for people who might be in these positions who aren't prepared to see what they have to see. I just think people who are shocked about pictures on the internet probably should look around them and pay more attention to how humans actually treat each other. Humans aren't nice, and are obscene in general, those pictures are snapshots in time of humans acting like humans, and what can be learned? Humans are some of the most beautiful creatures on this earth but at the same time some of the most hideous all depending on the context.
You can filter it out when you get to see it every now and then.
Imagine having to watch one video after the other of people being maimed or killed, animals being abused, children being abused, most of them with a laugh track attached, and you have to do this for an average of forty hours a week for a year.
No, I doubt you would be able to just 'filter it out' in the long run, and if you ARE able to do that you're seriously not someone I want to know IRL. Humans are supposed to have emotions and empathy; a lack of both would be shown by being completely unaffected by such a job.
So people who work as EMTs or as nurses who have to actually talk to and care for victims, don't you think they'd have the worst PTSD of all? What about people who have to do autopsies?
Agreed with a little help afterwards, you could pull ahead of it such that "nothing can shock you ever again". They do it in the Military all the time, though in a more physical style.
The U.S. Army Reports Record High Suicide Rates for July
Experts: Vets' PTSD, violence a growing problem
Maybe not.
PTSD is a problem but in the military it's PTSD because their friends and people they know are getting their heads blown off or blown up in front of their face. All 5 senses, it's a lot more intense. This job weare talking about is just viewing images and possibly video online.That is not real and very easy to compartmentalize for a large number of people.
If you can watch violent movies, snuff films and go to Rotten.com you can do the job. If you have nightmares after watching some stuff then perhaps you cannot do the job but there are ways to condition yourself for the job. Watch a lot of films about animals and watch animals hunt and kill their prey over and over again, eventually you can get used to seeing the death process. Does that mean you enjoy death? Hell no. Does it mean you like killing or that you even hunt? No.
It simply means you're good at viewing that particular kind of content and staying focused on your training. People who work as EMT's have to literally save peoples lives, people die in their arms, they have to deal with victims face to face, their job is harder in my opinion than dealing with pictures on the internet.
I would argue that if you take the most bad-assed military, police, or what have you ... unless someone has some serious issues of their own already which would make them enjoy it (which pretty much disqualifies them from doing the job), this kind of stuff 8 hours/day for a year is going to seriously fuck you up.
Unless you really want your military made up of vicious sadists, I completely fail to see how this kind of thing wouldn't cause lasting damage -- or at least the need for some heavy duty counseling and support.
That much exposure to every single horrible thing that ever gets filmed is bound to wear down anybody. And anybody it doesn't, likely scores in the very scary end of humanity.
You;'re logic is typical and its broken. Either they gotta be extremely white innocent or extremely black predator enjoying it. It's not usually either extreme. A lot of people simply can be paid to do a job and do it and condition themselves not to let it affect them. People do it all the time in many other jobs. Do people who work doing autopsies enjoy cutting people up like Dexter? Do you really believe this?
It's more people learn how to do their job and part of the job is compartmentalizing and learning how how to feel. It requires a lot of focus but you can shut empathy off. Doctors wouldn't be able to cut you open if they couldn't.