Anonymous & Lulz Security Statement to the FBI • Hacker News Board

Re: Anonymous & Lulz Security Statement to the FBI

#191

Post by jackpirate » Thu, Jul 21, 2011, 9:03 PM UTC

nathanb wrote: post #184

jackpirate wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, their definition of "lawful" is that the FBI is doing it. That said, I wouldn't go so far as to call this hypocritical. The FBI at least pretends to have a morally reasonable agenda for its actions.

To me, that's the definition of hypocrisy. They pretend to be acting from a moral (or at least societal) high ground and roundly condemn the actions of anonymous. However, both are engaging in the exact same behavior. Now that's hypocritical!

The FBI doesn't normally, and it is not their purpose to engage in the exact same behavior. 95% of the time, they act within bounds I suspect you agree with. I wouldn't consider the 95% hypocrites, only the 5%, and so I can't call the whole agency hypocritical, only parts.

Re: Anonymous & Lulz Security Statement to the FBI

#192

Post by admiralpumpkin » Thu, Jul 21, 2011, 9:18 PM UTC

mcantelon wrote: post #152

admiralpumpkin wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. Significance of your statement? Surely you're not saying that brutal dictatorships are fine so long as they're not ignoring earlier "charter documents"... We don't grade on a curve here. 2. The OP point was that on a 'relative badness' scale the US is better than other governments (see N Korea), so what other governments are doing is very relevant to their point. 3. Uh-huh. It's certainly enlightened of you not to…

>All countries and governments are dirty to some degree or other. Other countries haven't positioned themselves as the world's policeman and moral authority (complete with a large network of military bases), AFAIK. If you set yourself up as a standard of freedom, then it's unsurprising that others will hold you to that standard.

Of course no other nation has positioned themselves as policeman–they can't logistically or financially do it (though perhaps the US can't financially do it either...). It's certainly not from any internalized Prime Directive. If they could, they would; see CCCP 1950-1991.

As for moral authority, I completely disagree. Every nation positions themselves as a moral authority. The other nations are just so small and/or weak that nobody really cares what they say. You really perceive a world of quiet and humble non-US nations, keeping their moral views to themselves?

Re: Anonymous & Lulz Security Statement to the FBI

#193

Post by gdcbyers » Thu, Jul 21, 2011, 9:27 PM UTC

burgerbrain wrote: post #134

18pfsmt wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My attempt at understanding burgerbrain's comment leads me to believe that "we the people" are the victims, and our kidnappers are the government and corporate super powers operating via government action to provide legitimacy. While the Antisec people are trying to save us. I'm not saying I agree, but that's my interpretation.

Your interpretation is accurate. Think about it, how many people in this world have actually signed up to be dominated by their government? Very very few (immigrants might count). Yet we don't question their authority because 1) we are used to it, and 2) every few years, they ask our opinion. Of course they know that they can safely ask our opinion because they know that we've already bought into the entire thing. It…

So in this little metaphor, the people play the role of the hostages, the government plays the role of the kidnappers (lawless criminals) and LulzSec play the role of the government (the good guys trying to save you)

Interesting. Confusing, but interesting.

> Think about it, how many people in this world have actually signed up to be dominated by their government?

No one is making any such claims.

Your claim appears to be that the government is this "big bad evil uncle who just wants to rape you" or some such nonsense. Do all governments have issues with corruption, abuse of power and not honouring individual's rights: Yes. Has LulzSec exposed a single government (or private/corporate) abuse? Not that I can find.

Lets take a look at some of their releases:

62,000 random logins > Wow, that sounds like a very decisive and clear attack on those taking our rights roll eyes Senate.gov internal data > A copy of their apache config file, and a full file list (no real data, just the file names), I can only assume the documents they found would be so damming and pervasive that it would be wrong to release them....or it was just a publicly accessible site that had nothing to hide, not sure Pron.com user database > Clearly human rights abuses happen every day in the Pron.com offices....when they aren't watching porn Sony International and friends > I know they tend to make shitty stuff, especially music, but I have yet to have a single person be able to point to an action by sony that could be called "dominating", "abusive", "unjust", etc PBS.org > Does this even need an explanation? PBS isnt some evil company out to fuck the little guy. Take a look at their scheduling, Sesame Street, Cat in the Hat Knows A Lot About That! and Seven Wonders of Ancient Egypt. So what exactly has the evil PBS perpetrated to warrant this?

Even the Fox.com hack appears to be their licensing portal for other channels to license their syndicated content. It wasn't even news related, it was the site that let my local fox affilate run crappy reality tv. Absolutely ground breaking.

> We mistakenly think that they protect us when in reality they are just exploiting us.

Really? Because you appear to be mistakenly thinking that LulzSec is her to protect you, rather then exploit you.

They broke into a private computer network, stole your personal information (not the companies, not emploies, but your's) published it without your consent, and encouraged others to use it to commit further crimes agents you. All for personal enjoyment. How exactly has any of their acts helped any real situation? How is LulzSec violating your right to privacy considered an acceptable price to pay for....for what, free porn?

Re: Anonymous & Lulz Security Statement to the FBI

#194

Post by mcantelon » Thu, Jul 21, 2011, 9:33 PM UTC

admiralpumpkin wrote: post #192

mcantelon wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>All countries and governments are dirty to some degree or other. Other countries haven't positioned themselves as the world's policeman and moral authority (complete with a large network of military bases), AFAIK. If you set yourself up as a standard of freedom, then it's unsurprising that others will hold you to that standard.

Of course no other nation has positioned themselves as policeman–they can't logistically or financially do it (though perhaps the US can't financially do it either...). It's certainly not from any internalized Prime Directive. If they could, they would; see CCCP 1950-1991. As for moral authority, I completely disagree. Every nation positions themselves as a moral authority. The other nations are just so small and/or…

>As for moral authority, I completely disagree. Every nation positions themselves as a moral authority. The other nations are just so small and/or weak that nobody really cares what they say.

True... other countries would do the same thing if they could (but they can't and the US can hence the need to try to keep the US in check).

Re: Anonymous & Lulz Security Statement to the FBI

#195

Post by burgerbrain » Thu, Jul 21, 2011, 9:35 PM UTC

gdcbyers wrote: post #193

burgerbrain wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your interpretation is accurate. Think about it, how many people in this world have actually signed up to be dominated by their government? Very very few (immigrants might count). Yet we don't question their authority because 1) we are used to it, and 2) every few years, they ask our opinion. Of course they know that they can safely ask our opinion because they know that we've already bought into the entire thing. It…

So in this little metaphor, the people play the role of the hostages, the government plays the role of the kidnappers (lawless criminals) and LulzSec play the role of the government (the good guys trying to save you) Interesting. Confusing, but interesting. > Think about it, how many people in this world have actually signed up to be dominated by their government? No one is making any such claims. Your claim appears…

"So in this little metaphor, the people play the role of the hostages, the government plays the role of the kidnappers (lawless criminals) and LulzSec play the role of the government (the good guys trying to save you)

Interesting. Confusing, but interesting."

Yes, you do seem rather confused.

"you appear to be mistakenly thinking that LulzSec is her to protect you"

I am under no such illusion. However, I do recognize that the enemy of my far far far more powerful enemy is.. well.. as good a friend as any.

Re: Anonymous & Lulz Security Statement to the FBI

#196

Post by baltcode » Thu, Jul 21, 2011, 9:36 PM UTC

fleitz wrote: post #186

jackpirate wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tangent warning: The most successful satire is indistinguishable from the real thing. Either way, I tip my hat.

Most frightening is how the DPRK regards their neighbors to the south and how they have militarized their border to prevent the free flow of people. To start a war with another country, draw a line in the sand, militarize it and then imprison people because they want cross a line in the sand to be repatriated with their families is the mark of a very totalitarian regime. If it weren't for their military I don't think…

You know what is really funny about this? It applies (mostly) to any country I can think of.

Re: Anonymous & Lulz Security Statement to the FBI

#197

Post by gdcbyers » Thu, Jul 21, 2011, 9:42 PM UTC

wnight wrote: post #168

gdcbyers wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please clarify this statement. Are you suggesting that my distain for LulzSec and its methods are some how the result of brain washing or extreme trama? And if "We the people" are the Sheriff in this little Robin Hood adventure, who are the poor villagers Robin is trying to help? What a ridiculous reply. Or are we just naming random psychological phenomenon? If thats the case, I choose http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gr…

> Are you suggesting that my distain for LulzSec and its methods are some how the result of brain washing or extreme trama? Yes. Absolutely. If such an organization did not exist, such that you weren't conditioned to accept their abuses, you would be appropriately horrified to hear about the abuses that are currently being committed. By exposing you to ridiculous premises like a color-coded terror threat level and li…

This response reeks of inaccurate presumptions about my beliefs, options and reasoning. Not to mention, you aren't even the guy I was replying to. But I will respond none the less because I believe in open conversation.

>That you fixate on minor website inconvenience to these organizations ("vandalism") while ignoring the scale of the injustices going on shows you're hardly able to even think ill of these organizations.

That you fixate on minor website inconveniences to these organizations ("vandalism") and parade them around like some kind of political message or instrument of change shows just how biases you are. Please give me one piece of evidence (hell, I'll even take conjecture) that these acts of "vandalism" are even related to the "horrifying" injustices the big bad government and security forces commit. How have they helped your cause? Have they stopped a single injustice? Or raised awareness for a reputable cause (besides them selves)?

I think not.

If you want to talk about "horrifying abuses" by the government "with its boot on my neck" then lets talk about that. What does LulzSec have to do with it? Parading them around as heros of a cause they clearly have little concern for and even less connection to only serves to weaken your position on a legitimate issue, government abuse.

Re: Anonymous & Lulz Security Statement to the FBI

#198

Post by gdcbyers » Thu, Jul 21, 2011, 9:50 PM UTC

burgerbrain wrote: post #195

gdcbyers wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So in this little metaphor, the people play the role of the hostages, the government plays the role of the kidnappers (lawless criminals) and LulzSec play the role of the government (the good guys trying to save you) Interesting. Confusing, but interesting. > Think about it, how many people in this world have actually signed up to be dominated by their government? No one is making any such claims. Your claim appears…

"So in this little metaphor, the people play the role of the hostages, the government plays the role of the kidnappers (lawless criminals) and LulzSec play the role of the government (the good guys trying to save you) Interesting. Confusing, but interesting." Yes, you do seem rather confused. "you appear to be mistakenly thinking that LulzSec is her to protect you" I am under no such illusion. However , I do recogniz…

So the abuses LulzSec perpetrates are acceptable because they aren't as powerful as the big bad evil government? Or because they appear to hate the government as much as you?

I also could not help but notice you ignored my other points and questions, so ill sum it up.

How has anything LulzSec done been constructive to the cause you claim they represent?

Re: Anonymous & Lulz Security Statement to the FBI

#199

Post by mypov » Thu, Jul 21, 2011, 9:55 PM UTC

jxcole wrote: post #125

Why does Anonymous focus so much on attacking the US government (and related rich democratic countries) when it could instead be focused on fighting the governments that are actually oppressive? Nothing the US has ever done, even at it's most oppressive, could ever compare to what North Korea does to it's own citizen's on a regular basis. I would probably be much more sympathetic towards their cause if they focused m…

The only hope for this planet is for its supposedly advanced nations to actually adhere to their foundational practices and shine a path to modern living for the rest of the world.

When these same are governed by a thinly disguised global oligarchy that increasingly looks like a forom of internationalist neo-feudalism and where these same dukes and what not invade and kill abroad in the name of the painfully obviously disregarded principles and stated ideals, we as a are going to continue to face insecurity and injustice as a systemic outcome of our duplicitous selves.

Re: Anonymous & Lulz Security Statement to the FBI

#200

Post by rjbond3rd » Thu, Jul 21, 2011, 9:56 PM UTC

tshs33 wrote: post #160

rdtsc wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why does Anonymous focus so much on attacking the US government ... when it could instead be focused on fighting the governments that are actually oppressive? You probably didn't, but I think many people will see an obvious contradiction in that statement. > Nothing the US has ever done, even at it's most oppressive However North Korea is not advertising itself around the world and taken seriously as a bastion of f…

Reading your comment is just depressing and is a prime example of the Dunning Kruger effect. I have a PhD in economics. No other country has been responsible for lifting more people out of poverty than the U.S. For instance, China and India are eradicating poverty at record levels because of the open borders for trade with the U.S. The Four Asian Tigers became developed nations primarily through trade with the U.S. I…

Are you moving to Iraq? If not, why?