Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Anonymous Austria leaks 2.8 GB Scientology Emails

pastebin.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 156 posts

Re: Anonymous Austria leaks 2.8 GB Scientology Emails

#101

Post by anthonyb »

javajosh wrote: post #51
dfc wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Au contraire? Respectfully, in my opinion sitting back and hoping someone else has the motivation to be inquisitive/curious is counter to the spirit of HN. Furthermore as others have pointed out (as well as myself in another thread) CoS has deep pockets and I imagine that serves as a decent motivation for big media to not publish the incident.

I think the underlying message here is that Scientology is a lot more interesting to you than it is to me! Honestly, I care about global warming a lot more and yet I didn't take much time to sift through the "Climategate" emails in detail[1]. I also care about Linux security, and yet I've not done an audit of the kernel I'm currently running. I also care about the federal tax code, and have certainly not taken the ti…

So you're disgusted / "surprised and disappointed" at the reaction to the CRU emails, and yet you still trust other people to filter your news for you?

This is why you need to inform yourself about what's going on in the world. At least look at things with a critical eye, and not just throw up your hands and say "Oh well, the journalists will filter the important bits for me."

Re: Anonymous Austria leaks 2.8 GB Scientology Emails

#102

Post by anthonyb »

dfc wrote: post #30
mikescar wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing complex about this--it's a time-saving measure. Obviously there will be plenty of people sifting through this data, and we are free to rely on them to do so. You don't have to do everything yourself and find every data problem interesting to keep within the 'spirit of HN'.

It has nothing to do with finding everything interesting. I was speaking about the "if there is ever something interesting , the journalists will investigate/sum it up for me" line of reasoning. And whats with the "we are free" language, its not a cable news show. When did I ever say that anyone lacked the liberty to do something?

Well, technically you are free to ignore the Scientologists...

up until they overthrow the government and appoint L. Ron's disembodied head as ruler for life.

Re: Anonymous Austria leaks 2.8 GB Scientology Emails

#103

Post by saraid216 »

StavrosK wrote: post #91
saraid216 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most categories in sociology are blurry, because human beings are blurry things. This may help: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociological_classifications_of...

That's very interesting, thanks. It seems to treat the classifications as a timeline of a religion (from birth/cult to establishment/religion), and not by control or whatnot...

If you click through to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_religious_movement#Charisma... , it goes into some detail that doesn't explicitly talk about control, but if you're familiar with summaries of psychology literature, it's stated pretty baldly.

You can also think of it in terms of 1 Corinthians 13:11. Maturity, and the turning of generations, does something to an organization. Christianity began as an apocalypse cult, after all, promising hope of the afterlife for the downtrodden; it wasn't until Constantine was converted that it started to learn how to be a state religion; and not until Martin Luther and Henry VII did it learn to be just a religion. (The exile into Babylon and the dissolution of the Caliphate had similar effects on Judaism and Islam.)

In other words, they were forced to let go of their control simply because of historical circumstance. Straight through World War 2, the Vatican continued to exert a very strong influence on European nations... because the Pope was everyone's ambassador, even if he could no longer threaten excommunication with meaningful clout.

Scientology has not had these experiences. It is young and not officially descended from any known religion, so "sect" would be an incorrect term except in cases where you consider the entire whole of Judaism or Christianity a sect. It is dominated by personality cults, from the original of L. Ron Hubbard to its scheme of hooking celebrities to be spokespersons.

Re: Anonymous Austria leaks 2.8 GB Scientology Emails

#104

Post by Falling3 »

StavrosK wrote: post #69
ma2rten wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Scientology is not regarded a religion everywhere. In Germany it is considered a cult instead and it is even on a government watchlist. As students we were warned about it in school. EDIT: I was just looking at Scientology's (English) Wikipedia page and came across this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Scientology_warning_leafle... . I though it would illustrate my point. Those are three government-issued leaflets w…

"Cult" just means "a religion I don't like".

Absolutely not. I don't really like any religions, but cult is still a special distinction.

Re: Anonymous Austria leaks 2.8 GB Scientology Emails

#105

Post by roguecoder »

Spooky23 wrote: post #70
StavrosK wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Cult" just means "a religion I don't like".

Usually people distinguish a cult from a mainstream religion based on the level of control that the movement exerts over its members.

And whether they use that control to induce their members to perform illegal acts or provide personally-harmfully large amounts of money to the church.

Re: Anonymous Austria leaks 2.8 GB Scientology Emails

#106

Post by uptown »

lobster_johnson wrote: post #95
uptown wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"But most religiour organization -- generally speaking -- genuinely have their members' best interests at heart." I think that's highly dependent on whether you believe what's being preached. There's countless examples of mainstream religions exploiting their power for financial and organizational gain at the expense of individual followers. From a financial standpoint, just take a look at the Vatican City as an exam…

Apparently you missed my point. Most religious organizations have elements of corruption, sure, but Scientology as an organization is built to exploit its members by design .

I got your point. But again ... it depends what you believe. For argument's sake, let's assume there's no such thing as God -- then the entire basis for every religion is fraudulent and perpetuates falsehoods resulting in the manipulation of a community of people to think, act, tithe, and multiply according to the rules of that church. If all faiths happen to be incorrect, then aren't they guilty of the same sin ... perpetuating a fictional promise and manipulating a community (whether they know they're doing it or not) in an exploitive way? Or is it less bad because there's potentially a perceived positive effect on the individuals and the community?

Look, I realize debating religion online is pretty futile, and I'm no fan of Scientology or any other religion for that matter. I do get what your saying. I also have no idea what your religious views are ... but I've had a ton of debates where people seem to be blinded by how they were brought up and can only see outward from the religious views they hold as the truth. I suppose somebody could probably make that same case for my perspective on things. Personally, I think religion is introduced way before most people have the mental capacity to comprehend what's being thrust upon them, and I wonder what the religious landscape would look like if it were the kind of thing people first-experienced later on in life.

Re: Anonymous Austria leaks 2.8 GB Scientology Emails

#107

Post by grandalf »

lobster_johnson wrote: post #72
grandalf wrote: post #64

If you think Scientology is "weirder" than mainstream religions, it's b/c you are buying into the propaganda sponsored by its competitors.

The issue people have with Scientology is not that it's "weird". It's that they are an organization created expressly as a kind of pyramid scheme designed to funnel money from its clueless members to its corrupt leaders, and that they will go great (and highly immoral) lengths to safeguard the structure of the organization. All the weirdness -- the bogus science, the alien mythology, the extreme secrecy and protectiv…

Sure, all religions are "weird". But most religious organizations -- generally speaking -- genuinely have their members' best interests at heart. Scientology has no such concerns.

I very much do not believe that is the case at all. I find it fairly absurd to believe it possible to accurately generalize about the members of any large organization in that manner. There are doubtless some very good people and some very bad people who are members of nearly any group, including religions.

Re: Anonymous Austria leaks 2.8 GB Scientology Emails

#108

Post by Falling3 »

sakopov wrote: post #90

It's illegal to distribute confidential information of another group . This isn't about democrats or republicans. We're not talking about a group of people here. We're talking about a religion . If a religion has "secrets" which cannot be shared among believers and non-believers than it's not a religion - it's a sect.

I think you mean cult.

Re: Anonymous Austria leaks 2.8 GB Scientology Emails

#109

Post by tptacek »

MultiRRomero wrote: post #20

Am I the only one who doesn't find this all that positive? I already think scientology is bad/evil/dangerous, and I think that illegally getting access to their secrets might make the opposition (us) look worse in the public eye. Everybody has dirty secrets, both sides, and it's a bit low to go after the other side's private emails. It'd be much easier to fight/debate against their public image, which is easy enough,…

You're not the only one. The "hacktivism" trend is not going to work out the way Internet activists want it to; instead, it's just going to associate legitimate advocacy with criminality (and, for what it's worth: advocating against a criminal conspiracy wearing the garb of a religion is a legit target for adversary).

What exactly is gained by targeting an organization already famously good at playing the victim game with pointlessly malicious Internet pranks? Nothing.

Re: Anonymous Austria leaks 2.8 GB Scientology Emails

#110

Post by tptacek »

rondon1 wrote: post #60
evertonfuller wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right with you. This is illegal, plain and simple. Acts like this should not be celebrated. No matter if it's against the 'bad' guys.

Gay Marriage is also illegal in many places, but that doesn't make it wrong.

Oh. I see. We have unjust laws, therefore, everyone should be entitled to use coercion to enforce their personal morals and ethics.

Good plan. What could possibly go wrong with it? After all, everyone capable of coercing us of anything must share our morals and ethics.

Post reply on HN