Earlier quoted context omitted.
I know next to nothing about you, but you are probably an ignorant gossipmonger.
I don't understand the hate here. I meant threatening in a good way, to financial/state power.
[deleted]
War on Anonymous: British Spies Attacked Hackers, Snowden Docs Show
41–50 of 71 posts
Re: War on Anonymous: British Spies Attacked Hackers, Snowden Docs Show
#42You have to wonder, do the GCHQ agents involved really think Anonymous is worth their time? Are the people actually carrying out these attacks convinced that their efforts are better spent on that than identifying and infiltrating terrorist networks? I get spying. I get compromising and penetrating the networks of rival countries. I even get economic espionage, in the same way that I understand why the US Marines ove…
At the time, there appeared to be a concerted attack on the electronic infrastructure of the economy, which Anonymous was claiming responsibility for. It seems perfectly justified to me that GCHQ was attempting to disrupt those attacks and identify the perpetrators.
Mediatised attack. Their actions are at much smaller scale than any other criminal organization that operates in the shadows (hacking is more profitable than the drug market).
Anonymous is a threat not because of their actions but because they challenge the established powers.
Re: War on Anonymous: British Spies Attacked Hackers, Snowden Docs Show
#43You have to wonder, do the GCHQ agents involved really think Anonymous is worth their time? Are the people actually carrying out these attacks convinced that their efforts are better spent on that than identifying and infiltrating terrorist networks? I get spying. I get compromising and penetrating the networks of rival countries. I even get economic espionage, in the same way that I understand why the US Marines ove…
Anonymous is worth their time?
Yes, in the sense that hacker groups can harm a country more than other country with non digital weapons.
We are living exciting times moving to a new balance of forces.
Re: War on Anonymous: British Spies Attacked Hackers, Snowden Docs Show
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly money must be taken out of politics, i.e.: No more lobbying (= legalized corruption). But how are you going to do that when rich people are already in power and are using their financial dominance to protect their monopoly of power?
By eliminating taxation (governments can simply print the tax money they need according to a fixed formula against the national GDP), and then using computers, allow citizens to directly apportion their equal portion of the taxes to the causes they think are worthy, updated on a regular basis (I suggest daily so that the populace can respond quickly to things like natural disasters). A simple approach would be to let…
Certainly an idea that should be discussed in the mass media. (I'm not counting on US mass media, though, for some time to come.)
In other words, it can be summed up as 1 way to make democracy more direct. (The problem is, Washington with its ever-increasing level of corruption, is never going to want a more direct democracy.)
Re: War on Anonymous: British Spies Attacked Hackers, Snowden Docs Show
#45I would like to see more information on the botnet were or are operating. Is it fully theirs or did they rent it? If they rented it, how and from whom? If it is fully theirs, what did it consist of? Did they rent a bunch of servers, or did they use a collection of residential connections? Were these connections used with the consent of their owners, or did the GCHQ hack them? If there was consent, who gave it to them? ISPs?
The legality of this is interesting. I suppose it takes a peculiar legal structure to operate a botnet lawfully.
Re: War on Anonymous: British Spies Attacked Hackers, Snowden Docs Show
#46[deleted]
Re: War on Anonymous: British Spies Attacked Hackers, Snowden Docs Show
#47Has anyone ever done a kickstarter to bribe government employees to whistleblow on other government employees?
Re: War on Anonymous: British Spies Attacked Hackers, Snowden Docs Show
#48You have to wonder, do the GCHQ agents involved really think Anonymous is worth their time? Are the people actually carrying out these attacks convinced that their efforts are better spent on that than identifying and infiltrating terrorist networks? I get spying. I get compromising and penetrating the networks of rival countries. I even get economic espionage, in the same way that I understand why the US Marines ove…
I think it works like this:
- A government agency or government contractor notes a new threat to the status quo
- Question: Can we use technology to track, prevent, hinder or prosecute?
- If answer is 'yes' then invest large sums of public money to effect the plan
- If answer is 'maybe' then invest large sums of public money * 10 to evaluate and effect the plan
- If answer is 'no' then invest large sums of public money * 100 to evaluate and attempt and evaluate multiple possible solutions.
Therefore I believe that the underlying cause is money. Agencies and more often than not, third party companies who are trying to make a profit from government agencies are out there coming up with new ways to oppress the public. As a result the public fights back against the oppression. They can then be targetted as dissidents and the cycle ups a beat and continues round the merry-go-round. The sums of money getting higher and higher each time.
Invent the problem, sell the solution, profit, repeat.
It somewhat reminds me of the old idea that as a department (either of a private company or government) you should never ask for a new yearly budget lower than the year before. You always ask for more.
Re: War on Anonymous: British Spies Attacked Hackers, Snowden Docs Show
#49You have to wonder, do the GCHQ agents involved really think Anonymous is worth their time? Are the people actually carrying out these attacks convinced that their efforts are better spent on that than identifying and infiltrating terrorist networks? I get spying. I get compromising and penetrating the networks of rival countries. I even get economic espionage, in the same way that I understand why the US Marines ove…
do the GCHQ agents involved really think Anonymous is worth their time
Anonymous are political agitators, of course they think that.
We're constantly inculcated with notions of spy agencies as supremely powerful, supremely competent cloak-and-dagger organizations that work in the shadows to guide world events. But this just makes them look like bratty kids with a rich uncle.
Self-important assholes that feel justified in being the biggest hardass possible towards anybody that rocks the boat? Sadly this is nothing new.
Re: War on Anonymous: British Spies Attacked Hackers, Snowden Docs Show
#50You have to wonder, do the GCHQ agents involved really think Anonymous is worth their time? Are the people actually carrying out these attacks convinced that their efforts are better spent on that than identifying and infiltrating terrorist networks? I get spying. I get compromising and penetrating the networks of rival countries. I even get economic espionage, in the same way that I understand why the US Marines ove…
Don't Anonymous want to be treated as an existential threat? The whole "we are legion" rhetoric leaves little doubt on that.