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

Attack Is Suspected as North Korean Internet Collapses

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 205 posts

Re: Attack Is Suspected as North Korean Internet Collapses

#191

Post by darkstar999 »

BHSPitMonkey wrote: post #149
n09n wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is it with old people and their complete inability to understand Anonymous? If you did that, you wouldn't be acting like "them", you would be part of Anonymous.

That's the entire point. Anyone attributing an action to "them" inherently wrong in doing so. "Because Anonymous has no leadership, no action can be attributed to the membership as a whole. Parmy Olson and others have criticized media coverage that presents the group as well-organized or homogeneous." ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anonymous_%28group%29 )

Yes, that is my point.

Re: Attack Is Suspected as North Korean Internet Collapses

#192

Post by darkstar999 »

n09n wrote: post #177
BHSPitMonkey wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the entire point. Anyone attributing an action to "them" inherently wrong in doing so. "Because Anonymous has no leadership, no action can be attributed to the membership as a whole. Parmy Olson and others have criticized media coverage that presents the group as well-organized or homogeneous." ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anonymous_%28group%29 )

That quote and the wikipedia article it comes from are both misguided because they still describe Anonymous as a group.

That's partially my point.

However, when you do something under the name "Anonymous" like the twitter account did, you are doing it as Anonymous, the "loosely defined group".

Otherwise why would you call yourself Anonymous?

I am Anonymous right now. I am legion.

Re: Attack Is Suspected as North Korean Internet Collapses

#193

Post by SEJeff »

rtpg wrote: post #166
n09n wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is it with old people and their complete inability to understand Anonymous? If you did that, you wouldn't be acting like "them", you would be part of Anonymous.

the thing I don't get is it's literally in their name, that this is not a group but just some random people on the internet. The idea that it's one group just comes from how 4chan talks about anonymous people with slight lingo, making it sound like a group from an outsider.

If you want to be specific about what most of the internet refers to as 'Anonymous', it is /b/ on 4chan. /b/ and their very odd lingo is relatively well organized, but anonymous amongst eachother. Collectively, they are what the majority of people refer to as the 'hacker collective anonymous'. They also refer to themselves as btards look it up on urbandictionary or (NSFW) encyclopedia dramatica to learn more.

Re: Attack Is Suspected as North Korean Internet Collapses

#194

Post by Crito »

crdoconnor wrote: post #184
Crito wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There seems that people living under regimes with limited freedom often fail to comprehend that people living in other countries might produce something without the explicit approval of their government. To the North Koreans, it is beyond comprehension that people living in the US made something, rather than the US government making it. To them, if Americans made it, that means America made it. This misunderstanding…

That's incredibly naive. The likelihood of a Hollywood corporation releasing a North Korean movie that made any endorsements of the country is virtually nil. It is structurally impossible. That is in part thanks to the extremely blurred distinction between US corporations and the state. If North Korea suddenly became a US ally, though, it would happen eventually. Hollywood has often been a front for US policymakers t…

> "The likelihood of a Hollywood corporation releasing a North Korean movie that made any endorsements of the country is virtually nil. It is structurally impossible."

The likelihood of Hollywood releasing a movie that praises the Nazis is virtually nil, but that has fuck-all to do with "blurred distinctions" between Hollywood and the US Government.

Re: Attack Is Suspected as North Korean Internet Collapses

#195

Post by n09n »

darkstar999 wrote: post #192
n09n wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That quote and the wikipedia article it comes from are both misguided because they still describe Anonymous as a group.

That's partially my point. However, when you do something under the name "Anonymous" like the twitter account did, you are doing it as Anonymous, the "loosely defined group". Otherwise why would you call yourself Anonymous? I am Anonymous right now. I am legion.

It's a loosely defined group only in the sense that some people incorrectly define it as a group.

Re: Attack Is Suspected as North Korean Internet Collapses

#196

Post by n09n »

darkstar999 wrote: post #190
n09n wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is it with old people and their complete inability to understand Anonymous? If you did that, you wouldn't be acting like "them", you would be part of Anonymous.

> old people Really? Age has anything to do with this? "What's with black people and their complete inability..."

No, not really. I said it for the same reason racists might use your example. To demean that group and to prime people who don't identify with that group to look down on the behavior.

Re: Attack Is Suspected as North Korean Internet Collapses

#197

Post by crdoconnor »

Crito wrote: post #194
crdoconnor wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's incredibly naive. The likelihood of a Hollywood corporation releasing a North Korean movie that made any endorsements of the country is virtually nil. It is structurally impossible. That is in part thanks to the extremely blurred distinction between US corporations and the state. If North Korea suddenly became a US ally, though, it would happen eventually. Hollywood has often been a front for US policymakers t…

> "The likelihood of a Hollywood corporation releasing a North Korean movie that made any endorsements of the country is virtually nil. It is structurally impossible." The likelihood of Hollywood releasing a movie that praises the Nazis is virtually nil, but that has fuck-all to do with "blurred distinctions" between Hollywood and the US Government.

Before the US entered the war it actually wouldn't have been all that unlikely. They had plenty of supporters. Only after did it become an impossibility.

And yes, that was everything to do with the US government.

Re: Attack Is Suspected as North Korean Internet Collapses

#198

Post by duaneb »

cbd1984 wrote: post #180
duaneb wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or it could be an actual false flag operation by the US to instigate something.... Something is very weird about their attitude towards north korea regarding this break in.

You know, it can't be a false flag until there's actually a flag. Has anyone claimed responsibility for doing this yet?

Well, the US government appears to be throwing its weight behind the "North Korea" idea without a whole lot of direct evidence.

Re: Attack Is Suspected as North Korean Internet Collapses

#199

Post by duaneb »

peteretep wrote: post #176
bencollier49 wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

C) The Iraq War WMD-dossier-fairy told them.

Pretty sure they recently confirmed a great deal of WMD was found in Iraq... [1] http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/uranium-shipped-to-montreal-fro... [2] http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/10/14/world/middleea...

Well, I'm glad we waited until we got confirmation before making any foolish decisions.

Re: Attack Is Suspected as North Korean Internet Collapses

#200

Post by duaneb »

n09n wrote: post #177
BHSPitMonkey wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the entire point. Anyone attributing an action to "them" inherently wrong in doing so. "Because Anonymous has no leadership, no action can be attributed to the membership as a whole. Parmy Olson and others have criticized media coverage that presents the group as well-organized or homogeneous." ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anonymous_%28group%29 )

That quote and the wikipedia article it comes from are both misguided because they still describe Anonymous as a group.

Ok, lemme define the group:

Anonymous: the group of people who identify themselves as part of the group "Anonymous".

Post reply on HN