How can we take it back?

[Kgal]

I wish anonymous had followed through with their threat against the TX cop(s) involved with Sandra Bland.

 

[Y0u]

I have another brilliant, and obvious in hindsight, suggestion for making the world a better place: a space alien for every man, woman, and child.

 

[sprinkles]

I wish anonymous had followed through with their threat against the TX cop(s) involved with Sandra Bland.

anonymous is quickly becoming a joke. Mainly because they became a fad all of a sudden and now everyone wants to be them and random people make claims that they never back up because there's no real gauge for authenticity anymore.

Edit:
Well maybe they're not entirely a joke yet but there's been a lot of threats which never materialize, mainly because of people milking the image for attention. It's regrettably annoying.

 

[Skarekrow]

anonymous is quickly becoming a joke. Mainly because they became a fad all of a sudden and now everyone wants to be them and random people make claims that they never back up because there's no real gauge for authenticity anymore.

Edit:
Well maybe they're not entirely a joke yet but there's been a lot of threats which never materialize, mainly because of people milking the image for attention. It's regrettably annoying.

I agree…I do hope that the threat of unmasking the clan members happens though…I wonder how many are cops and shit?

 

[Wyote]

Anon is sort of irrelevant as a "hacker" group, but it is embedded in our culture as an agent of change. People should be more interested in Lizard Squad or whatever other group pops up in the near future. Times are changing in the cyber world.

 

[Skarekrow]

Anon is sort of irrelevant as a "hacker" group, but it is embedded in our culture as an agent of change. People should be more interested in Lizard Squad or whatever other group pops up in the near future. Times are changing in the cyber world.

Honestly, a real hacker group that is fighting for social change has nothing to gain by making themselves known.
I’m sure there are some groups no one even knows about except for the NSA and shit.
I’m curious who the mouthpiece for Anonymous actually is?
Who writes their material and produces the videos?
Is it the same guy/group every time or are there rouge Anonymous groups?

 

[Kgal]

Anon is sort of irrelevant as a "hacker" group, but it is embedded in our culture as an agent of change. People should be more interested in Lizard Squad or whatever other group pops up in the near future. Times are changing in the cyber world.

Are you talking about these guys? If so...could you reframe this for me in dumbed downed language for the lay person....ahh...that would be me. :tongue:
Why would they want to disrupt gaming services?


Lizard Squad is a black hat hacking group, mainly known for their claims of distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks[SUP][1][/SUP] primarily to disrupt gaming-related services.

On September 3, 2014, Lizard Squad seemingly announced that it had disbanded[SUP][2][/SUP] only to return later on, claiming responsibility for a variety of attacks on prominent websites. The organisation at one point participated in the Darkode hacking forums and shared hosting with them.[SUP][3][/SUP][SUP][4][/SUP]

 

[the]

How do we take it back...

Well you first have to start by specifically naming the future victims. You also need to have a goal in sight. Then you assess where you are now vs where you want to be and create way points to guide you on your way to peaceful terrorism.

 

[Wyote]

@Skarekrow

Sabu, Commander X, Aendy, Barret Brown and others were among the core group that instigated a lot of things surrounding Anon initially. As of now, Anon is no longer centralized. There are stronger pockets of it all over the world, but there hasn't been unification as solid since 2008. Lots of Anons were involved in the wall street protests, but probably the majority of them were not hacktivists, just Anon supporters.

Usually if a group pulls off something big, they'll want to make themselves known, so the groups themselves are easy to find but the members less so (unless they're dumb of course). The media doesn't report it though. It's like gang violence, none of it is reported unless something of significant note occurs.

@Kgal

There are lots of reasons to attack particular organizations. Whether it's because they wanted to take down an evil conglomerate or had some specific issues with how the company is running I can't say, it was probably slightly varied reasoning for all involved. Lizard Squad themselves claimed it was to "raise awareness" of exploits they found but I'm sure they were just mad at the companies for whatever reasons. Could just be that they are PC gamers and don't like consoles. Like I said, varying reasons.

DDOS attacks are the simplest attacks to pull off and so they have become the go to method for any sort of trolling really. Basically you just get a bunch of people together and overload a website.

 

[the]

"It was the Baby Boomer generation who got us in this mess, who created the national debt, who spend more money on warmongering than any other country in the world"

OP, why is this relevant? How are you going to hold an entire generation responsible for this? Why is placing the blame on them helpful?

 

[Skarekrow]

"It was the Baby Boomer generation who got us in this mess, who created the national debt, who spend more money on warmongering than any other country in the world"

OP, why is this relevant? How are you going to hold an entire generation responsible for this? Why is placing the blame on them helpful?

I stand by what I said when you take the whole thing I wrote into context, it was their generation that dismantled the “New Deal” on both sides of the isle.
It’s historically accurate that I state who was in power at the time.
I don’t place blame on the whole generation, part of which my own parents are/were.
It is also contextually fair to report that their generation enjoyed growing up at a time in America where we saw the most growth and money spent on social programs enabling them to have basically free to very cheap college education, well-paying jobs, etc…and then it was the same generation that dismantled all the programs they benefitted from when they came to power in the name of profits under the guise of “free market” “privatization” bullshit.
If the Quakers were the one’s calling the shots at the time I would have listed them.

 

[the]

I stand by what I said when you take the whole thing I wrote into context, it was their generation that dismantled the “New Deal” on both sides of the isle.
It’s historically accurate that I state who was in power at the time.
I don’t place blame on the whole generation, part of which my own parents are/were.
It is also contextually fair to report that their generation enjoyed growing up at a time in America where we saw the most growth and money spent on social programs enabling them to have basically free to very cheap college education, well-paying jobs, etc…and then it was the same generation that dismantled all the programs they benefitted from when they came to power in the name of profits under the guise of “free market” “privatization” bullshit.
If the Quakers were the one’s calling the shots at the time I would have listed them.

I have no argument that people who were a part of that generation are responsible, how is this information helpful? If it is not helpful, is it detrimental to tell an entire generation that they screwed over their kids?

 

[ImaginaryBloke]

I have no argument that people who were a part of that generation are responsible, how is this information helpful? If it is not helpful, is it detrimental to tell an entire generation that they screwed over their kids?

People who voted for Ronald "Ronnie" Reagan had no idea that they were voting for the return of 19th century corruption and gangster capitalism back in 1980.

These days, voting districts are gerrymandered to ensure that the current incumbent wins. And their economic sponsors - the 0.1% - want a return for their "investment" when betting for political candidates. The Citizens United ruling open the flood gates of money for political advertising.

'Faux' News tell people what to think and how to vote, just like in '1984'. The Fairness Doctrine ensured that issues and news in the media were presented in a balanced manner. It was eliminated in 1987.

Criminal convictions make it impossible for some people to vote and the USA has the highest incarceration rate in the entire world. There are many indirect ways of ensuring that the 'wrong' people do not or cannot vote, which lovers the voting rate.

 

[the]

People who voted for Ronald "Ronnie" Reagan had no idea that they were voting for the return of 19th century corruption and gangster capitalism back in 1980.

These days, voting districts are gerrymandered to ensure that the current incumbent wins. And their economic sponsors - the 0.1% - want a return for their "investment" when betting for political candidates. The Citizens United ruling open the flood gates of money for political advertising.

'Faux' News tell people what to think and how to vote, just like in '1984'. The Fairness Doctrine ensured that issues and news in the media were presented in a balanced manner. It was eliminated in 1987.

Criminal convictions make it impossible for some people to vote and the USA has the highest incarceration rate in the entire world. There are many indirect ways of ensuring that the 'wrong' people do not or cannot vote, which lovers the voting rate.

Thats nice... And does not answer any of the questions I asked. Why did you quote me?

 

[Skarekrow]

I have no argument that people who were a part of that generation are responsible, how is this information helpful? If it is not helpful, is it detrimental to tell an entire generation that they screwed over their kids?

It is helpful in the same way any history is helpful…it helps us not make the same mistakes twice hopefully.
There were those who clearly understood what they were doing was going to be detrimental to those under them…like trickle down economics is now an oxymoronic idea.
Those in that generation were swindled for the most part, some people really thought that Reaganomics would raise all boats, and some were wildly successful because of those policies.
There is some generational blame that should be placed upon them, such as allowing our higher educational system to put people in debt for the rest of the lives….or not speaking up when the government tapped social security (and still does) back in the 80’s.
In many, many ways, the bulk of that generation, on purpose or not, allowed shit like banks and investment houses to be one entity where that was illegal before…and it was all done in the name of greed.
Just like the movie ‘Wall Street’, it was a perfect reflection of the mentality that anyone could get rich, and the more you had the better of a person you were.
This permeated my childhood with constant commercial bombardments on TV that continues to this day, designed to make you scared and feel insecure or unworthy.
Like I said, I don’t blame everyone…it was the times.
I still say it’s historically accurate to say that these detrimental changes to the US were made under the watch of that generation.
I could post link upon link to back that up…you’ve now taken one line out of context and expanded upon it because why?
Do you think that it is not so?
Did I sit there and curse the baby-boomers to hell?

 

[Kgal]

People who voted for Ronald "Ronnie" Reagan had no idea that they were voting for the return of 19th century corruption and gangster capitalism back in 1980.

These days, voting districts are gerrymandered to ensure that the current incumbent wins. And their economic sponsors - the 0.1% - want a return for their "investment" when betting for political candidates. The Citizens United ruling open the flood gates of money for political advertising.

'Faux' News tell people what to think and how to vote, just like in '1984'. The Fairness Doctrine ensured that issues and news in the media were presented in a balanced manner. It was eliminated in 1987.

Criminal convictions make it impossible for some people to vote and the USA has the highest incarceration rate in the entire world. There are many indirect ways of ensuring that the 'wrong' people do not or cannot vote, which lovers the voting rate.

What a wonderful thing to say!!!

It's true. I had no idea who or what I was voting for when I clicked the box next to Reagan's name...and I did my "homeowork" too. I felt guilt for a long time....

Now I know the deck was stacked against us all along.

 

[ImaginaryBloke]

I have no argument that people who were a part of that generation are responsible, how is this information helpful? If it is not helpful, is it detrimental to tell an entire generation that they screwed over their kids?

Thats nice... And does not answer any of the questions I asked. Why did you quote me?

I was trying to answer the question of whether the baby-boomer generation was 'responsible' for political changes following the election of Ronald Reagan.

Did they have all the information necessary to make a responsible and sensible choice in the 1980 US presidential election and subsequent elections? Was there a hidden or semi-hidden agenda?

Economic and social inequality has rocketed since then. It is back to the level of the 1920's.



Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States

Please correct me if I am wrong regarding what you were trying to express in your question to S.

 

[the]

It is helpful in the same way any history is helpful…it helps us not make the same mistakes twice hopefully.
There were those who clearly understood what they were doing was going to be detrimental to those under them…like trickle down economics is now an oxymoronic idea.
Those in that generation were swindled for the most part, some people really thought that Reaganomics would raise all boats, and some were wildly successful because of those policies.
There is some generational blame that should be placed upon them, such as allowing our higher educational system to put people in debt for the rest of the lives….or not speaking up when the government tapped social security (and still does) back in the 80’s.
In many, many ways, the bulk of that generation, on purpose or not, allowed shit like banks and investment houses to be one entity where that was illegal before…and it was all done in the name of greed.
Just like the movie ‘Wall Street’, it was a perfect reflection of the mentality that anyone could get rich, and the more you had the better of a person you were.
This permeated my childhood with constant commercial bombardments on TV that continues to this day, designed to make you scared and feel insecure or unworthy.
Like I said, I don’t blame everyone…it was the times.
I still say it’s historically accurate to say that these detrimental changes to the US were made under the watch of that generation.
I could post link upon link to back that up…you’ve now taken one line out of context and expanded upon it because why?
Do you think that it is not so?
Did I sit there and curse the baby-boomers to hell?

as you may recall, I didn't disagree with the historical accuracy. It's just when I read these things over and over and do not see any action taken on the subject it becomes nothing more than blame shifting.

 

[ImaginaryBloke]

What a wonderful thing to say!!!

It's true. I had no idea who or what I was voting for when I clicked the box next to Reagan's name...and I did my "homeowork" too. I felt guilt for a long time....

Now I know the deck was stacked against us all along.

Thanks [MENTION=2578]Kgal[/MENTION]! :yo:

Ronnie was an actor and natural PR performer. He knew how to connect with people.

I am an ex-Friedmanite, so I also had a lot of "homework" to do. I fell out with neoliberalism after the second Iraq war.

But I did never really understand "how things work". INTPs are not street-smart. But somehow Ayn Rand did not appeal to me when I was a teenager in the 1990's. I was not completely helpless.

What saved me was reading about psychopaths. I read two books about the subject. That explains the behavior of Ayn Rand followers, and how business and politics works in the USA. It is also explains movie characters such as Gordon Gekko. (Not every businessman or right-wing politician is a psychopath, but many are on the psycopathic spectrum.)

And a big thanks to the NY Times. More exactly, there are street-smart people in the commentariat who tell people how the big world really works. :w:

The Economist is a right-wing magazine, but you can find similar comments that those in NYT if you spend some time looking.

 

[ImaginaryBloke]

How do we take it back...

Well you first have to start by specifically naming the future victims. You also need to have a goal in sight. Then you assess where you are now vs where you want to be and create way points to guide you on your way to peaceful terrorism.

as you may recall, I didn't disagree with the historical accuracy. It's just when I read these things over and over and do not see any action taken on the subject it becomes nothing more than blame shifting.

Sometimes the cognitive processes get in the way of communication and understanding other people. I see that you are an INTJ.

Te is about breaking a problem down into smaller parts and then try to solve each subproblem. It is also about taking action to do things.

Ti is about understanding how things work. I think that [MENTION=5045]Skarekrow[/MENTION]'s blog is an attempt for himself to record and process information. (It is disorganized and impossible to follow subthreads, but that is none of my business.)

And then there is the Fe side to inform people and attract a crowd.

I learnt all of this on http://www.intjforum.com and I would never understand it otherwise. Those INTJs are observant guys.