Shadowrun
Off-topic => Off-off-topic => Topic started by: FastJack on <08-10-11/1608:00>
-
Real? Hoax? We'll know on 11/5/11
Project Facebook (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SWQTS8zqYXU)
-
Real? Hoax? We'll know on 11/5/11
Project Facebook (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SWQTS8zqYXU)
More on the subject (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2024449/Anonymous-threaten-close-Facebook-November-5.html)
-
The more and more this group speaks, the more I'm convinced they're people with underdeveloped social skills, lashing out at anything and everything they feel have slighted them.
-
Pretty much real.
Also, i am actually curious if they can really do it . .
If they can, then there is, technically, not much that they can NOT do . .
-
I don't know, the one guy that had for an interview against the Westboro Baptist Church (WBC), who arranged a hack while the church member was busy being quite uncivil and just stated on-air that "God will protect our servers" (Or some such, I could only watch it once without choking on bile!) was pretty socially apt.
'Course, there's always one even in a crowd of socially inept hacker types that check their transcripts of conversations with people to ensure they mention they like Star Wars at least once every time.
-
I don't know, the one guy that had for an interview against the Westboro Baptist Church (WBC), who arranged a hack while the church member was busy being quite uncivil and just stated on-air that "God will protect our servers" (Or some such, I could only watch it once without choking on bile!) was pretty socially apt.
It's the nice thing about their setup - put a Guy Fawkes mask on anybody, give them a script, and nobody will know if they're a face or not. And while I think WBC is a group comprised of nutjobs, the moment Anon went after their website they proved themselves no better than WBC. Just because WBC says some abhorrent things doesn't mean they don't have the right to say those things. Anon took the first steps in censorship.
-
But anon denied involvment with the action with wbc (http://www.tgdaily.com/security-features/54228-god-hates-hackers-says-westboro-pastor)
it's pretty obvious that the very structure of anon invites people to abuse it. because there is no administration or hierachy and no coherent opinion, everyone can pose as anon and say pretty much anything and it is really hard to verify what is really anon and what not.
anyway it will be interesting how it turns out, maybe nothing, maybe the will succeed or do just something totally unpredictable. or they are just trying to troll the internet.
-
Or they're proof that Anarchy is really just a bunch of people running around doing whatever the hell they want, because they are without leaders. (Well, authority or organization.).
-
of course anon is anarchistic, that's the point, it makes it really hard to get reliable information about this group.
they are interesting because despite their anarchy they actually get something done, which is really rare for an anarchistic society.
now don't get me wrong, neither do i support anarchy nor illegal hacking. i just think people should observe this social phenomena because it is something unique that has never develope before.
-
Welcome to the Internet.
We're just throwing science at the wall and seeing what sticks!
...
Who the hell put Cave Johnson (http://www.cavejohnsonhere.com/) in charge of the Internet?
-
oh i know the internet and i am familiar with its deepest pits of hell. to my everlasting regret -.-
also is there another way of doing sience?
-
Yes.
It's called "Properly". :P
-
some of our newer comprehension how the universe might work stem from smashing subatomic particles at extremly high speeds into each other.
also i am an engineering student, thats how we do stuff ;D
physicists, on the other hand, always think it's only about math. horrible horrible math
-
some of our newer comprehension how the universe might work stem from smashing subatomic particles at extremly high speeds into each other.
also i am an engineering student, thats how we do stuff ;D
physicists, on the other hand, always think it's only about math. horrible horrible math
:P Math is simple and beautiful.
-
Can Anon crash Facebook? It's entirely possible, not knowing specifics about Facebooks capability for handling large spikes in traffic (which is,essentially,what a DDoS is) I couldn't say. However, when Anon tried this against Amazon it failed, precisely because Amazon has the capacity and ability to handle a large spike in traffic.
But the bigger question I think is - SHOULD they? If, as Anon claims, they have evidence of Facebook selling out users to the government, of giving personal information to various agencies - isn't it better to share that information with the world via a site like Cryptome or even Wikileaks (ugh)? What actual,tangible good comes from taking down Facebook beyond drawing attention specifically to Anon? And that I think is the crux of it here - it's not about striking a blow for privacy or personal freedom for Anon, its about doing whatever they wish and getting attention for it.
-
Can't the "CrunchBox" help protect against DDoS? Or does it just handle exploits?
-
just a thought, is there maybe a connection to anon+, their planned social network?
-
just a thought, is there maybe a connection to anon+, their planned social network?
I wouldn't put it past the little attention whores. they are almost as bad as Julian Assange for the "Look at me,Look at me!!" need for spotlight.
-
Personally, I think announcing their plans like that, and giving the specific date, were decisions as dumb as pickled shit.
Still . . . if they manage to kill Facebook, I will be suitably impressed and remarkably relieved.
-
Can Anon crash Facebook? It's entirely possible, not knowing specifics about Facebooks capability for handling large spikes in traffic (which is,essentially,what a DDoS is) I couldn't say. However, when Anon tried this against Amazon it failed, precisely because Amazon has the capacity and ability to handle a large spike in traffic.
But the bigger question I think is - SHOULD they? If, as Anon claims, they have evidence of Facebook selling out users to the government, of giving personal information to various agencies - isn't it better to share that information with the world via a site like Cryptome or even Wikileaks (ugh)? What actual,tangible good comes from taking down Facebook beyond drawing attention specifically to Anon? And that I think is the crux of it here - it's not about striking a blow for privacy or personal freedom for Anon, its about doing whatever they wish and getting attention for it.
It's unlikely that WikiLeaks can really do ass to stop Facebook from selling your personal info to other people. Whereas causing a site to go into complete shutdown? Well, that'll probably be something other Social Networking sites remember and take note not to follow Facebook's example and not sell people's personal info. Though I doubt Anonymous really took that into account, as a group they do most of what they do for shits, giggles 'n cause they feel like it.
Edit: Aww, they're back to that Old School "We do not forgive. We do not Forget." spiel, I preferred the "We stand as One" bit myself that they brought out for the Scientology
-
Personally, I think announcing their plans like that, and giving the specific date, were decisions as dumb as pickled shit.
Still . . . if they manage to kill Facebook, I will be suitably impressed and remarkably relieved.
Any half-assed group can attack a site when it's weak and vulnerable.
It's a challenge to do it when they're ready and prepared!
Which is why you should never take a negative quality to do stuff like that as a Decker/Hacker in Shadowrun. :P
-
Never Watched Cat's Eye, eh Can?
-
Lots of Lupin the 3rd.
-
Couldnt care less, got no SIN there ;D
-
Couldnt care less, got no SIN there ;D
No, but you do have an IP and a MAC Address.
Me, I got a SIN. :(