Re:How one man tracked down Anonymous—and paid a heavy price
by rapicastillo on Thursday February 10, 2011 @08:07AM
(#2201784)
If we go with the fact that Anonymous is infact a true distributed environment, then the replacement mechanism will be very easy. I think Anonymous is a kind of humanized group-comm architecture sans a coordinator.
Re:How one man tracked down Anonymous—and paid a heavy price
by radu_floricica on Thursday February 10, 2011 @08:19AM
(#2201822)
You're overestimating the uniqueness of Anon. Most communities nowadays don't have coordinators. And Anon doesn't have limitless communication channels, only about a dozen. For a site/software to be a good choice, it has to be already in the "hivemind". Ask 10 Anon tot tell them 10 places where they hang, and the most common choices are the (only) ones that are viable.
There is a unique feature though - the anonymity. This could really make a difference if things get serious.
Re:How one man tracked down Anonymous—and paid a heavy price
by stcredzero on Thursday February 10, 2011 @11:12AM
(#2202351)
This makes me want to read _True Names_
Re:How one man tracked down Anonymous—and paid a heavy price
by stcredzero on Thursday February 10, 2011 @06:28AM
(#2201571)
Implying that the 0.1% have never been caught?
Re:How one man tracked down Anonymous—and paid a heavy price
by radu_floricica on Thursday February 10, 2011 @08:13AM
(#2201807)
Only that it's hard to know, one way or another.
It may be a real difference if the 0.1% can be easily replaced, Stand Alone Complex style. Say they're all arrested one day, and a month after something happens (Julian Assange is extradited, there's a revolution in Iran, whatever piques Anonymous' interest). There's a good chance many people at the same time will think that something needs to be done, see that nothing is happening, and do it. Not as good as the "old guard" maybe, but they'll probably try.
We can't really know how well this replacement mechanism works...