There will always be scofflaws and pranksters. Indeed for our way of life to be assured, they must be able to exist.
The ever-growing reach of the military-espionage-industrial complex is the only real threat.
Viewing my world in terms of black and white has always been more of a comforting illusion than a reasonable approximation of reality. I realize this. But either these self-styled hacktivists are rationalizing their hooliganism with noble-sounding platitudes or they honestly believe that their way is the best way to fight against corporate corruption and government abuse of its own constituents.
If the former, it's becoming less obvious. And the latter is a frightening thought indeed. One day I might have to choose between a government agency whose actions have transcended public accountability (as in the Instapaper raid), corporations who will gladly sacrifice me on the altar of their own convenience (as in the Peter Adekeye case), or a capricious band of anonymous malcontents who might fight for my rights or might hold me up to public mockery and exploitation "for the lulz".
But what really scares me is that the choice will be made for me.
That all said, this all reeks of a cold civil war, maybe something will come out of it, maybe nothing will. I'll just keep doing what I do, solving issues of non-freedom the way I can, one person at a time. A lot could be done if people just acted better towards each other. But I think right now that's too much to ask of us(humans).
For the sake of our survival, may we eventually get to a point where people are judged more for how they treat others, rather than what they are able to purchase.
There is no difference between what Lulzsec and Anonymous do, compared with the FBI storming into a data centre without warrants and grabbing hardware.
None at all. In fact, the FBI did more damage.
Has it been proven that this is what happened?
Has it been proved the equipment was fairly taken?
I thought over the Atlantic pond it was "Innocent until proven guilty." It seems guilt was assumed and equipment taken.
No trial.
I think the orwellian big govt agency these hacker guys seem to base their doctrine against is the NSA. The 'we can listen to any phone call on the planet, imprison our whistle blowers, collect every bit of data on everybody, consume 1/4 of the power of the baltimore metro area for our data centers, have projects so secret you didnt know you didnt know about' NSA. Either anon knows this, and know they stand NO chance hacking the NSA, or theyve been misguided on who to target. my vote is a bit of both... I'm not gonna give you sources on this, but there is plenty of legitimate and credible reading out there to satidify your curisioty.
Also, hi out there to all you intel analysts reading... ;)
Maybe the ones with guns.
Today I have not heard of a single case of hackers using guns to make a point, but the government does all of the time.
I can live with all of the hysteria in the world if someone does not mame my body, with blunt objects, explosions, pointy things, or projectiles.
MAME is an arcade machine emulator. ;)
So far the acts of these groups have only been against typical websites. What happens when it escalates to aircraft, air-traffic control systems, nuke plants, dams, and other things where disrupted systems could cause massive loss of life?
cek...get a grip. sometimes we have to wait for the future and adapt instead of trying to control it.
Would you rather struggle/suffer/work for an imaginary possible situation or one that exists?
The FBI on the other hand...
In fact, a decentralized police state is exactly the only thing a centralized police state has to fear.
E.g. see the laws making it illegal to film police in public.
That said, I wouldn't go so far as to call this hypocritical. The FBI at least pretends to have a morally reasonable agenda for its actions.
Are you allowed to lock people in a cage for decades because they do something you disagree with? Of course not.
Is the FBI allowed to do this? Well, yes, but only because they're special and you have to do what they say, not what they do. Now what's this word hypocrite you speak of?
This is quite the hypocritical statement coming from the FBI. As far as I can tell, the only difference between Anonymous, Lulzsec, and the FBI is that the FBI act by executive fiat. I don't support Internet vigilanteism, but I also don't support the concept of the FBI as an untouchable force who are no longer held accountable by the public they are theoretically serving.
At this point, I'm not sure which one I find more scary.