Anonymous and Lulzsec members arrested by authorities

LulzSec strike me as a bit naïve. They try to make themselves sound intimidating, but their most obviously political attack, on the Arizona law enforcement, was dangerous, foolish and displayed a lack of understanding (or concern) for the safety of others. The guy they arrested in London was 16 years old. They've done their best to make themselves as intimidating as possible, but they're in over their heads.

@ neo: I think you're drawing a distinction that Anonymous themselves don't recognise. They're all Anonymous, regardless of their individual actions or goals.

edited 20th Jul '11 1:20:08 PM by BobbyG

There was nothing white hat about lulz sec. They went around doing petty hacking and then tried to act like they were kings of the internet. Good riddance.

I'm not saying I like them, I'm saying that I think their hacking abilities exceeded their common sense. Their mentality seems to be very similar to that of regular trolls.

Being regular trolls is probably what they all do on their days off.

I can't say I have a lot of sympathy for Anonymous et al, for all the reasons that have been given. I wouldn't mix them up with guys like Assange who was making public information of great public importance, as opposed to hacking just to cause disruption and piss people off (even if some of them deserved to be pissed off).

I hope they leak everything they got and make the government pay for each arrest and each move they dare to make. I hope they release the really sensitive stuff, the stuff that compromises the national security of most countries. I hope the hackers win, and that it becomes a total and unreserved victory.

What can I say? Whenever someone fights The Man, I'm on their side. They could be Chtulhu himself and I'd be on their side.

edited 20th Jul '11 12:35:09 PM by SavageHeathen

Like I said before, a movement with a meaningful message is not the same as reckless rebellion, and if these groups turn into the latter and actually act like cyber-terrorists, it's a dangerous thing to do. It's bad enough if they're Internet trolls, but they shouldn't do something so severe.

Yes, they should. They should make the government pay twentyfold for any arrest they dare make. They should cause as much damage as is imaginable every time the government dares look at one of them.

Rebellion wouldn't be reckless. Given the authoritarianism and restrictiveness of current governments, rebelling would be entirely appropriate.

edited 20th Jul '11 1:13:27 PM by SavageHeathen

Blah blah anarchy blah blah rebellion blah. We have to live in this world, Savage, and that means we need structures to live by. Go get a cabin in the Australian wilderness if you're so determined to be antisocial.

You sound like you're part of these groups...

And I would definitely draw a distinction between being an Internet phenomenon and going head-on against the government. That's civil unrest and not right.

edited 20th Jul '11 2:14:26 PM by abstractematics

I'd argue that civil unrest has its place in advancing the conditions for the downtrodden. What Anon and Lulzsec do is not civil unrest. It's simple jackassery under the guise of freedom of information. In other words, they're the guys who show up to protests with bats and molotovs because riots are fun.

edited 20th Jul '11 1:35:45 PM by KitsuneInferno

^^^^^ For argument's sake, such mindsets also sparked various wars for capitalist or democratic reasons, which also caused large amounts of deaths and devastation at the hands of people who were nonetheless vindicated by history.

Not that I have any sympathy for Anonymous, Lulzsec, or their overall self-serving pettiness, just busting the chops of a bad argument.

Meaningful rebellion against a first world power in this day and age is impossible. You need a significant percentage of the population behind you and most people are too prosperous (in a relative sense) to abandon their homes and families to go wave torches around.

So we're left with a bunch of idealistic fratboys and card carrying quasi-anarchists throwing around vague threats of apocalypse while gnawing at the walls like rats. Honestly if Anonymous would turn their sights on the actual hackers and criminals responsible for the majority of cybercrime, I'd love 'em.

edited 20th Jul '11 1:35:29 PM by Fighteer

Hey, let's rerail back away from the tired, tired anarchy discussion. There's a dangerous, dangerous trend about these articles and subsequent discussion that no one ever notices.

Aren't we all presumed innocent until guilty? So why is it these people are always labelled, both by article and comments, as Anonymous and Lulzsec members? Why not alleged members? Why are they immediately hackers, instead of alleged hackers? They haven't been to court, they haven't been convicted, and it's pretty disturbing that they're pretty much consciously or unconsciously seen as guilty before they even get a trial.

I don't think this is my imagination, either. Every single news story I've ever seen like this is the same, it's always "members" and "hackers". Doesn't anyone notice how easy it would be to exploit this immediately "guilty!" mindset? How it could prevent innocent people from having a fair shake in court *

Am I overreacting? Am I the only one that notices?

edited 20th Jul '11 1:38:38 PM by deathjavu

The media always, always, presumes guilt before innocence. That's not exactly a new phenomenon, and it's basic human nature. Let the legal process take its course.

I don't think being accused of hacking carries the same stigma as murder or rape.

I haven't assumed that the people caught are guilty of being in those groups. But it's safe to say that the groups themselves admit to doing thing that are non-conventional.

edited 20th Jul '11 1:47:06 PM by abstractematics

Haha, they are finally getting checked on. They have both done SOME good things, but they have also been pretty nasty here and there as well.

Also, Savage Heathen's post: AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA~*cough*

No, I always see "alleged" in the more reputable news sources, in regards to any other crime. Except these. It's...unsettling.

Uh...I never said it did? I'm just saying, there's a distinct tendency to assume guilt in these kinds of cases, perhaps because the evidence is complex and hard to display, which means people can't judge for themselves, or (most likely) because the discussion always gets steered towards the support/analysis/dislike of said groups. *

I suppose the groups themselves are more interesting than the innocence or guilt of a few people, though.

edited 20th Jul '11 1:51:38 PM by deathjavu

Hate to break it to you Savage, but most of these "hackers" are 16 year old script kiddies, with maybe a very small minority of actual hackers. Even you yourself looked at the Arizona incident with some remorse when you realized what the ramifications of it were for innocent civilians.

As the local TV Tropes spokesperson for The Man I hope that Jester starts systematically finding and annihilating some of these folks.

I'm just surprised it's taken so long.

but then again, people have been arrested before, so I guess mehbe not.

I say good.

And man, Savage... (laughter) dude, man you say some truly priceless things! Thanks for the comedy gold, bro.

Its like he just spews extremism with every post!

A world like that...ruled by Anarchy, it cannot exist.

But, back on topic, these arrests are great things, and show that just because you are Anonymous, does not mean the law cannot find you. With what they did to the Arizona State Police, I suspect they angered quite a lot of people.

I wonder how many of those angered people condemned Anonymous when they trolled Jessi Slaughter or ChristianU2ber.

edited 21st Jul '11 4:38:32 AM by neoYTPism

It was only a matter of time before they tracked someone down. You can hide very well but never assume your cover is perfect.

Lets see where they take this.