MattAn24 said:
Popido said:
Conza said:
This news is about half as good as the news about Osama Bin Laden - and that news was friggin awesome.
That's right, we caught the f**kers, and I hope they are fined to the point of near outrageousness, and kept in cells for atleast 10 years... should I read the article first on what they plan to do?..
This is actually even better than catching Obama. You really did it this time. The 12th time you catched these f**kers. Thats like, 4 times catching Obama!
I'm going to assume you meant Osama there..
Anyway.. No. Replacing the word Anonymous with people makes even less sense. Because not all people are immature dicks just trying to fuck with other people's shit. Anonymous is NOT everyone or whatever the fuck they claim. They DO NOT represent everyone's "best interests".
Exactly, because Anonymous is not everyone, but the people that are present atm. The Anonymous manifesto is simple just an ideal supported by people. It represents the people supporting this ideal. The more popular the ideal is the more people will support it. And the more sophisticated the ideal is, the more wiser the supporters behind this ideal are. And if they aint, the ideal silently quiets down or gets picked up by wiser sum of people.
MattAn24 said:
JET1971 said:
Sony says they found a file that claims Anon hacked them and all Sony fans assume Anon did but all evidence based on Anons modus operandi points to Anon not actualy hacking them. I love ignorance.
So, the AnonOps admin didn't hack them, thanks for the obvious update.
But if *anyone* can be "Anonymous" (using the fucked up logic of their own "rules"), Anonymous was involved. As the so-called commandments state (Anonymous is NOT the ruler of the internet, fuck right off, that makes the whole freedom excuse entirely useless), "Anonymous is no one and anyone" (WHAT.), so therefore ANYONE that has involvement with Anonymous IS Anonymous. By their own logic, they did it.
People did it. Go arrest the people. What people? The people. Who? Just go arrest some people, I dont care.
The Anonymous rules are more of an observations, such as rule 34. But the Ideals have rules to support the ideal, like Operation World Peace: RULE #36 Do NOT shoot people in a bathtub either.
The anonymous word originated from message boards where it ment "a colorful group of strangers posting as one person." No need to look for that one up. The Anonymous manifesto is the observation that if ideal is good enough, people will support it. And The Anonymous "Freedom" movement is a sum of ideals put in action by different people to support the ideal Freedom, whatever that is.
The LulzSec is in sense an Anonymous manifesto, but should not be connected to The Anonymous movement, as people are not good enough to tell these two apart. The first is an ideal to expose the security holes of internet services to the world and the former is a freedom movement.
Edit:
Lets continue on why "we" know that Anonymous didnt hack the PSN.
Its not in the Ideal. It has to be in the Ideal or the people supporting the Ideal dont know that they're supposed to hack into PSN. If something like this happens and there are no supporters present to take a credit for it nor no ideals presented to speak for the supporters, then is it really an anonymous manifesto at all? No, but it can become one. A solo group show'd to the world that "this is what we can and want to do" and now there is LulzSec.