Gene Simmons Declares War on Anonymous
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
Recommended Videos
It's not relevant though. You're suggesting that walking into BestBuy and taking a TV without paying for it isn't necessarily stealing as long as nobody else was likely to buy that TV. When you gain control of a product against the will of the product's owner, then you are a thief, it is as simple as that. I know everybody wants to obfuscate reality in order to justify their actions, but it simply is what it is. Nobody is suggesting the death penalty, just maybe fine for those caught, with a minimum and a maximum on a case by case basis. The guys that need to do some hard time are the Anonymous people who think that they can go around damaging people's personal property in order to get them to shut up about not liking being stolen from.Socken said:
well, I think the best case scenario is the people simmons has got on the case might catch a couple people for the attack but the whole thing seems absurd to me. there's only so much striking at an invisible foe one can do successfully. I'm not particularly interested in him being successful but it's nice to see more standing up against people too cowardly to take responsibility for their actions. Damned internet bravery
That is an unbelievably ignorant statement. At least in the context that you mean it. Of course he doesn't have the right to make money off of it, that would mean that people are forced to buy it. But if they do want it however, FACT: then people must give him what he wants in exchange. The idea that you can steal whatever you like so long as it isn't made of metal and plastic or whatever is just ridiculous. Why do you think we have copyright law? Why do you think we have patent law? Lets say that you are a pharmaceutical company, and you spend 500 million dollars researching and developing a new type of cancer medication. You now have to sell it at a certain price in order to make your money back and be profitable. The profit margin being necessary to pay your scientists a wage that will keep them working for you and not for some other pharmaceutical company. You also need that profit to be able to start working on research and development of the next cancer drug, or heart disease medication or whatever. But what if after you released your new cancer drug, some other drug company lets call them Blakfaytpharm decides to buy one bottle of your product and then reverse engineer it, and start selling it for 5 bucks a bottle, which they can do, because they aren't 500mil in the hole because of the research. A society where that is totally legal is a society where NOTHING gets invented. There would be NO pharmaceutical research, because people wouldn't be able to get back the money they invest. There would be virtually no technological advancement at all. If thats the kind of world you want to live in, just so that you can justify in your own mind your stealing of the intellectual property of others, then please go somewhere else to create that world.blakfayt said:
Gene Simmons... who was that again? Ah yes, the "bassist" from a "band" whose success relied on face painting. The guy who had a reality show about with his family to try to get the same succes as an actual, real hard-rock legend, Ozzy. The guy whose son published a "manga" made by tracing and ripping of "Bleach", and then lectures about "intellectual properties".
A guy that implies that you should be raped in prison for downloading a song.
He think anyone downloading his "songs" should "find their little butts in jail, right next to someone who's been there for years and is looking for a new girl friend".
How some people can side with that hateful asshole is beyond me.
Also, what I find ironic is people talking about "internet bravery", and "anonymous coward" while themselves secure in their own anonymity. I don't see many of them using their real name to comment here.
A guy that implies that you should be raped in prison for downloading a song.
He think anyone downloading his "songs" should "find their little butts in jail, right next to someone who's been there for years and is looking for a new girl friend".
How some people can side with that hateful asshole is beyond me.
Also, what I find ironic is people talking about "internet bravery", and "anonymous coward" while themselves secure in their own anonymity. I don't see many of them using their real name to comment here.
As I am very strongly against the sueing culture (I have dreams about stabbing the "underdog" from the national accident helpline ad), and Gene is being a bit of a twat, I'm going to side with Annoymous on this one. Mind you, I quite like annoymous (I don't like scientoligy either)so I probably would have sided with them anyway.
I've skimmed through the responses to this article and I agree that it shall be a good show. My money is on nobody "winning" as neither shall "defeat" the other.
As one who formerly associated themselves with Anon years ago, as well as a former cyber pirate (stealing was easy and fun, but we must all grow up), i know that the hivemind mentality of this angry, formless mass has an amazing amount of potential to organize and creatively fight those they deem an enemy. They appear out of nowhere and no matter how many are caught, there are always more who will join the fray as all that is required is a computer and an internet connection.
The problem is that anon is a fickle creature and this old vet of net has seen a few of anonymous' operations grow outside of the chans and ED and actually last a few months in terms of strength. Yet, dedicated revolutionary zealots they are not, and eventually the inertia carrying the cause will fade as people grow bored. Even the lulz will not be enough reason to keep up the effort.
The difference I see here among this fight against the copyright fat cats and many of the other more ambitious operations by anon is that this attack on dl'ing will be perceived as an invasion on their "ground". Thus i think the legion will have less reason to quarrel over the reason for their war and more motivation to carry on as the actions of Gene have more of direct impact on their parts of the tubes.
Will anything be accomplished by either side? No. Gene won't be destroyed (in any way shape or form) and Anon is nothing more than a concept of identity stemming from modern cyber-culture thus it cannot be permanently harmed itself.
Still I feel this deserves what some in this thread have suggested. *Tosses popcorn in microwave while getting up to speed on the "war" as he starts up New Vegas.*
As one who formerly associated themselves with Anon years ago, as well as a former cyber pirate (stealing was easy and fun, but we must all grow up), i know that the hivemind mentality of this angry, formless mass has an amazing amount of potential to organize and creatively fight those they deem an enemy. They appear out of nowhere and no matter how many are caught, there are always more who will join the fray as all that is required is a computer and an internet connection.
The problem is that anon is a fickle creature and this old vet of net has seen a few of anonymous' operations grow outside of the chans and ED and actually last a few months in terms of strength. Yet, dedicated revolutionary zealots they are not, and eventually the inertia carrying the cause will fade as people grow bored. Even the lulz will not be enough reason to keep up the effort.
The difference I see here among this fight against the copyright fat cats and many of the other more ambitious operations by anon is that this attack on dl'ing will be perceived as an invasion on their "ground". Thus i think the legion will have less reason to quarrel over the reason for their war and more motivation to carry on as the actions of Gene have more of direct impact on their parts of the tubes.
Will anything be accomplished by either side? No. Gene won't be destroyed (in any way shape or form) and Anon is nothing more than a concept of identity stemming from modern cyber-culture thus it cannot be permanently harmed itself.
Still I feel this deserves what some in this thread have suggested. *Tosses popcorn in microwave while getting up to speed on the "war" as he starts up New Vegas.*
Well, it looks like it boils down to some middle ground comprimise. True, a bigger punishment would make a stronger deterrent, but if a lesser punishment is consistently enforced, then it should at least lessen the frequency of the crime.Lord_Panzer said:
I like how anon is made out to be the 'big bad' of the world, when in actuality, it's nothing more than a collection of little shits coming together to satisfy their own needs, at the risk of very little.
I don't even understand how we can talk about 'anonymous' as a single, domineering, entity. It's merely a culture of people who share similar values, no different to The Escapist. In the same way that The Escapist could run a Photoshop contest and gather hundreds, if not thousands, of participants- anonymous can run an 'anti-Gene Simmons' campaign and gather the same number of people working towards a single goal. How do you think political parties, businesses and societies form? This is exactly the same principle- someone comes forward with an idea, and if other people feel that the idea is within their best interests, they support it. In this case, someone said, 'Gene Simmons is going to get me arrested', and others hopped on the wagon with cries of, 'Me too!'.
Anonymous, as a collective entity, is not unified- for every 'attack' like this, there are hundreds of plans that lowly, down-on-their-luck teens will make that just get shrugged off. 'Please hack my Geography teacher's email', 'Make my dog a meme', 'let's bring down Russia'- anything that anon does will have to have reason, which is exactly why Geography teachers the world over can rest safe- no-one is going to support a plan to put a picture of a penis in Mr Ross' inbox except the student who made the plea in the first place.
I suppose this rant is just the equivalent of a nervous twitch; a knee-jerk reaction to a minority of people claiming that Anon is the scourge of modern society, and that they'll bring the apocalypse upon us by hacking into the Pentagon or something. It's nothing but a bunch of dumb-ass kids getting together and doing stupid stuff. It's the internet equivalent of placing a flaming bag of crap on a doorstep and ringing the bell.
So, to get on topic, I can see how both parties could suffer from this. Simmons is no doubt a revered (and rich) enough figure to do some serious damage to some kid's life, but at the end of the day, he's going to have to put up with a whole load of crap on his doorstep. This isn't a battle for the ages, and no-one will remember it as such- it's just a minor dispute between two parties (who, as far as I'm concerned, can both go throw themselves off a bridge).
I don't even understand how we can talk about 'anonymous' as a single, domineering, entity. It's merely a culture of people who share similar values, no different to The Escapist. In the same way that The Escapist could run a Photoshop contest and gather hundreds, if not thousands, of participants- anonymous can run an 'anti-Gene Simmons' campaign and gather the same number of people working towards a single goal. How do you think political parties, businesses and societies form? This is exactly the same principle- someone comes forward with an idea, and if other people feel that the idea is within their best interests, they support it. In this case, someone said, 'Gene Simmons is going to get me arrested', and others hopped on the wagon with cries of, 'Me too!'.
Anonymous, as a collective entity, is not unified- for every 'attack' like this, there are hundreds of plans that lowly, down-on-their-luck teens will make that just get shrugged off. 'Please hack my Geography teacher's email', 'Make my dog a meme', 'let's bring down Russia'- anything that anon does will have to have reason, which is exactly why Geography teachers the world over can rest safe- no-one is going to support a plan to put a picture of a penis in Mr Ross' inbox except the student who made the plea in the first place.
I suppose this rant is just the equivalent of a nervous twitch; a knee-jerk reaction to a minority of people claiming that Anon is the scourge of modern society, and that they'll bring the apocalypse upon us by hacking into the Pentagon or something. It's nothing but a bunch of dumb-ass kids getting together and doing stupid stuff. It's the internet equivalent of placing a flaming bag of crap on a doorstep and ringing the bell.
So, to get on topic, I can see how both parties could suffer from this. Simmons is no doubt a revered (and rich) enough figure to do some serious damage to some kid's life, but at the end of the day, he's going to have to put up with a whole load of crap on his doorstep. This isn't a battle for the ages, and no-one will remember it as such- it's just a minor dispute between two parties (who, as far as I'm concerned, can both go throw themselves off a bridge).
I'm just going to post my bit on what I think will happen rather than my views on the subject. I really don't want to have to argue with anybody on either side.
All right, let's give a suitable appearance for Anonymous.
I think Legion would suffice.
Anyway, Gene Belmont has challenged Anonymous to a battle to the death in his no-save speed run through Castlevania: Music Industry. The reasons don't matter, the fact of the matter is, he stepped into their room and they attacked him, so instead of leaving, he's going to fight back, despite the fact that the doors never locked. He might knock a few of the white formless bodies from its amorphous shell, but he is unaware of what hides inside. The core of Legion, where it is most vulnerable can only be damaged when all of its shell is destroyed, but even when just a small amount of its shell is gone, it can retaliate, and retaliate it does. You see, Gene Belmont never bothered actually leveling up. Instead, he found some equipment that made it easy for him to succeed up to this point. Well, it turns out just a few laser blasts from Legion's core will utterly destroy Gene Belmont as a result.
So there are three possible resolutions I see:
1. Anonymous eats Gene Simmons alive.
2. Gene Simmons takes enough damage that he decides to leave.
3. Gene Simmons never does enough damage for Anonymous to fully retaliate.
I'm not saying Anonymous is invincible, I'm just saying it would be damn hard to pierce into the users that make up the heart of Anonymous. They're very well defended by their countless defenses and very well hidden behind the less effective masses.
All right, let's give a suitable appearance for Anonymous.
I think Legion would suffice.
Anyway, Gene Belmont has challenged Anonymous to a battle to the death in his no-save speed run through Castlevania: Music Industry. The reasons don't matter, the fact of the matter is, he stepped into their room and they attacked him, so instead of leaving, he's going to fight back, despite the fact that the doors never locked. He might knock a few of the white formless bodies from its amorphous shell, but he is unaware of what hides inside. The core of Legion, where it is most vulnerable can only be damaged when all of its shell is destroyed, but even when just a small amount of its shell is gone, it can retaliate, and retaliate it does. You see, Gene Belmont never bothered actually leveling up. Instead, he found some equipment that made it easy for him to succeed up to this point. Well, it turns out just a few laser blasts from Legion's core will utterly destroy Gene Belmont as a result.
So there are three possible resolutions I see:
1. Anonymous eats Gene Simmons alive.
2. Gene Simmons takes enough damage that he decides to leave.
3. Gene Simmons never does enough damage for Anonymous to fully retaliate.
I'm not saying Anonymous is invincible, I'm just saying it would be damn hard to pierce into the users that make up the heart of Anonymous. They're very well defended by their countless defenses and very well hidden behind the less effective masses.