Hacktivist guild Anonymous has taken to Twitter to ask followers for tips on who the group should attack next. Still reeling over the arrest of Megaupload mogul Kim Dotcom, Anonymous posted the following tweet: Anon tweet After several people suggested the group throws punches at social network sites, it responded: “Lulz at …
Me Me mE Me!
come n ave ago if you fink yer ard enough!
Put up or shut up
I just told them to do just that. Take apart the NSA. Every single last bit of information pertaining to anything and everything the agency has ever done.
Would it not be against Twitters T&C to be promoting illegal activity?
"...a well-known Anonymous hacker."
who STILL fails to see the inherent irony in that
"Why would Anon take down how we send our messages?"
Lest our morals be impaired.
It's all very Rebel Without a Cause, isn't it?
More like "Rebel without a clue"
My suggestion to them..
I dare you. I double dare you.
My suggestion to them..
I dare you. I double dare you.
I suggest Microsoft.com
As they are an avid supporter of PIPA/ACTA and most other random evil scheme that lurks the earth.
Not to mention the bribing of our present governtards to stop supporting open standards - one of the 2 things that was positive about this governbent (the other being the cancellation of ID cards.)
This is not about freedom of speech
It's about condoning theft - that is what "piracy" is, theft, Pure and simple. No amount of special pleading will ever change that fact.
Any site knowingly carrying copyrighted materiel should be accountable to the law of the land and be legally obliged to make efforts to police itself.
There are surely enough genuine FOS issues around the world to keep the hackers occupied. All this situation does is expose them as the bunch of puerile intellectual adolescents they are.
@AC at 09:51
I think you'll find piracy tend to occur at sea and generally involve physical violence, murder, rape, kidnap and/or the removal/destruction of goods.
There is no comparison between that an copyright infringement. None. It is disgusting moral relativism to equate the atrocities of true piracy with someone making unlicensed copies of a CD/DVD.
"Any site knowingly carrying copyrighted materiel should be accountable to the law of the land and be legally obliged to make efforts to police itself."
I think you'll find that all sites carry copyrighted material and so they should, it's their material. The law is not universal, some states allow more fair-use/transformative work than others.
"There are surely enough genuine FOS issues around the world to keep the hackers occupied."
And the destruction of cultural heritage is just one. Would you like Bach, Shakespeare et al to still be under copyright? That's the future we are creating. Corporate greed is perverting copyright, patents and trademarks into doing things that they were never intended to for.
The infringing material exists because the people hosting it are providing the service the legitimate owners should be providing, but don't because they are not prepared to change their business models. Sure, if they did provide the service infringing material would still exist, but that's not new but I would be prepared to say that the level of infringement would be much lower.
Case in point: I record something on my PVR, can I watch it on my PC? *NO*! Why? DRM and a lack of connectivity. Crap like that is what drives people to infringing sites. I don't want to make a copy of the stuff, I just want to watch it where I happen to be sat and not be restricted by some total ass-hat of a lawyer.
I could (if I was allowed to connect my own device to the cable) build a HTPC and stream/do what I want (even to mobile) without any need of their services and DRM crap. And once I am out of this contract I'll probably switch to Freesat for just such a purpose. Their tight grip on their media is costing them customers. It's their fault and they have no one to blame but themselves. Will they change? No, they'll just offer more bribes for more laws.
FFS we are talking about people who crow about a movie making billions and yet claim innocence when their accounts show it made a loss (e.g. Harry Potter). Both can't be right, one has to be a lie if not a fraud.
Morally bankrupt and a cancer to culture. Those are the people you are defending.
Words can have more than one meaning. The use of the word piracy for taking copyright material, without legal right to do so, has been around since Dickens. If you don't believe me, go and look it up in the OED.
This avoidance of the actual argument by deliberate misunderstanding and use of, often wrong, semantics is tedious and does a disservice to any value your position my have.
@AC at 12:45
I did not avoid the argument, I simply do not like the use of the work "pirate" or "piracy" for infringement. In the same way that I do not like the use of the word "hack" or "hacker" for the breaching of security (that'd be "crack" or "cracker").
@ the AC 9:51. Is that permanently on your clipboard you moronic troll?
The game's up, you've been rumbled. You need to improve your troll-foo
I just fed it
He's pretty much 100% dead on, from where I stand.
Anonymous did some important work with COS, but I have lost any respect for them with their running around the Internet virtually smashing up anything they can "for teh lulz".
- Review 'Mommy got me an UltraVibe Pleasure 2000 for Xmas!' South Park: Stick of Truth
- The land of Milk and Sammy: Free music app touted by Samsung
- Privacy warriors lob sueball at Facebook buyout of WhatsApp
- The long war on 'DRAM price fixing' is over: Claim YOUR spoils now (It's worth a few beers)
- Dell thuds down low-cost lap workstation for
cheapfrugal creatives or engineers