...they're just a bunch of wankers....
An attack by hackers at 4chan on Gawker left the news blog intermittently unavailable on Wednesday. 4chan's denizens reportedly launched the attack in reprisal to a recent article on Gawker about the alleged harassment of an 11-year-old girl by users of the image board. The DDOS assault on Gawker began on Tuesday and peaked …
...they're just a bunch of wankers....
those hicks at gawker lack the journalistic integrity of El' Reg
And I love it when they do stuff like this. Why can't people just leave them alone? Gawker was all "hurrr lets go stab a bear in the eye while naked and covered in honey" yep you're going to get eaten.
Why should they be granted privilege that they don't give to others? Anyone that's into making public statements of the kind 4chan members do should grow the balls to handle when others direct such statements back at them instead of leaving the technological equivalent of a burning paper bag of dog crap on the doorstep.
They are not taking a privilege they are unwilling to grant unto others. Their action is retaliatory and is thus justifiable.
If you and I are arguing and you pull out a knife and stab me, you are wrong. (Morally, ethically, intellectually) If as a result of your action, I pull out a knife and stab you back, or escalate and pull a gun on you, I am morally and ethically justified. If a rule exists and you choose to break it toward a person, you can no longer object to that person breaking the rule against you.
Now, your response here will be to say "well 4chan has said bad things about people before, so Gawker can say bad things about them!" and there are two sides to that statement.
First, I could say Gawker was not involved in this situation, so they could not act against 4chan morally or ethically. That one is somewhat weak. The stronger argument is this:
Gawker was justified to take shots at 4chan, but if they were, they cannot object to 4chan's subsequent DDoS.
So lets change that initial example a little. You see me arguing with someone else on the street. You have heard before that I am a "bad person" so while I am arguing you run up, jump on my back and stab me. I can certainly turn around and punch you in the face while being justified.
Final note, because my thoughts are wandering on the topic:
When it comes down to it, 4chan isn't saying Gawker can't talk smack about them, they are saying if they do there will be consequences. Anyone who the internet, knows 4chan, and a reasonable person would EXPECT the response Gawker got for the actions they took.
Umm i do believe they are handling it
Revenge is never justified. There is a difference between REVENGE and PROPORTIONAL RESPONSE. One is offensive; aimed at hurting your enemy. The other is defensive; it's a tactical measure designed to discourage your enemy from further acts of aggression.
Revenge is a disproportionate response based in emotion that leads to nothing but a cycle of revenge. Proportional response is calculated with the goal of entering into détente and eventually a ceasefire and peace.
4Chan was not responding proportionately.
Storming Normandy and bombing Germany were proportional responses. Germany was engaged in similar enterprises all over Europe and Africa. According to my analysis of history, the Allied response to Germany’s actions was largely proportionate.
As to nuking Japan, that’s entirely another story. It gets pretty squiggly because there are so many different analyses of the days surrounding that event that it’s hard to believe which are true. That said, my understanding is that even without the nukes, the war was largely over. Japan could have been contained with conventional weapons; indeed they were starting for the very first time to consider what until then they were not actually capable of considering. Their emperor was wrong; he had made a mistake. Worse yet, they were starting to consider the concept of “surrender,” though they didn’t quite have a word for it.
Was nuking Hiroshima required to end that war? I can never know for sure. The Japanese, despite their slow slide towards the idea of surrender, and growing civil unrest were fighting against generations of indoctrination into the unquestionable and absolute authority and infallibility of their ruling class. It might well have been that the only thing that would have worked was the detonation of a nuclear bomb on their soil.
THAT SAID, the use of such weapons against a civilian target as the primary site was out of bounds. It was completely unnecessary to demonstrate the destructive power the US had now attained. Furthermore, the US proceeded to blow the concept of proportional response completely out of the water by launching an attack against Nagasaki that was completely unrequired. Japan was descending into chaos even before it officially surrendered; the end of that empire was writ large with the detonation of the first weapon.
If you want to glorify War, that is your choice. I do have to ask however if you have ever fought in one, or known closely those who have seen it’s atrocities up close. I grew up on a military base; while I was unable to serve my country, I am well aware of the horrors of even conventional warfare.
Disproportionate responses must either eradicate your enemy nearly completely, (so as to leave no one behind to hate you,) or they will beget a cycle of revenge and violence that is nearly impossible to end. Look at most of the Middle East, or a thousand or so years of the various bitter rivalries in Europe or Asia.
Peace is found through negotiation, compromise, and constant vigilance and preparedness. It is not found through fear and intimidation; these only lead to animosity and an ever increasing need to watch your own back.
Lest you find a knife or two in it.
For the best effect, first scroll to the video at the bottom of the article, and watch the 11-year-old tart acting all tough where she threatens to put a glock your mouth and make a "brain slushie".
Then watch the video at the top of the article where she's balling her eyes out, and phsyco dad makes the funniest empty threats you've ever seen.
Did people look at the video on there? Why are the parents not losing custody of their child? She is wearing a zebra print top so low cut that her pink and purple bra is sticking out. I've seen hookers far more tastefully dressed. This is clearly a case of people being unfit for parenting.
If pictures do exist, will they arrest the 11 yr old for producing child pr0n? And the parents for being complacent to it/allowing it to happen due to their gross negligence?
Have you read her Tumblr entry, reprinted at the top of:
Ed Byrne covered this topic better (and I can't get to his DVD to quote properly), but if you ever see a little girl in a pick track suit with "Sexy Bitch" (or words to that effect) embroidered across her pre-sexual tuchus. And of course the was the whole Primark's padded kids bikini.
What is needed is the return of the (admittedly cruel and misrepresenting) reality show where the ghost of the children future is used to scare the living shit out of the parents. Show parents pictures of their kids 20/30 years hence, but rather than showing the effects of a poor diet the future image will be based on what happens when a child is allowed to emulate the look, behaviour and anima of Miley Cyrus through childhood and into young adulthood.
I don't recall them saying it was about an 11 year old girl though, just a plan to stop gawker posting articles about 4Chan.
They normally use Low Orbit Ion Cannon for the DoS attacks...
Other Raids are sometimes also planned here:
They are all a bit lame. School kids pissing about thinking they know how internets works acting up as internet tough guys - with many of them not even bothering to use proxies. In this case, I don't even think they bothered going to IRC to discuss...
Half of them are probably just as old as the girl. People like to try to type cast 4chan as "creepy old men" whenever they do something bad to an "innocent little girl" but then type cast 4chan as "little boys with huge egos" whenever they post Nazi pictures on some random site.
Like the rest of the internet, they are a mix representing all parts of humanity. They deserve more credit, their accomplishments are impressive.
"They deserve more credit, their accomplishments are impressive."
No they don't, and no they aren't.
There *might* be a few people who post there who have some semblance of technical ability, but everything else is just zerging by the hangers on who want to look cool and bad-ass.
...to see how gawker handled it from an ISPs perspective.
In this case their ISP either did nothing or policed the rate inbound to their server address. Neither of which methods are very successful and the result is generally the same. Valid requests time-out.
For DDoS attacks, I route the destination address to Null throughout our AS at all upstream/ peering points/ IXPs and take the server offline immediately. In addition, I send a BGP community to our Tier-1 upstream providers and they Null route as well. In a matter of seconds, this is propagated and the attack becomes void. Except for the customer. I can just imagine all those 4Chan retards wondering why their newfound technical knowledge of ping and traceroute no longer works.
The important point being that the garbage traffic is kept off the backbone ISP network so that other customers don't see any deterioration in service. It's all youtube traffic these days don't you know.
I like 4Chan /b/ - can be funny sometimes. But I don't believe that there are that many specialists that participate in any real hacking. 4Chan is totally overrated for that. Using the low-orbit ion cannon is schoolboy stuff.
However, ruining peoples lives is what they are quite good at. Some basement dwellers are quite persistent as Internet Detectives and this is the reason it has a reputation as the arsehole of the internet.
Beware posting pics if you want to shoot pellets at your next-door neighbours pets, set a cat on fire or throw a dog off a bridge.
So there was a moderate attack on Gawker following a story that they now admit they fabricated.
Good occasion to give both Gawker and 4chan some lip service!
Fame has brought in too many hangers-on and wannabes. I can see why they don't want any more attention. Not matter what else /b/ does, they have my admiration for going after Co$. They say it was for the lulz but fighting evil is noble, the reason is moot.
So I raise my glass to the crass, the vulgar and the noble.
I see what you did there.
...is that the Streisand effect is now working AGAINST 4chan.
'Anonymous', for quite obvious reasons.
If they do, the consequences will never be the same again.
they have the same ideals as filesharers. "you can't stop us all"
after all the raids, it is quite laughable that Co$ has only made examples of a few people. not near enough to intimidate anon.
I've heard that they can go through 7 PROXIES.
I'm behind at least 7 proxies!
There's no winners here, just the sad trolling the bad trolling the mad. I call Cripple Fight on this.
If you direct your attention to the internet.. we have... a cripple fight
Really this just strikes me as an internet episode of Jerry Springer
The collective bunch of assclowns known and 4chan, Vs a white trash family.
Having seen the vids, I am actually siding with 4chan on this one.
The family of that girl.. you dun goofed in raising her
yeah... getting coat... going..
Interesting how just one spouse member got involved... with the suggestion of an affair to boot. Methinks that was more perfect timing than anything else!
Wife: I had an email from some girl saying you're having an affair!!
Husband: Dont be silly dear, its, uuh, oh, its those pesky 4chan kids, they're hassling work at the moment.
Wife: Oh... oh ok then.
The timeline would go:
Journo: I'm splitting up with you. I'm bored of this affair.
Lover: Right, I'm going to tell your wife what we've been up to, and about the Great Dane, the whipped cream and the clingfilm!
***Journo wanders off to poke 4chan with a stick***
Wife: You've been having an affair, I got this email...
Journo: Sorry dear, we're being dDOSed by 4chan.
For extra conspiracy nutjobbery one could also suggest our hero going onto 4chan to instigate the attack on his own employer, just to make sure, and maybe posting a few other rude things about fellow employees families on Facebook as further cover.
And using the internet's Wayback Machine to transport himself onto the grassy knoll wearing a shiny badge and a long gun to cause extra confusion. The Wayback machine is clearly using a time machine to display old webpages, and can be hired (for a consideration) by anyone who knows the secret.
Ever feel like your stuck between scum and gov scum. whichever way u look theres more of it....
There's a bit of hypocrisy in 4channers attacking media sights to get them to stop talking about them. They've taken on an ideology that they can do anything they want to anyone, yet no one is allowed to take a shot back, certainly not through media channels. That said, I'm fully aware of the silliness in trying to explain hypocrisy to teen and preteen boys.
I do love the kicking they've given the CoS, but there's little nobility, and a great deal of arbitrariness, in their targets and tactics.
I'll stay anonymous on this one because, quite frankly, they scare me.
Bullies. That is all.
Seriously. A ping flood does not a hacker make.
Paris, does not a twat make.
Oi weh, what passes for hacking these days. These kids'll be in for a surprise if they ever earn the ire of the real thing.
/b/ used to be kind of a cool place. People posted lots of neat stuff there back in the day, and the entire point behind forcing people to post anonymously was that it emphasized content instead of identity, which should have discouraged identity politics and egotistical dick-waving.
I guess the reputation of the place attracted the wrong kind of people, though--the people who thought /b/ was about being cool or something and wanted to be cool themselves--and they have made their unfortunate mark on the culture of /b/. Whereas, previously, puffing up one's feathers and trying to look cool was frowned upon and invited derision, it's now become acceptable as long as enough other people are doing it at the same time, and as long as the purpose is to make yourself feel better by finding something to attack with a group of like-minded idiots. Even if forced anonymity discourages the direct stroking of one's ego in public, those users disappointed by the erstwhile lack of egotistical dick-waving may now satisfy themselves with /b/'s new culture of herd mentality and trying to be cool by being a dick to people. They've harnessed the power of stupid people in large groups, to the detriment of the internet at large, and they're proud of it.
Since most of the people who weren't obsessed with trying to be cool have since left for greener pastures (the greenest probably being 420chan, though there are several), it's about all that /b/ has to be proud of. The other boards on 4chan are not as bad, but have nonetheless absorbed some of /b/'s lamentable culture.
Sounds like a job for the Cyberpolice.
Gawker is self-serving and egotistical (iPhone 4 "scandal"... and about 2 million phones later, no one cares.) So is 4chan (It's Yahoo Chat in a forum-sized capsule, basically...)
Thanks for bringing more attention to attention-whores.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017