Anonymous tells NATO to fuck off

[ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞]

NATO's report also provided a larger look into the growing danger of cyberattacks and how governments should respond to them. In the report, Joplin asked the question of how NATO should react if one of its member nations was the victim of a cyberattack.
"Can one invoke Article 5 of the Washington Treaty after a cyber attack?" asked the report. "And what response mechanisms should the Alliance employ against the attacker? Should the retaliation be limited to cyber means only, or should conventional military strikes also be considered?
Both the U.S. and the U.K. have recently made their own positions clear--that they consider cyberwarfare another form of warfare, and one potentially subject to a response using conventional military weapons. (Emphasis added)

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-20070283-83/anonymous-warns-nato-not-to-challenge-it/

[Jasper]

So now DDoS is punishable by tactical strikes?

Nice. 

[Laughin Jude]

Oh no, a new paradigm that doesn't fit our traditional ideas about how the world works! Let's figure out how to integrate it into our existing paradigms as quickly as possible and then go back to responding to everything we perceive as a threat to our power structure the same way our species always responds to perceived threats to our made-up authority!

*flings explosive feces and chirps a lot on cable networks*

Applying the term "cyber attack" to hackers DDoSing sites or "stealing" and releasing government information that shouldn't be secret to begin with is brilliant in an evil way, by the way. That term makes it sound like the hackers are initiating the use of force and therefore can be responded to with actual force without raising any ethical issues.

[Triple Zero]

Anon's got a damn good point there, though.

[Adios]

Three suspected members of the Anonymous hacking group have been arrested in Spain.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-13727639

I've always wondered how they communicate with one another without getting caught.

[maphdet]

It was somewhere that brought my eyes to see--that----the right to bare arms (but hell-us Ole citizens could only wish we had a quarter of the tools they have)are not for militant purposes-but for citizens to have the right and must , if and when, they see 'their' (yeah "their being the government') turning to tyranny.

May be irrelevant to thread but it some sick form still relevant.
:P