Alrighty, I've seen a few things on the board and I have a topic I wanted to develop I touched on earlier.
Ground Rule: This is not 4chan, duh, so cut the crap. If you know a meme, saying it aloud to others that are sure to understand it does not make one a hopeless chantard, nor does saying "anonymous" so lets attempt to grow past that for a few moments.
Alright, here's the press release:
http://www.thehackernews.com/2011/03/operation-icarus-will-anonymous-shut.html
edit: the release is reposted below because hacker news is not liked by most PC virus software (as you might expect). Sorry for the shit link
I'm just linking it because it's really long and I don't think we have collapsible tags as far as I can tell.
It's more Anon rhetoric designed to rile the masses, as is expected.
The problem I have with this is the personal responsibility aspect of it.
It has been duly noted that innocent bystandards are considered acceptable loss in this operation, and that's where I take issue with it.
I was there for Habbo Hotel, Scientology and a shit ton of others, but this one is different. Innocent people's livelihoods and retirement are on the line.
It brings to mind that quote "before the revolution, man exploited man, but since then, it's all gotten turned around"
Doing this is not going to end greed and oppression. I'm all for hitting proper targets in the nuts, but once you start claiming innocent bystandards as acceptable loss you are, by definition, a terrorist.
To allow for the kind of real liberty or freedom where even total scumfuck cretins are allowed to prosper side by side with decent folk, with all the same rights, we must all decide to be held accountable. This isn't being held accountable. This is being a terrorist with a mask. Even if it has a societal gain for the downtrodden, it's not fixing the problem, it's just changing the hand the glove is on.
I hate the monarch scumbags at NYSE too, but there is better ways too deal with this, and they aren't even all pleasant or politically correct. I agree something still needs to be done, but hitting innocent bystandards is not at all cool with me.
It reminds me of that poem:
First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me.
The key function I have a problem with here is that they aren't proposing a model for a new way of life, just promising one the same way the current institution does. If anonymous becomes any kind of institution it gains the flaw inherent to being a system: That it will be exploited, and I'm starting to think that's what's happening.
These are just my views of course, and they are subject to your scrutiny.
I guess my question is then, if Anonymous is a discordian ideal (I tend to think it is, ymmv) then as a discordian, where do you draw the line in the sand? When does morality come into play and how do you resolve that with your discordian views?
How do you feel about the Icarus Op?
Ground Rule: This is not 4chan, duh, so cut the crap. If you know a meme, saying it aloud to others that are sure to understand it does not make one a hopeless chantard, nor does saying "anonymous" so lets attempt to grow past that for a few moments.
Alright, here's the press release:
http://www.thehackernews.com/2011/03/operation-icarus-will-anonymous-shut.html
edit: the release is reposted below because hacker news is not liked by most PC virus software (as you might expect). Sorry for the shit link
I'm just linking it because it's really long and I don't think we have collapsible tags as far as I can tell.
It's more Anon rhetoric designed to rile the masses, as is expected.
The problem I have with this is the personal responsibility aspect of it.
It has been duly noted that innocent bystandards are considered acceptable loss in this operation, and that's where I take issue with it.
I was there for Habbo Hotel, Scientology and a shit ton of others, but this one is different. Innocent people's livelihoods and retirement are on the line.
It brings to mind that quote "before the revolution, man exploited man, but since then, it's all gotten turned around"
Doing this is not going to end greed and oppression. I'm all for hitting proper targets in the nuts, but once you start claiming innocent bystandards as acceptable loss you are, by definition, a terrorist.
To allow for the kind of real liberty or freedom where even total scumfuck cretins are allowed to prosper side by side with decent folk, with all the same rights, we must all decide to be held accountable. This isn't being held accountable. This is being a terrorist with a mask. Even if it has a societal gain for the downtrodden, it's not fixing the problem, it's just changing the hand the glove is on.
I hate the monarch scumbags at NYSE too, but there is better ways too deal with this, and they aren't even all pleasant or politically correct. I agree something still needs to be done, but hitting innocent bystandards is not at all cool with me.
It reminds me of that poem:
First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me.
The key function I have a problem with here is that they aren't proposing a model for a new way of life, just promising one the same way the current institution does. If anonymous becomes any kind of institution it gains the flaw inherent to being a system: That it will be exploited, and I'm starting to think that's what's happening.
These are just my views of course, and they are subject to your scrutiny.
I guess my question is then, if Anonymous is a discordian ideal (I tend to think it is, ymmv) then as a discordian, where do you draw the line in the sand? When does morality come into play and how do you resolve that with your discordian views?
How do you feel about the Icarus Op?