http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/01/guilty-plea-in-scientology-ddos-attack/
QuoteA Nebraska man is pleading guilty in federal court to a computer disruption charge for his role in the 2008 distributed denial-of-service attack that temporarily shuttered Church of Scientology websites, the authorities said Tuesday.
Los Angeles federal prosecutors said Brian Thomas Mettenbrink, 20, signed a plea agreement Friday admitting his role in the January, 2008 attack (.pdf) –- bringing to two the number of defendants convicted in Anonymous' attack on Scientology. Mettenbrink is expected within days to be sentenced to a year in prison, prosecutors said.
"He took their websites down," Assistant United States Attorney Erik M. Silber said in a brief telephone interview from Los Angeles. "Anonymous: I think one of their primary missions is to bring down the Church of Scientology."
Mettenbrink's attorney did not return repeated telephone calls.
Last year, Dmitriy Guzner, part of the online troublemaking group Anonymous, pleaded guilty to similar charges and was sentenced to a year in prison in what at the time was the first known prosecution of an Anonymous member.
Urgh. I wonder if Anonymous are now going to attack the Feds? Could be amusing. I might go stir up some trouble aimed in that direction and see what comes of it.
"Online troublemaking group" originally caused me to balk. Then, I realized that it's true.
Anon won't attack the Feds though. I have a hypothesis that Anon won't attack unless there is enough lulz for the effort required. Easy targets that are inherently objectionable and ridiculous are prime Anon targets.
Hard to tell what they'll do. I'd say it's unlikely, but at the same time I wouldn't be surprised if some of them did try something.
Yeah, the group in general has the predictability and attention span of a shoggoth composed entirely of kittens.
Also: If you get caught, haven't you jsut failed at beign anonymous?
Yeah, but legislation is eons behind the hivemind concept. It still thinks like Aristotle.
Quote from: Horrendous Foreign Love Stoat on January 29, 2010, 10:25:41 AM
good. serves em for enforcing their views on others via peer pressure and hive mind bullying.
:spag:
I read that, and thought... 'anonymous fail'
If you re going to do something borderline illegal, at least bounce it around a bit, ya know?
Quote from: Felix on January 27, 2010, 02:04:01 AM
Easy targets that are inherently objectionable and ridiculous are prime Anon targets.
The feds are both objectionable and ridiculous. As for easy targets, that depends upon whether or not you consider the possible outcome.
Now that our fearless leader can have terrorists (read: inconvenient people) summarily executed, we'll just go ahead and have them labeled "hard" targets.
Do you really think that anon thinks ahead that far?
Anonymous as a superorganism doesn't have that well developed 3rd circuit grammar yet. It communicates to itself in LOLcat, ALL YOUR BASE, and Imma Let You Finish memes.
That's because it's an ESL superorganism, so it speaks in a patois of tired in-jokes, permutated memes and amusingly broken grammar.
what's ESL?
English as a second language?
SHOULDN'T
This be in 'first world problems?'?
ALSO, THIS COURT
Shall not concern itself with mere facts.
well it would make sense i guess for the dudes to get prosecuted...i mean, for messing with someones online property..?
lulz at teh chonz