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?
Tried to check the link, Norton had a shitfit.
http://safeweb.norton.com/report/show?url=http:%2F%2Fwww.thehackernews.com%2F2011%2F03%2Foperation-icarus-will-anonymous-shut.html
I couldn't check the link because of the net nanny but you are right, it's not a new thing of these attacks being poorly thought out in terms of who will really bear the brunt of it. I had objections to the repeated attacks on Sony by Lulzsec because of the following.
The company makes a huge financial loss because of loss of sales, money that needed to be pumped into contractors to fix the security gap and from loss of trust of its userbase.
Companies like Sony aren't going to bear the brunt of those costs at the top. They are going to cut hours, lay off people and generally tighten the amount of money they put back into the community...
A community that recently bore the brunt of an earthquake, tsunami and nuclear meltdown.
The only way that country is going to get restored is through global sales and exports, they need money and that's the long and short of it. Repeatedly attacking one of the countries largest industry is nothing short of attacking the victims of the disasters over there.
Pretty much any site carrying the news is a hacker news site, so I'll just repost the crap:
youtube vid: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBW8dGfZY5g
Release...
Operation Icarus
Attention Brothers: Charge your lasers and aim them at the the New York Stock Exchange. (NYSE.com)
It has been said that humanity is not an end in itself but rather a means to an end. We have shown the world our strength to deny ignorance, overcome adversity, fight oppression and even the power to throw a wrench in the system that perpetuates it. We are enslaved within a matrix of institutions with the illusion that each stands alone, each fighting for power, for profits, for the scraps on the table that represent humanities dwindling resources. In reality however, these institutions; the arms industries, banking and other financial institutions, government intelligence agencies and countless others have formed what was once a clandestine coalition whose corruption and avarice have become increasingly transparent due to wikileaks and the efforts of anonymous. This coalition seeks the preservation and the perpetuation of the powers that be and this octopus operates through the tentacles of the IMF, the Federal Reserve and the World Bank, masterminded by think tanks such as the Bilderberg group and the Council on Foreign Relations.
The puppets of the powers that be include the president of the united states and his cabinet, and through them they are able to repress the freedom of information and with it the free and open exchange of ideas which are fundamental to the existence and operations of anonymous and the ability to see beyond the veil of secrecy from which the powers that be stand behind. But where does the power behind the throne lie? Within the global financial system, centered within the New York stock exchange.
They feel secure in their ivory tower built on the broken backs of the laborers of the world for what are their subjects but human...all too human. In humanity lies the restraints of pity and mercy, driven by fear. But We are not merely human. Anonymous is something much more for we possess neither fear nor mercy. It is time to show the world the true power and the true face of the faceless, the nameless and the ghosts of society.
Like Icarus, the powers that be have flown too close to the sun and the time has come to set the wings of their empire ablaze and watch the system their power relies on come to a grinding halt and come crashing down around them. We must strike at the heart of their empire by once again throw a wrench into the machine, but this time we face a much bigger target; the global financial system. This time our target is the New York Stock Exchange. (NYSE.com)
This is a call to arms my brothers who for too long have stood for nothing but have criticized everything. Stand now, behind the banner of free men against the tyrannical matrix of institutions that oppose us. Ready your weapons and aim them at the New York Stock Exchange. This is the operation to end all others. Innocent people may stand to lose something from this but the powers that be stand to lose much more. Bring the rain brothers.
We are Anonymous
We are Legion
We do not forgive
We do not forget
Expect Us.
Faust has the right of it.
The attitude of "oh, well, innocent people are gonna get hurt" is about as wrong as it gets.
Quote from: Faust on July 04, 2011, 12:25:41 PM
I couldn't check the link because of the net nanny but you are right, it's not a new thing of these attacks being poorly thought out in terms of who will really bear the brunt of it. I had objections to the repeated attacks on Sony by Lulzsec because of the following.
The company makes a huge financial loss because of loss of sales, money that needed to be pumped into contractors to fix the security gap and from loss of trust of its userbase.
Companies like Sony aren't going to bear the brunt of those costs at the top. They are going to cut hours, lay off people and generally tighten the amount of money they put back into the community...
A community that recently bore the brunt of an earthquake, tsunami and nuclear meltdown.
The only way that country is going to get restored is through global sales and exports, they need money and that's the long and short of it. Repeatedly attacking one of the countries largest industry is nothing short of attacking the victims of the disasters over there.
Perhaps the tide is changing. I got out when it ceased to be about the lulz, now it seems to be more about "who can we fuck up and whore the name anonymous to?" without giving proper forethought in the slightest.
I remember this shit happened with $cientology and I fought hard to get them to endorse helping people on the inside get out with projects like the free scientology society thing I found (a religious group that shared the materials freely and didn't exploit one another, they were all kooks, but they weren't corrupt, I think they were called freezone or something) and I remember this being glanced over for weeks. Originally the free scientology kooks were even on the list to get attacked. It was just haphazard. The problem was fixed by the time it was an issue, but like you said with sony, they just flat out failed to plan.
It's kind of pissing me off now that I think about it, like Einstein being blamed for the bomb. It's totally unintended misuse of the premise of the product.
If you want to be a freedom fighter you have to plan to not be a terrorist.I suppose natural law dictates this kind of behavior is allowed to thrive, but I thought the whole purpose for buying into society at all was to prevent total chaos unleashed for the sake of everyone having more rights and by proxy a better quality of life than they might have if they were born in the cretaceous period. Granted the only real right one has is to die, but without aspiring to something greater than that life seems awfully pointless. Why fight in the army of anon if it is unjust, and how long until the just have to take arms against anon? I don't like that thought.
Pardon the rant.
edit:
@faust: Where the hell is that thing in your sig from, I'm totally dejavu-ing out to it, like it was from a dream or something.
Quote from: Ambassador KLOK KAOS on July 04, 2011, 01:03:47 PM
edit:
@faust: Where the hell is that thing in your sig from, I'm totally dejavu-ing out to it, like it was from a dream or something.
I dunno, i think it's from tumblr or something.
Quote from: Faust on July 04, 2011, 01:27:27 PM
Quote from: Ambassador KLOK KAOS on July 04, 2011, 01:03:47 PM
edit:
@faust: Where the hell is that thing in your sig from, I'm totally dejavu-ing out to it, like it was from a dream or something.
I dunno, i think it's from tumblr or something.
This is going to haunt me until I find out.
Awesome.
Meh, Anonymous have been targeting "innocent" people for years.
So have most of the companies and individuals trading on the NYSE.
Nothing changes if they succeed and nothing changes if they fail.
(Either way, calling it "terrorism" is kinda rich. It's not like Anonymous are actually going to plant bombs in the offices of stockbrokers or send a hit squad in to teach Lloyd Blankfein you can really fuck someone's life up for the very cheap cost of 8 cents, rather than through crashing the world economy).
Quote from: Cain on July 04, 2011, 05:11:19 PM
Nothing changes if they succeed and nothing changes if they fail.
Gives censors more ammo
Quote from: Cain on July 04, 2011, 05:11:19 PM
Meh, Anonymous have been targeting "innocent" people for years.
So have most of the companies and individuals trading on the NYSE.
Nothing changes if they succeed and nothing changes if they fail.
(Either way, calling it "terrorism" is kinda rich. It's not like Anonymous are actually going to plant bombs in the offices of stockbrokers or send a hit squad in to teach Lloyd Blankfein you can really fuck someone's life up for the very cheap cost of 8 cents, rather than through crashing the world economy).
I suppose more accurately it would be "Financial Terrorism" so no it's not the same as flying planes intot the towers.
Quote from: Ambassador KLOK KAOS on July 04, 2011, 08:42:21 PM
Quote from: Cain on July 04, 2011, 05:11:19 PM
Meh, Anonymous have been targeting "innocent" people for years.
So have most of the companies and individuals trading on the NYSE.
Nothing changes if they succeed and nothing changes if they fail.
(Either way, calling it "terrorism" is kinda rich. It's not like Anonymous are actually going to plant bombs in the offices of stockbrokers or send a hit squad in to teach Lloyd Blankfein you can really fuck someone's life up for the very cheap cost of 8 cents, rather than through crashing the world economy).
I suppose more accurately it would be "Financial Terrorism" so no it's not the same as flying planes intot the towers.
I don't see how it qualifies as terrorism at all.
the plan is drop wall street on it's ass.
ter·ror·ism
[ter-uh-riz-uhm]
–noun
1.
the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.
2.
the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
3.
a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.
sauce dictionary.com
Quote from: Ambassador KLOK KAOS on July 04, 2011, 09:51:19 PM
the plan is drop wall street on it's ass.
ter·ror·ism
[ter-uh-riz-uhm]
–noun
1.
the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.
2.
the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
3.
a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.
sauce dictionary.com
And how does what they do fall into any of those three catagories?
What they're doing is market manipulation.
Unless you're one of those guys that wants to make every crime "terrorism", so we can two-step around due process?
Quote from: Ambassador KLOK KAOS on July 04, 2011, 08:42:21 PM
Quote from: Cain on July 04, 2011, 05:11:19 PM
Meh, Anonymous have been targeting "innocent" people for years.
So have most of the companies and individuals trading on the NYSE.
Nothing changes if they succeed and nothing changes if they fail.
(Either way, calling it "terrorism" is kinda rich. It's not like Anonymous are actually going to plant bombs in the offices of stockbrokers or send a hit squad in to teach Lloyd Blankfein you can really fuck someone's life up for the very cheap cost of 8 cents, rather than through crashing the world economy).
I suppose more accurately it would be "Financial Terrorism" so no it's not the same as flying planes intot the towers.
Buddy, while you were making outlandish music on the internet I was working for a transatlantic think tank on questions involving terrorism, financial and economic sabotage of critical structures and the best way to prevent them (which would then be promptly reversed engineered and distributed to intelligence personnel for their usual half-hearted efforts at blowing things up and killing people).
This isn't terrorism.
I'm citing reason 2 as well as Faust's examples. Reason 2 can be confirmed through reaction of NYSE posted on blog comments all over the net.
Anon is completely aware of the fear they are instilling and using that fear to drive the market. In the end, innocents will lose their pensions if their plan is successful, and this is considered acceptable loss, making them no different from the current establishment, except that they are potentially more dangerous.
Anon isn't just computers, black faxes and pizza deliveries, it's also a propaganda machine capable of a twisting a paradigm. Controlling others through fear is exactly terrorism IMO. Whether it's a gun at the head or the threat of losing one's life savings, it's still coercion.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on July 04, 2011, 09:52:42 PM
Quote from: Ambassador KLOK KAOS on July 04, 2011, 09:51:19 PM
the plan is drop wall street on it's ass.
ter·ror·ism
[ter-uh-riz-uhm]
–noun
1.
the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.
2.
the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
3.
a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.
sauce dictionary.com
And how does what they do fall into any of those three catagories?
What they're doing is market manipulation.
Unless you're one of those guys that wants to make every crime "terrorism", so we can two-step around due process?
I just want to savour this moment. AKK is quoting dictionary.com at me to try and explain what terrorism is.
I believe this is stage two of his known and noted behaviour.
Quote from: Cain on July 04, 2011, 10:25:01 PM
Buddy, while you were making outlandish music on the internet I was working for a transatlantic think tank on questions involving terrorism, financial and economic sabotage of critical structures and the best way to prevent them (which would then be promptly reversed engineered and distributed to intelligence personnel for their usual half-hearted efforts at blowing things up and killing people).
This isn't terrorism.
Please share your findings then. Not challenging your position, I'm interested.
Quote from: Ambassador KLOK KAOS on July 04, 2011, 10:26:24 PM
I'm citing reason 2 as well as Faust's examples. Reason 2 can be confirmed through reaction of NYSE posted on blog comments all over the net.
Anon is completely aware of the fear they are instilling and using that fear to drive the market. In the end, innocents will lose their pensions if their plan is successful, and this is considered acceptable loss, making them no different from the current establishment, except that they are potentially more dangerous.
Anon isn't just computers, black faxes and pizza deliveries, it's also a propaganda machine capable of a twisting a paradigm. Controlling others through fear is exactly terrorism IMO. Whether it's a gun at the head or the threat of losing one's life savings, it's still coercion.
Right, then. We should also arrest anyone who starts a boycott on terrorism charges.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on July 04, 2011, 10:35:10 PM
Quote from: Ambassador KLOK KAOS on July 04, 2011, 10:26:24 PM
I'm citing reason 2 as well as Faust's examples. Reason 2 can be confirmed through reaction of NYSE posted on blog comments all over the net.
Anon is completely aware of the fear they are instilling and using that fear to drive the market. In the end, innocents will lose their pensions if their plan is successful, and this is considered acceptable loss, making them no different from the current establishment, except that they are potentially more dangerous.
Anon isn't just computers, black faxes and pizza deliveries, it's also a propaganda machine capable of a twisting a paradigm. Controlling others through fear is exactly terrorism IMO. Whether it's a gun at the head or the threat of losing one's life savings, it's still coercion.
Right, then. We should also arrest anyone who starts a boycott on terrorism charges.
Fair enough. I suppose I'm mostly concerned of the scale of the damage and the innocent bystandards that stand to lose a great deal. That's if you want to be all pragmatic about it :/ I'm interested in seeing Cain's findings though.
Quote from: Cain on July 04, 2011, 10:25:01 PM
Quote from: Ambassador KLOK KAOS on July 04, 2011, 08:42:21 PM
Quote from: Cain on July 04, 2011, 05:11:19 PM
Meh, Anonymous have been targeting "innocent" people for years.
So have most of the companies and individuals trading on the NYSE.
Nothing changes if they succeed and nothing changes if they fail.
(Either way, calling it "terrorism" is kinda rich. It's not like Anonymous are actually going to plant bombs in the offices of stockbrokers or send a hit squad in to teach Lloyd Blankfein you can really fuck someone's life up for the very cheap cost of 8 cents, rather than through crashing the world economy).
I suppose more accurately it would be "Financial Terrorism" so no it's not the same as flying planes intot the towers.
Buddy, while you were making outlandish music on the internet I was working for a transatlantic think tank on questions involving terrorism, financial and economic sabotage of critical structures and the best way to prevent them (which would then be promptly reversed engineered and distributed to intelligence personnel for their usual half-hearted efforts at blowing things up and killing people).
This isn't terrorism.
I don't know. Have you heard his music.
lol, I totally get it! You were comparing my music to terrorism...
:roll:
In actuality the record after the one I'm currently working on (concept only right now) is under the working title "American Audio Torture". It came up when someone suggested that they blast my music instead of Metallica at the prisoners in Guantanamo to make sure they learn their lesson. Admittedly, I think it would have a better impact. Metallica does include melodies and harmonies while I strive for cognitive dissonance that just barely holds itself together structurally.
But thanks for the vote of confidence :D
Quote from: Ambassador KLOK KAOS on July 04, 2011, 10:40:56 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on July 04, 2011, 10:35:10 PM
Quote from: Ambassador KLOK KAOS on July 04, 2011, 10:26:24 PM
I'm citing reason 2 as well as Faust's examples. Reason 2 can be confirmed through reaction of NYSE posted on blog comments all over the net.
Anon is completely aware of the fear they are instilling and using that fear to drive the market. In the end, innocents will lose their pensions if their plan is successful, and this is considered acceptable loss, making them no different from the current establishment, except that they are potentially more dangerous.
Anon isn't just computers, black faxes and pizza deliveries, it's also a propaganda machine capable of a twisting a paradigm. Controlling others through fear is exactly terrorism IMO. Whether it's a gun at the head or the threat of losing one's life savings, it's still coercion.
Right, then. We should also arrest anyone who starts a boycott on terrorism charges.
Fair enough. I suppose I'm mostly concerned of the scale of the damage and the innocent bystandards that stand to lose a great deal. That's if you want to be all pragmatic about it :/ I'm interested in seeing Cain's findings though.
1. We don't like your company's policies.
2. We will conspire to not buy from you until you change.
3. You and all of your employees (and their families) and vendors (and THEIR families) will suffer financially until this happens.
I have now used a boycott, and by your definition, become a terrorist.
ITT, We learn that Martin Luther King Jr's boycott of the Birmingham bus system was an act of terrorism. Lester Maddox would be so pleased to hear about this, were he alive.
Also, Gandhi was a terrorist, for his multiple Boycotts, as was Nelson Mandella.
I LOVE THIS CENTURY! :lulz:
Quote from: Doktor Howl on July 05, 2011, 05:49:08 PM
Quote from: Ambassador KLOK KAOS on July 04, 2011, 10:40:56 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on July 04, 2011, 10:35:10 PM
Quote from: Ambassador KLOK KAOS on July 04, 2011, 10:26:24 PM
I'm citing reason 2 as well as Faust's examples. Reason 2 can be confirmed through reaction of NYSE posted on blog comments all over the net.
Anon is completely aware of the fear they are instilling and using that fear to drive the market. In the end, innocents will lose their pensions if their plan is successful, and this is considered acceptable loss, making them no different from the current establishment, except that they are potentially more dangerous.
Anon isn't just computers, black faxes and pizza deliveries, it's also a propaganda machine capable of a twisting a paradigm. Controlling others through fear is exactly terrorism IMO. Whether it's a gun at the head or the threat of losing one's life savings, it's still coercion.
Right, then. We should also arrest anyone who starts a boycott on terrorism charges.
Fair enough. I suppose I'm mostly concerned of the scale of the damage and the innocent bystandards that stand to lose a great deal. That's if you want to be all pragmatic about it :/ I'm interested in seeing Cain's findings though.
1. We don't like your company's policies.
2. We will conspire to not buy from you until you change.
3. You and all of your employees (and their families) and vendors (and THEIR families) will suffer financially until this happens.
I have now used a boycott, and by your definition, become a terrorist.
ITT, We learn that Martin Luther King Jr's boycott of the Birmingham bus system was an act of terrorism. Lester Maddox would be so pleased to hear about this, were he alive.
Also, Gandhi was a terrorist, for his multiple Boycotts, as was Nelson Mandella.
I LOVE THIS CENTURY! :lulz:
But if that is true then I'm a terrorist..... :cry:
Quote from: Khara on July 05, 2011, 05:53:52 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on July 05, 2011, 05:49:08 PM
Quote from: Ambassador KLOK KAOS on July 04, 2011, 10:40:56 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on July 04, 2011, 10:35:10 PM
Quote from: Ambassador KLOK KAOS on July 04, 2011, 10:26:24 PM
I'm citing reason 2 as well as Faust's examples. Reason 2 can be confirmed through reaction of NYSE posted on blog comments all over the net.
Anon is completely aware of the fear they are instilling and using that fear to drive the market. In the end, innocents will lose their pensions if their plan is successful, and this is considered acceptable loss, making them no different from the current establishment, except that they are potentially more dangerous.
Anon isn't just computers, black faxes and pizza deliveries, it's also a propaganda machine capable of a twisting a paradigm. Controlling others through fear is exactly terrorism IMO. Whether it's a gun at the head or the threat of losing one's life savings, it's still coercion.
Right, then. We should also arrest anyone who starts a boycott on terrorism charges.
Fair enough. I suppose I'm mostly concerned of the scale of the damage and the innocent bystandards that stand to lose a great deal. That's if you want to be all pragmatic about it :/ I'm interested in seeing Cain's findings though.
1. We don't like your company's policies.
2. We will conspire to not buy from you until you change.
3. You and all of your employees (and their families) and vendors (and THEIR families) will suffer financially until this happens.
I have now used a boycott, and by your definition, become a terrorist.
ITT, We learn that Martin Luther King Jr's boycott of the Birmingham bus system was an act of terrorism. Lester Maddox would be so pleased to hear about this, were he alive.
Also, Gandhi was a terrorist, for his multiple Boycotts, as was Nelson Mandella.
I LOVE THIS CENTURY! :lulz:
But if that is true then I'm a terrorist..... :cry:
Well, I guess it's indefinite detention for you. We can't be too careful, you know.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on July 05, 2011, 05:56:37 PM
Quote from: Khara on July 05, 2011, 05:53:52 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on July 05, 2011, 05:49:08 PM
1. We don't like your company's policies.
2. We will conspire to not buy from you until you change.
3. You and all of your employees (and their families) and vendors (and THEIR families) will suffer financially until this happens.
I have now used a boycott, and by your definition, become a terrorist.
ITT, We learn that Martin Luther King Jr's boycott of the Birmingham bus system was an act of terrorism. Lester Maddox would be so pleased to hear about this, were he alive.
Also, Gandhi was a terrorist, for his multiple Boycotts, as was Nelson Mandella.
I LOVE THIS CENTURY! :lulz:
But if that is true then I'm a terrorist..... :cry:
Well, I guess it's indefinite detention for you. We can't be too careful, you know.
I think after a week with my kids, I'll be set free. :lulz:
Maybe paranoid but..
My (limited) understanding is that "anons" are not centrally organized and might be considered more of a ladder conspiracy or similar.
If there is no knowable organizer then it becomes possible to use the rhetoric and format to simply stir up people to do what you suggest.
There's serious money on the table here for someone that's ready to short the fall (if it happens).
It would also likely allow for more "Anti-terror" legislation, and only the less skillful participants are likely to take the fall.
Perhaps this is an attempt by the con to use anon.
I wouldn't call an attack on the new york stock exchange terrorism, but I also wouldn't call it market manipulation. It is systemic disruption, a direct attack on the system.
A more concrete example of systemic disruption would be cutting the powerline to a city, and this is a much more direct attack than a boycott.
a DDOS attack on the stock exchange falls under the same category.
Quote from: Luna on July 04, 2011, 12:18:34 PM
Tried to check the link, Norton had a shitfit.
http://safeweb.norton.com/report/show?url=http:%2F%2Fwww.thehackernews.com%2F2011%2F03%2Foperation-icarus-will-anonymous-shut.html
I just checked that link, it is bullshit. 9 threats on that page? I don't see anything.
Quote from: Triple Zero on July 05, 2011, 11:58:24 PM
Quote from: Luna on July 04, 2011, 12:18:34 PM
Tried to check the link, Norton had a shitfit.
http://safeweb.norton.com/report/show?url=http:%2F%2Fwww.thehackernews.com%2F2011%2F03%2Foperation-icarus-will-anonymous-shut.html
I just checked that link, it is bullshit. 9 threats on that page? I don't see anything.
:fnord:
:argh!: :lulz:
Quote from: Telarus on July 06, 2011, 04:32:07 AM
Quote from: Triple Zero on July 05, 2011, 11:58:24 PM
Quote from: Luna on July 04, 2011, 12:18:34 PM
Tried to check the link, Norton had a shitfit.
http://safeweb.norton.com/report/show?url=http:%2F%2Fwww.thehackernews.com%2F2011%2F03%2Foperation-icarus-will-anonymous-shut.html
I just checked that link, it is bullshit. 9 threats on that page? I don't see anything.
:fnord:
:argh!: :lulz:
Thanks, Trip. Given that I just plain don't know enough to unfuck my machine, and I don't want to harass the folks I know who DO too often ("Yeah, oops, I was stupid again...") I tend to just listen when Norton whines.
(Edited to fix stupid caused by trying to post from phone.)
If you don't have it yet, get http://www.microsoft.com/security_essentials/
That goes for everyone using Windows, btw.
Not sure, but do you even need a virus scanner if you got MSE? (I hadn't heard about MSE last time I used Windows--and yes it did succumb to a virus when I had to ditch it).
Quote from: Cain on July 04, 2011, 05:11:19 PM
Meh, Anonymous have been targeting "innocent" people for years.
So have most of the companies and individuals trading on the NYSE.
Nothing changes if they succeed and nothing changes if they fail.
(Either way, calling it "terrorism" is kinda rich. It's not like Anonymous are actually going to plant bombs in the offices of stockbrokers or send a hit squad in to teach Lloyd Blankfein you can really fuck someone's life up for the very cheap cost of 8 cents, rather than through crashing the world economy).
I want to know where you buy your bullets.
Everything can be bought for 8 cents, if you buy in large enough bulk.
Admittedly, that phrase did come into being in the 1950s, and should be adjusted for inflation.
i guess it's possible to fuck up somebody's life with a 22lr
Quote from: Triple Zero on July 06, 2011, 10:16:38 PM
If you don't have it yet, get http://www.microsoft.com/security_essentials/
That goes for everyone using Windows, btw.
Not sure, but do you even need a virus scanner if you got MSE? (I hadn't heard about MSE last time I used Windows--and yes it did succumb to a virus when I had to ditch it).
MSE is a virus scanner, if you have it you can't have another one.
It's not bad although personally I prefer AVG or Avast.
Any particular reason why?
Having a virus scanner made by whoever made the OS is a good thing because it's in their advantage to stay right on top of things.
For companies in the anti-virus industry, it benefits them to report as many threats as possible, even harmless or non-existent ones (such as "tracking cookies" and the above Norton "safeweb" report). Because they must sell fear and snake-oil. They only make money when people buy the "upgrade" or "business solution". Your safety and computer's protection is actually of second concern--as becomes obvious when AV company Kaspersky denounces AV research showing how most if not all AV programs can be bypassed as "unethical" and "dangerous".
That's why I think it's such a great idea that Microsoft wrote an AV program for their own OS. Their interests are protecting a positive imago of Windows as virus-free, stable and trustworthy. Which is much more aligned with the user's interest of keeping their data safe, computer protected and running smoothly.
Really, I know it used to be that you didn't have much of a choice, but now you do, and you can take a good and critical look at the AV industry, their fear-based marketing, the bullshit they peddle--ever notice how they never just straight up tell you what their XYZ Shield or BLahblah Guard "features" actually do? It's all marketing buzzwords. Will "AVS Security Protection Agent" scan my email? HTTP traffic? Or just modified files? If so, which ones?
AVG used to be OK but now they pretty much suck donkey balls.
God I fucking hate AVG
HATE
HATE
HATE
Quote from: Triple Zero on July 07, 2011, 06:42:03 PM
Any particular reason why?
Having a virus scanner made by whoever made the OS is a good thing because it's in their advantage to stay right on top of things.
For companies in the anti-virus industry, it benefits them to report as many threats as possible, even harmless or non-existent ones (such as "tracking cookies" and the above Norton "safeweb" report). Because they must sell fear and snake-oil. They only make money when people buy the "upgrade" or "business solution". Your safety and computer's protection is actually of second concern--as becomes obvious when AV company Kaspersky denounces AV research showing how most if not all AV programs can be bypassed as "unethical" and "dangerous".
That's why I think it's such a great idea that Microsoft wrote an AV program for their own OS. Their interests are protecting a positive imago of Windows as virus-free, stable and trustworthy. Which is much more aligned with the user's interest of keeping their data safe, computer protected and running smoothly.
Really, I know it used to be that you didn't have much of a choice, but now you do, and you can take a good and critical look at the AV industry, their fear-based marketing, the bullshit they peddle--ever notice how they never just straight up tell you what their XYZ Shield or BLahblah Guard "features" actually do? It's all marketing buzzwords. Will "AVS Security Protection Agent" scan my email? HTTP traffic? Or just modified files? If so, which ones?
I'm prejudiced against Microsoft, I also like the visual interface for the other two and have had them protect me pretty well so far.
I'm probably letting my prejudice stand in my way though because your arguement makes a lot of sense.
I used to be prejudiced against Microsoft. I lost it somewhere along the years ... Probably when I realized that a lot, if not most corporations are just as bad. And back in the day MS had a monopoly on the OS market, the Office Suite market and the Internet Browser market, and in the bad old days MS abused that position to hamper interoperability. Now they don't have a monopoly anymore, and I noticed that they're actually capable of writing pretty decent software (especially when they're not being haunted too much by their own legacy).
Quote from: Triple Zero on July 07, 2011, 08:04:31 PM
I used to be prejudiced against Microsoft. I lost it somewhere along the years ... Probably when I realized that a lot, if not most corporations are just as bad. And back in the day MS had a monopoly on the OS market, the Office Suite market and the Internet Browser market, and in the bad old days MS abused that position to hamper interoperability. Now they don't have a monopoly anymore, and I noticed that they're actually capable of writing pretty decent software (especially when they're not being haunted too much by their own legacy).
QFT
Windows 7 and the ARM compatibility on Windows 8 is definitely softening my hatred of Microsoft. They have been making some decent strides towards actually making useful software sometimes.
Of course, that point is only valid after a couple hours post-install un-stupifying the OS. Removing the retarded "You do not have a firewall/AV" constant pop ups and unhiding file extensions and certain file types and all the directories they hide in the Explorer windows etc. I can see the point ("lets start by assuming everyone who uses Windows is trying to break it!"), and in my experience fixing the 1500 virii per week my relatives always seem to end up with, it's a very good point, but whenever I try to dual-boot and have a Windows partition, I find it frustratingly time consuming to un-stupify the OS. Especially with the ton of retarded services I have to disable that they enable by default.
Granted though, a lot of the annoyance of Windows come more from the software makers than Microsoft. Every time I install something it tries to bundle 6 other stupid programs. No I don't want Yahoo to take over my browser and autostart 16 services, NO I don't want Bonzai Buddy to install itself all over the place, No I don't want this-crap and that-crap and everything else ever made. God damnit I bought a DVD player, I just want a fucking DVD player. Nothing else. Also, every goddamn windows software wants to install a service or ten, and start up with the computer. WTF?
That's the one thing I like the absolute most about Linux, software repositories. No crawling the internet risking virii and bloatware and spyware and adware and browser plugins/hotbars/searchbars/hostile-takeovers, no bundled crap, no auto-services and startup crap unless necessary. Just "packager install vlc-player" and poof VLC player is installed. "packager install firefox" and poof I have firefox and only firefox. "packager remove firefox" and poof firefox is gone, no residual bullshit, no "are you SURE? Are you SUPER SURE? Are you positive? Really? You keep clicking Yes, do you really mean No?"
So wait, now that I'm thinking about it, FUCK windows! :evilmad: