Group items tagged

Three studies examined the notion that computer-mediated communication (CMC) can be characterised by high levels of self-disclosure. In Study One, significantly higher levels of spontaneous self-disclosure were found in computer-mediated compared to face-to-face discussions. Study Two examined the role of visual anonymity in encouraging self-disclosure during CMC. Visually anonymous participants disclosed significantly more information about themselves than non-visually anonymous participants. In Study Three, private and public self-awareness were independently manipulated, using video-conferencing cameras and accountability cues, to create a 2 × 2 design public self-awareness (high and low)×private self-awareness (high and low). It was found that heightened private self-awareness, when combined with reduced public self-awareness, was associated with significantly higher levels of spontaneous self-disclosure during computer-mediated communication.

"The principle of anonymity has an immense spiritual significance. It reminds us that we are to place principles before personalities."

A laboratory experiment was used to evaluate the effects of anonymity and evaluative tone on computer-mediated groups using a group decision support system to perform an idea-generation task. Evaluative tone was manipulated through a confederate group member who entered supportive or critical comments into the automated brainstorming system. Groups working anonymously and with a critical confederate produced the greatest number of original solutions and overall comments, yet average solution quality per item and average solution rarity were not different across conditions. Identified groups working with a supportive confederate were the most satisfied and had the highest levels of perceived effectiveness, but produced the fewest original solutions and overall comments.

The results suggest that increased visual anonymity is not associatedwith greater self-disclosure, and the findings about the role of discursive anonymity aremixed.

Three levels of anonymity, visual anonymity, dissociation of real and online identities, and lack of identifiability, are thought to have different effects on various components of interpersonal motivation

suggesting that individuals in Western societies will gravitate toward online communities that allow lower levels of anonymity, while individuals in Eastern societies will be more likely to seek out online communities that promote higher levels of anonymity.

Anonymous is not a single person, but rather, represents the collective whole of the internet.

As individuals, they can be intelligent, rational, emotional and empathetic. As a mass, a group, they are devoid of humanity and mercy. Never before in the history of humanity has there once been such a morass, a terrible network of the peer-pressure that forces people to become one, become evil. Welcome to the soulless mass of blunt immorality known only as the Internet.

Anonymous are the Monsters from the Id.

Anonymous is devoid of humanity, morality, pity, and mercy. Anonymous works as one, because none of us are as cruel as all of us. Anonymous cannot be harmed, no matter how many Anonymous may fall in battle. Anonymous doesn't fall in battle, anyway. Anonymous only undertakes Serious Business. Anonymous is everyone Anonymous is everywhere. Anonymous cannot be out-numbered. Anonymous is a hydra, constantly moving, constantly changing. Remove one head, and ten replace it. Anonymous reinforces its ranks exponentially at need. Anonymous has no weakness or flaw. Anonymous exploits all weaknesses and flaws. Anonymous doesn't have a family or friends. Anonymous is your family and friends. Anonymous is not your friend. Anonymous is not your personal army. Anonymous is in control at all times. Anonymous does not accept failure, Anonymous delivers. Anonymous has no identity. Anonymous cannot be betrayed. Anonymous does it for the lulz. Anonymous is humanity. Anonymous are created as equals. Anonymous is a choice. Anonymous is an unstoppable force. Anonymous has over 9000 penises and they are all raping children. If Anonymous must have a name, his name is David. Anonymous obeys the Code. Anonymous is not Hitler. Anonymous is Legion. Anonymous does not forgive. Anonymous does not forget. Expect us.

If girls were on the internets...inb4 cumdumpster. Show your tits or leave. Why women shouldn't be allowed out of the kitchen.

People these days seem to think we are some sort of internet vigilante group, That couldn't be further from the truth.

We are the little voice in the back of your head that wants to fuck your hot sixteen year old daughter. We are the father who beats his six year old child simply because he spilled his beer. We are every chef that's ever spit in some random person's food for the hell of it. We are the pyromaniac who burns down the homeless shelter for shits and giggles. We are the person who rapes the same girl twice. We are that feeling you get when you beat your pets; and enjoy it.

We see some guy hang himself live, we laugh. A wrestler kills his family, we laugh. Some maladjusted Asian shoots up his university, we laugh. Fifty-thousand die in North Korea, we laugh. AIDS ravages a continent, we laugh. An Austrian Australian man locks his daughter in his basement for 24 years and fathers 8 children with her, we laugh. A religion invented by a psychotic writer swindles countless gullible fucktards out of their cash, we laugh, and then go kick his religion's ass just for the hell of it.

Message to New Anon From Old Anon

We have no culture

We are an autonomous collective, each an insignificant part of a whole. You cannot assimilate us, we do not change. You cannot defeat us, we do not exist. You cannot infiltrate us, we know our own. We do not sleep, we do not eat and we do not feel remorse. We will tear you apart from outside and in, we have all the time in the world.

Enjoy your AIDS, faggots.

Anonymous Recruitment History (Nevar 4Get) MARCH 26, 2007 Anonymous is dead. JUNE 17, 2007 Anonymous is alive, Moot has brought back forced Anonymous. July 20 2007 Anonymous is dead again, forced Anonymous is no more. July 27 2007 Several Anonymous members engaged in a series of website defacements as a perfectly legitimate form of Anonymous publicity. OVER 9,000! sites were affected. July 28 2007 Anonymous is alive. Forced Anonymous is back. October 20 2007 Anonymous is weaker than ever, with no concentrated energy in the form of /b/! October 24 2007 Anonymous is /b/ack, and ready to do it for the lulz again. January 21 2008 Chanology declares war on the CoS for the lulz (and great justice) February 10 2008 Chanology stages a worldwide IRL protest against CoS, resulting in epic win fucking fail. March 15 2008 Chanology stages ANOTHER worldwide IRL protest against CoS. Another win, but not quite as epic. SERIOUSLY epic win, gets moar media attention MORE FUCKING FAIL. May 08, 2008 Butthurt faggots are letting their own egos run amok and are editing faggotry on ED. May 14, 2008 As of now, Anonymous, Chanology and Raidfags are all united in indifference to one another and are busy bringing in the lulz. May 29, 2008 Anonymous is no longer forced, thanks to the fags found here: http://digg.com/politics/2008_House_Bill_775_Prohibit_anonymous_blogging lol, Palin emails

I will tell you Anonymous' motives. Anonymous does because Anonymous can. It is neither the inherent dark side of every man, nor is it the glorious white knight of the will of the people. Anonymous does because they can. And they feel like it. So do not shame yourself any longer, if you are at all confused. Put on the mask. Lose yourself. Welcome to the collective. You are Anonymous. You are Legion. You do not forgive. You do not forget. And You do not matter.

Anonymous, I know who you are - Version 6 How to tell a real anonymous from raidfags. NEVAR FORGET: SRS BINISS Anonymous is like an amoeba: A Real Anon. Simple, yet omnipresent-yet unnoticed. Willing to learn, merge, mutate, exeunt its failures, and survive. it is the very simplistic essence of life: random, undecyphered code; hypocritical and a paradox in itself. Anonymous can be a disease, or the squalor that gives us the right to live on this Earth. Anonymous is a Puzzle that cannot be solved. In order to defeat anonymous, it is required that you suffer greater than Stalin, and outsmart everyone while withholding your true name. You would have to be mightier than God himself, and Satan combined. You would have to undo so many things, and create so many devices. In other words....only anonymous can defeat anonymous. and even then, you would be anonymous, thus making anonymous a paradox. We do not need the internet to thrive, We have existed for over 9000 years, and our concept will exist as long as people can use a vehicle to transmit their thoughts without those being traced back to them. Anonymous is Immortal. You, are not.

Identity. One of our most precious possessions. You believe we all have one, but you are sadly mistaken. Identity belongs only to those who are important. Those who have earned it by struggle and blood. Those who matter. You, my friend, do not. Identity is a fragile and weak thing. It can be stolen or replaced. Even forgotten. Identity is a pointless thing for people like us. So why not let go of it and become Anonymous? We are all anonymous in some sense. The person on the bus. A customer in line. A stranger in another country. Being anonymous protects us in some way, making us feel safe at night and keeping us sane. How, you may ask. Simple. Being anonymous is to be part of the world, the ones like you who do not matter and do not stand out. It makes us feel like we belong. Anonymous is one and yet is many. The many combine to make one, the Legion. It is you, it is me, it is everything and anything. Anonymous lives to some day take over everything. No one shall learn the identity of Anonymous, for in finding identity, we lose our anonymous selves. So break away from your identity. Become one with anonymous and give up the struggle for identity. Join us and belong.

Authored on /b/day, the Declaration of /b/ Independence was (and still is) the essential document that separates Anon's ties to his homeland: When in the course of /b/tard events, it becomes necessary for anonymous to set forth the shackles of oppression we set forth on the Furfag mods of 4chan.org. They have plundered our posts, and deprived us of our jailbait. They have forced upon us their twisted ideology of "Furry Fandom." They have deprived us of our ability to fight our enemies, forcing us to submit to the wishes of the Furfag overlords. In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated bans from our homeland. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free anonymous. We, therefore, the Representatives of the Anonymous States of /b/, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good Anonymous of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That /b/ is, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the 4chan Crown, and that all political connection between /b/ and the State of 4chan, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor. We are Anonymous. We are /b/. Our home is no longer on 4chan. In these times of unrest, we have formed the State of 7chan.org as our new sovereign nation on the World Wide Internet. Signed, Anonymous

Though Anonymous has since been shifting between many *chan sites since /b/-day, this document is still important to the status of Anonymous, which defines them as independent of wherever their 'home' may happen to be. From the authoring of this precious document to present day, Anonymous would get full credit for Anon's doings, and not their home. This has since led to the /i/ slogan "Anon gets the credit, *chan gets the blame." In actuality, Anonymous raiders often claim to be from eBaum's World or Gaia Online, though whether any raid victims have actually been stupid enough to fall for it and hit Anonymous's enemies with a misdirected "counterattack" is unknown.

Pyromaniacs lusting after the flames that consume humanity. Right or wrong? No. We destroy for destruction's sake. Strauss warned that this accommodating culture would become stagnant. He feared that materialism would leave philosophy barren. This apathy toward transcendent truth would breed nihilism. Welcome to nihilism made manifest in Western Civilization. Strauss described nihilism as strong or weak. Strong were the Nazis, who worshiped might and power to destroy. Weak are the hollow McMansions, strip malls, and emo kids. Little did he realize weak nihilism would fester in the tubes. Strong nihilism has emerged in resentment of a superfluous society. Tycho's dickwad corollary would go beyond net flaming. To fear us is to fear everything. To not fear us is suicide. Anonymous has achieved a persona. Anthropologists would call it a “death cult.” We have subjugated our individuality for our thirst for hatred. Anonymous moves as a force of nature. Our thirst grows. You will never know when we are watching. We have shattered lives. We are always close to you. We are in each stranger's face. We are the itch that humanity will scratch into an infected, pus filled open sore. TL;DR We are Anonymous. We are Legion. We do not Forgive. We do not Forget.

With an identity you will eventually be found. The day will come when only Anonymous will walk the ground.

We will stop at nothing until we've achieved our goal Permanent destruction of the identification role. You, me, we...I am as you are Together we are united, stretching near and far. Anything standing in our way, doesn't deserve to live We are void of human restraints taught to never forgive Answering the question of who we are is a must. We are anonymous, indeed. Therefore, Expect us.

“  Write a wise saying and your name will live forever.  „  — Anonymous

“  THE VOICE OF NONE IS STRONGER THEN THE VOICE OF ONE.  „  — Anonymous

“  DESPICABLE, SLIMY, SCUMMY  „  —Bill O'Reilly

“  Aha! To be astounded. An army of assholes, an association armed with an arsenal of asinine ambiguously adult anonymii. This antiquated armada no mere attack force, is an astounding assembly of articulate aristocrats. Assuming the collective affliction has not abruptly atrophied, another day of ardent internet arguments arises. Under the ambiguous aegis of internet anonymity, all annoying assertions may be announced with reckless abandon. Apology? Do not forgive. Alas, I am all aflutter. After the anticipation....You may call me Anonymous.  „  — Anonymous

 “  ANONYMOUS IS THE CREATOR...THE CREATOR OF LIFE DEATH AND NEVER-ENDING HUMILIATION...ANONYMOUS IS KEY, THE ALL MIGHTY, THE HOLY SON...ANONYMOUS IS L.O.L'S...ANONYMOUS IS THE UNEXPECTED EXPECTED.-ANONYMOUS IS GOD!!! NOT I BUT WE ARE ANONYMOUS  „  —ANONYMOUS

“  Then Jesus asked him, "What is your name?" "My name is Legion," he replied, "for we are many."  „  —The Bible, Mark 5:9

genuine conversation with their audience,

Marhshall McLuhan argued that in each socio-cultural era the medium in which information is created and transmitted determines the essential characteristics of that culture. He also predicted the evolution of an interconnected "global village".  The shift from a centralized media industry modeled on industrial revolution structures to a decentralized chaotic information-age soup is having a profound effect on the messages we exchange and shaping the characteristics of our culture. The global village comes to a crescendo with podcasting, and you can participate in the revolution with tools that are easily within reach: your imagination, the computer you're using to read this web page, and a video camera. We're not going to predicting what's next, as that's going to depend on what you, yes you, plan to do with new media. If the flutter of one butterfly wing, can trigger a chain reaction of events resulting in a storm half-way across the planet, imagine the effect millions, or billions, of individually produced videos will have on the characteristic of the global village and the media landscape.

You don't even need a video camera to start videoblogging, the mashup culture is in full force

most new computers come with free video editing software

A large group of vloggers, over 2,000 at last count, actively participate in the Yahoo! Videoblogging Group from all over the world.

So much of what we take for granted as part of daily life online, from the BIND software that makes domain names work, to the Apache webserver that powers a sizable chunk of the world's websites, to the cheap Linux servers that Google stacks into its global datacloud, was created by volunteers who gave their creations away to make possible something larger−the Web as we know it.

Is it possible to understand exactly what it is about the web that makes Wikipedia, Linux, FightAIDS@Home, the Gutenberg Project and Creative Commons possible? And if so, can this theoretical knowledge be put to practical use?

"We must now turn our attention to building systems that support human sociality."

We must develop a participative pedagogy, assisted by digital media and networked publics, that focuses on catalyzing, inspiring, nourishing, facilitating, and guiding literacies essential to individual and collective life.

to humanize the use of instruments that might otherwise enable commodification, mechanization and dehumanization

By literacy, I mean, following on Neil Postman and others, the set of skills that enable individuals to encode and decode knowledge and power via speech, writing, printing and collective action, and which, when learned, introduce the individual to a community.

Printing did not cause democracy or science, but literate populations, enabled by the printing press, devised systems for citizen governance and collective knowledge creation. The Internet did not cause open source production, Wikipedia or emergent collective responses to natural disasters, but it made it possible for people to act together in new ways, with people they weren't able to organize action with before, in places and at paces for which collective action had never been possible.

If print culture shaped the environment in which the Enlightenment blossomed and set the scene for the Industrial Revolution, participatory media might similarly shape the cognitive and social environments in which twenty first century life will take place (a shift in the way our culture operates). For this reason, participatory media literacy is not another subject to be shoehorned into the curriculum as job training for knowledge workers.

Like the early days of print, radio, and television, the present structure of the participatory media regime−the political, economic, social and cultural institutions that constrain and empower the way the new medium can be used, and which impose structures on flows of information and capital−is still unsettled. As legislative and regulatory battles, business competition, and social institutions vie to control the new regime, a potentially decisive and presently unknown variable is the degree and kind of public participation. Because the unique power of the new media regime is precisely its participatory potential, the number of people who participate in using it during its formative years, and the skill with which they attempt to take advantage of this potential, is particularly salient.

taken together, over time, the little snippets coalesce into a surprisingly sophisticated portrait of your friends' and family members' lives, like thousands of dots making a pointillist painting. This was never before possible, because in the real world, no friend would bother to call you up and detail the sandwiches she was eating. The ambient information becomes like "a type of ESP," as Haley described it to me, an invisible dimension floating over everyday life.

ad hoc, self-organizing socializing.

The Japanese sociologist Mizuko Ito first noticed it with mobile phones: lovers who were working in different cities would send text messages back and forth all night

You could also regard the growing popularity of online awareness as a reaction to social isolation, the modern American disconnectedness that Robert Putnam explored in his book "Bowling Alone."

"Things like Twitter have actually given me a much bigger social circle. I know more about more people than ever before."

Online awareness inevitably leads to a curious question: What sort of relationships are these? What does it mean to have hundreds of "friends" on Facebook? What kind of friends are they, anyway?

Dunbar noticed that ape groups tended to top out at 55 members. Since human brains were proportionally bigger, Dunbar figured that our maximum number of social connections would be similarly larger: about 150 on average

where their sociality had truly exploded was in their "weak ties"

"I outsource my entire life," she said. "I can solve any problem on Twitter in six minutes."

She also keeps a secondary Twitter account that is private and only for a much smaller circle of close friends and family — "My little secret," she said. It is a strategy many people told me they used: one account for their weak ties, one for their deeper relationships.)

Psychologists have long known that people can engage in "parasocial" relationships with fictional characters, like those on TV shows or in books, or with remote celebrities we read about in magazines. Parasocial relationships can use up some of the emotional space in our Dunbar number, crowding out real-life people.

Danah Boyd, a fellow at Harvard's Berkman Center for Internet and Society who has studied social media for 10 years, published a paper this spring arguing that awareness tools like News Feed might be creating a whole new class of relationships that are nearly parasocial — peripheral people in our network whose intimate details we follow closely online, even while they, like Angelina Jolie, are basically unaware we exist.

"These technologies allow you to be much more broadly friendly, but you just spread yourself much more thinly over many more people."

She needs to stay on Facebook just to monitor what's being said about her. This is a common complaint I heard, particularly from people in their 20s who were in college when Facebook appeared and have never lived as adults without online awareness. For them, participation isn't optional. If you don't dive in, other people will define who you are.

"It's just like living in a village, where it's actually hard to lie because everybody knows the truth already," Tufekci said. "The current generation is never unconnected. They're never losing touch with their friends. So we're going back to a more normal place, historically. If you look at human history, the idea that you would drift through life, going from new relation to new relation, that's very new. It's just the 20th century."

Psychologists and sociologists spent years wondering how humanity would adjust to the anonymity of life in the city, the wrenching upheavals of mobile immigrant labor — a world of lonely people ripped from their social ties. We now have precisely the opposite problem. Indeed, our modern awareness tools reverse the original conceit of the Internet. When cyberspace came along in the early '90s, it was celebrated as a place where you could reinvent your identity — become someone new.

"If anything, it's identity-constraining now," Tufekci told me. "You can't play with your identity if your audience is always checking up on you.

"You know that old cartoon? 'On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog'? On the Internet today, everybody knows you're a dog! If you don't want people to know you're a dog, you'd better stay away from a keyboard."

Young people today are already developing an attitude toward their privacy that is simultaneously vigilant and laissez-faire. They curate their online personas as carefully as possible, knowing that everyone is watching — but they have also learned to shrug and accept the limits of what they can control.

Many of the avid Twitterers, Flickrers and Facebook users I interviewed described an unexpected side-effect of constant self-disclosure. The act of stopping several times a day to observe what you're feeling or thinking can become, after weeks and weeks, a sort of philosophical act. It's like the Greek dictum to "know thyself," or the therapeutic concept of mindfulness.

this new library – at least seven million volumes – has become available everywhere. The library has become coextensive with the Internet.

What does this mean for the library as we have known it? Has Google suddenly obsolesced the idea of a library as a building stuffed with books?

Google seems to have abandoned – or ignored – library science in its own book project.

In fact, because the library is universal, library science now needs to be a universal skill set, more broadly taught than at any time previous to this.

we are rapidly becoming a data-generating species.

In order to have a connection to our data selves of the past, we are all going to need to become library scientists.

Woolcock (1998) argues that social capital `encompasses the norms and networks facilitating collective action for mutual benefit.'

Fountain (1998) defines social capital as the institutional effectiveness of inter-organizational relationships and cooperation—horizontally among similar firms in associations, vertically in supply chains, and multidirectional links to sources of technical knowledge, human resources, and public agencies.

Nahapiet and Ghoshal (1998) defined social capital as the sum of actual and potential resources embedded within, available through and derived from the network of relationships possessed by an individual or social unit.

And Fukuyama (1999) included informal norms that promote cooperation between two or more individuals. The norms that constitute social capital can range from a norm of reciprocity between two friends, all the way up to complex and elaborately articulated doctrines like Christianity, Islamism or Confucianism. And so by definition, trust, networks, civil society, and the like which have been associated with social capital are all epiphenomenal, arising as a result of social capital but not constituting social capital itself.

A meta-societal definition of social capital was offered by the World Bank (1999), which referred to the institutions, relationships, and norms that shape the quality and quantity of a society's social interactions. In this view, social capital is seen not merely as the sum of the institutions that underpin a society _ it is the glue that holds them together.

Cohen and Prusak (2001) extend Putnam's definition to define social capital as a stock of active connections among people, which covers the trust, mutual understanding, and shared values and behaviours that bind people as members of human networks and communities.

As a working definition, we define social capital in virtual learning communities as . common social resource that facilitates information exchange, knowledge sharing, and knowledge construction through continuous interaction, built on trust and maintained through shared understanding.