Group items tagged

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

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.

will one day fight for control of information

he form of value

Knowledge is and will be produced in order to be sold

Wittgenstein, taking up the study of language again from scratch, focuses his attention on the effects of different modes of discourse; he calls the various types of utterances he identifies along the way (a few of which I have listed) language games.

especially if it is to undergo an exteriorisation with respect to the “knower” and an alienation from its user even greater than has previously been the case

revealing that knowledge and power are simply two sides of the same question: who decides what knowledge is, and who knows what needs to be decided? In the computer age, the question of knowledge is now more than ever a question of government.

New legal issues will be raised, and with them the question: “who will know?”

the observable social bond is composed of language “moves.”

One can decide that the principal role of knowledge is as an indispensable element in the functioning of society, and act in accordance with that decision, only if one has already decided that society is a giant machine.

For brevity’s sake, suffice it to say that functions of regulation, and therefore of reproduction, are being and will be further withdrawn from administrators and entrusted to machines. Increasingly, the central question is becoming who will have access to the information these machines must have in storage to guarantee that the right decisions are made. Access to data is, and will continue to be, the prerogative of experts of all stripes. The ruling class is and will continue to be the class of decision makers. Even now it is no longer composed of the traditional political class, but of a composite layer of corporate leaders, high-level administrators, and the heads of the major professional, labor, political, and religious organisations.

This breaking up of the grand Narratives (discussed below, sections 9 and 10) leads to what some authors analyse in terms of the dissolution of the social bond and the disintegration of social aggregates into a mass of individual atoms thrown into the absurdity of Brownian motion.

It would be superficial to reduce its significance to the traditional alternative between manipulatory speech and the unilateral transmission of messages on the one hand, and free expression and dialogue on the other.

What is needed if we are to understand social relations in this manner, on whatever scale we choose, is not only a theory of communication, but a theory of games which accepts agonistics as a founding principle.

Rather, the limits are themselves the stakes and provisional results of language strategies, within the institution and without.

This, I think, is the appropriate approach to contemporary institutions of knowledge.

Because love is an act of courage, not of fear, love is commitment to others.

If I do not love the world — if I do not love life — if I do not love people — I cannot enter into dialogue.

dialogue cannot exist without humility.

Dialogue further requires an intense faith in humankind, faith in their power to make and remake, to create and re-create, faith in their vocation to be more fully human

the “dialogical man” believes in others even before he meets them face to face.

Founding itself upon love, humility, and faith, dialogue becomes a horizontal relationship of which mutual trust between the dialoguers is the logical consequence.

naming of the world

Whereas faith in humankind is an a priori requirement for dialogue, trust is established by dialogue.

Nor yet can dialogue exist without hope. Hope is rooted in men’s incompletion, from which they move out in constant search

critical thinking — thinking which discerns an indivisible solidarity between the world and the people and admits of no dichotomy between them — thinking which perceives reality as process, as transformation, rather than as a static entity — thinking which does not separate itself from action, but constantly immerses itself in temporality without fear of the risks involved.

We must never merely discourse on the present situation, must never provide the people with programs which have little or nothing to do with their own preoccupations, doubts, hopes, and fears — programs which at times in fact increase the fears of the oppressed consciousness. It is not our role to speak to the people about our own view of the world, nor to attempt to impose that view on them, but rather to dialogue with the people about their view and ours. We must realize that their view of the world, manifested variously in their action, reflects their situation in the world. Educational and political action which is not critically aware of this situation runs the risk either of “banking” or of preaching in the desert.

Often, educators and politicians speak and are not understood because their language is not attuned to the concrete situation of the people they address. Accordingly their talk is just alienated and alienating rhetoric.

he dialogue of education as the practice of freedom

oncept of a generative theme

For precisely this reason, the methodology proposed requires that the investigators and the people (who would normally be considered objects of that investigation) should act as co-investigators.

Generative themes can be located in concentric circles, moving from the general to the particular.

I consider the fundamental theme of our epoch to be that of domination — which implies its opposite, the theme of liberation, as the objective to be achieved.

For example, underdevelopment, which cannot be understood apart from the relationship of dependency, represents a limit-situation characteristic of societies of the Third World.

I must re-emphasize that the generative theme cannot be found in people, divorced from reality; nor yet in reality, divorced from people; much less in “no man’s land.” It can only be apprehended in the human-world relationship.

t is as transforming and creative beings that humans, in their permanent relations with reality, produce not only material goods — tangible objects — but also social institutions, ideas, and concepts

Actually, themes exist in people in their relations with the world, with reference to concrete facts.

We must realize that the aspirations, the motives, and the objectives implicit in the meaningful thematics are human aspirations, motives, and objectives.

a common striving towards awareness of reality and towards self-awareness,

As a process of search, of knowledge, and thus of creation, it requires the investigators to discover the interpenetration of problems, in the linking of meaningful themes.

the comprehension of total reality

Thus, the process of searching for the meaningful thematics should include a concern for the links between themes, a concern to pose these themes as problems, and a concern for their historical-cultural context.

Just as the educator may not elaborate a program to present to the people, neither may the investigator elaborate “itineraries” for researching the thematic universe, starting from points which he has predetermined.

That is, they must consist of communication and of the common experience of a reality perceived in the complexity of its constant “becoming.”

Human beings are because they are in a situation. And they will be more the more they not only critically reflect upon their existence but critically act upon it.

One of these basic themes (and one which I consider central and indispensable) is the anthropological concept of culture. Whether men and women are peasants or urban workers, learning to read or enrolled in a post-literacy program, the starting point of their search to know more (in the instrumental meaning of the term) is the debate of the concept. As they discuss the world of culture, they express their level of awareness of reality in which various themes are implicit. Their discussion touches upon other aspects of reality which comes to be perceived in an increasingly critical manner These aspects in turn involve many other themes.

I am more and more convinced that true revolutionaries must perceive the revolution, because of its creative and liberating nature, as an act of love

This affirmation contains an entire dialogical theory of how to construct the program content of education, which cannot he elaborated according to what the educator thinks best for the students.