By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony - Anon attacking Sony employees and their children?

Porcupine_I on 05 April 2011
r505Matt said:
Porcupine_I said:
r505Matt said:
Games4Fun said:
r505Matt said:
Games4Fun said:
 

Well im no legal expert in fact when it comes this kind of stuff you can say I know next to nothing on the laws. I also know from reading on the forums that people spin both sides in order to make them a bigger thing then what they probably are. Funny enough the site that posted what I underlined has since changed the title and said that line is a isolated case with no endorosements from the leaders of the leaderless group.  Still that means at least one person with some know how is targeting kids, or in the very list would like too. That is something that should never happen and according to wiki its not the first time a kid has been targeted by them or a group linked to them.

Anyways, Got off subject there some. Find what I read on these boards the big issues with Sony is he released the how to and some codes. Im not for what Geohot did, but im also not for how Sony has be handleing it. Example getting donatoin money information and the like when really it is not there buisness. Both sides are  being ..........

They targetted that other kid because he was promoting censorship. Anon HATES censorship.

And who knows, Stringer's kids could be 18 , so while they're still his children, they may be adults themselves. If they are actually kids (under 18 years of age), then I'm not so sure most of Anon would think of targetting them.

Yes, re-read the source, there was an update.

Update: After further research into this it seems we need to point out a little more strongly that the comment concerning “Stringer’s kids” was an isolated comment and has not been endorsed by any of the leadership of either Anonymous or SonyRecon (such that they are). The headline has been altered to reflect this.

This would be one of the things I dont get. They fight censorship with trying to censor another person or company. You can be against cernsorship all you want, but if you are doing it too then you are no better,

You know, this is something I've been trying to think through myself. Are they, in a sense, attempting to censor Sony for Sony's attempt at censoring? And is that okay? I think so. I'm not totally sure, but I do believe it it okay. I mean, Sony is attempting to censor Geohot and other hackers from their free speech right to share information. So I think fighting fire with fire is okay here.

Now, sure, it's not so black and white to say that the hackers actually have that right to share that information. Legal precedence says yes, but with the way this judge really seems to favor Sony, it can turn out either way.

Also, the whole subpoenaing for IPs for anyone who's visited the site since 2009 is very very anti-privacy. I mean, 2009? Is that when this recent hack was first released? That part of that really bothers me. Just visiting a site can get you put on a list. That just doesn't seem fair/right/just/legal to me.

are you opposing the free flow of information? shame on you!

There's a difference between censorship and privacy. You should learn about that fine difference before you notice your own shame, if you ever do. Also, update the OP. As ssj12 and I have pointed out, there was an update.

there is also a difference between legal action and illegal action. So, what is your point?



“It appeared that there had even been demonstrations to thank Big Brother for raising the chocolate ration to twenty grams a week. And only yesterday, he reflected, it had been announced that the ration was to be reduced to twenty grams a week. Was it possible that they could swallow that, after only twenty-four hours? Yes, they swallowed it.”

- George Orwell, ‘1984’

Around the Network
Kudistos Megistos on 05 April 2011
Porcupine_I said:

it's disgusting!


What's disgusting is the sensationalism in the reporting of this story. Looking at this site, I'm reminded of those old Fox News reports on "hackers on steroids" (warning: watching this video might lower your IQ, or might make you realise that VGChartz's reporting is of the same quality).

As someone has said, the worst anonymous is going to do to anyone at Sony or their families is make the internet equivalent of prank calls. Anonymous are not "hackers" (I suspect most journalists don't know what this word means) and their abilities are limited to pressing F5, running LOIC, trawling through the internet for personal information posted in public places, and being potty-mouthed once they've found a target. Anyone who has ever taken part in a 4chan raid or been in a thread in which one has been organised will know how little threat anonymous actually poses.

The way this story is reported is at the same time amusing and frightening. It is certainly based on either ignorance or mendaciousness. Perhaps we can learn something about the old media and the general public in the way they sex-up stories about uncoordinated attacks by 4channers and imagine them as either revolutionary movements or something akin to war or terrorism, an absolutely disgusting comparison that is an insult both to human intelligence and to the memories of people who have actually died as a result of real terrorism.

I think people just want an exciting story.



r505Matt on 05 April 2011
Games4Fun said:
r505Matt said:

You know, this is something I've been trying to think through myself. Are they, in a sense, attempting to censor Sony for Sony's attempt at censoring? And is that okay? I think so. I'm not totally sure, but I do believe it it okay. I mean, Sony is attempting to censor Geohot and other hackers from their free speech right to share information. So I think fighting fire with fire is okay here.

Now, sure, it's not so black and white to say that the hackers actually have that right to share that information. Legal precedence says yes, but with the way this judge really seems to favor Sony, it can turn out either way.

Also, the whole subpoenaing for IPs for anyone who's visited the site since 2009 is very very anti-privacy. I mean, 2009? Is that when this recent hack was first released? That part of that really bothers me. Just visiting a site can get you put on a list. That just doesn't seem fair/right/just/legal to me.

Well I was more referring to the 15yr old kid part on the whole censorship thing, but the same logic applies to the Geohot case I suppose. But the getting information on who donated visted the site and such is actually part of my problem with the Sony side. Which is one of the many reasons I cant agree with a side. Its abunch of politics and quite frankly it drives me nutty. You end up voting for the lesser of two evils, but in the end you are still going to  be screwed somehow.

Yeah, if it was just the donators, I might not even mind too much. But it's anyone who visited since 2009, around the time when Geohot first got in through Other OS. But that doesn't really have that much to do with the current hacks, and is the main reason I'm very against Sony lately.

The "funny" thing is, I'm VERY against piracy. Piracy has changed the music industry into something I don't like anymore. Musicians have to be businessmen themselves these days just to make a living. Being an artist isn't enough anymore (I'm a musician if you can't tell).

So I have quite a big problem with piracy, but I truly believe free speech is an amazing thing. Most corporations are against free speech, and go about corporate censorship on a daily basis. Maybe that's why it's still so easy to be against Sony here, so by trying to squash the hack in such a heavy handed way, it really just amounts to a form of corporate censorship.



r505Matt on 05 April 2011
Porcupine_I said:
r505Matt said:
Porcupine_I said:
r505Matt said:
 

You know, this is something I've been trying to think through myself. Are they, in a sense, attempting to censor Sony for Sony's attempt at censoring? And is that okay? I think so. I'm not totally sure, but I do believe it it okay. I mean, Sony is attempting to censor Geohot and other hackers from their free speech right to share information. So I think fighting fire with fire is okay here.

Now, sure, it's not so black and white to say that the hackers actually have that right to share that information. Legal precedence says yes, but with the way this judge really seems to favor Sony, it can turn out either way.

Also, the whole subpoenaing for IPs for anyone who's visited the site since 2009 is very very anti-privacy. I mean, 2009? Is that when this recent hack was first released? That part of that really bothers me. Just visiting a site can get you put on a list. That just doesn't seem fair/right/just/legal to me.

are you opposing the free flow of information? shame on you!

There's a difference between censorship and privacy. You should learn about that fine difference before you notice your own shame, if you ever do. Also, update the OP. As ssj12 and I have pointed out, there was an update.

there is also a difference between legal action and illegal action. So, what is your point?


Which illegal are you referring to, Anon illegal or Geohot "illegal"?

And you still haven't updated your OP, it would take you like, 10 seconds. Misleading thread is misleading.



Porcupine_I on 05 April 2011
Kudistos Megistos said:
Porcupine_I said:

it's disgusting!


What's disgusting is the sensationalism in the reporting of this story. Looking at this site, I'm reminded of those old Fox News reports on "hackers on steroids" (warning: watching this video might lower your IQ, or might make you realise that VGChartz's reporting is of the same quality).

As someone has said, the worst anonymous is going to do to anyone at Sony or their families is make the internet equivalent of prank calls. Anonymous are not "hackers" (I suspect most journalists don't know what this word means) and their abilities are limited to pressing F5, running LOIC, trawling through the internet for personal information posted in public places, and being potty-mouthed once they've found a target. Anyone who has ever taken part in a 4chan raid or been in a thread in which one has been organised will know how little threat anonymous actually poses.

The way this story is reported is at the same time amusing and frightening. It is certainly based on either ignorance or mendaciousness. Perhaps we can learn something about the old media and the general public in the way they sex-up stories about uncoordinated attacks by 4channers and imagine them as either revolutionary movements or something akin to war or terrorism, an absolutely disgusting comparison that is an insult both to human intelligence and to the memories of people who have actually died as a result of real terrorism.

I think people just want an exciting story.

how do you know that? they supposedly have no leaders, so who is going to tell them when they go too far?



“It appeared that there had even been demonstrations to thank Big Brother for raising the chocolate ration to twenty grams a week. And only yesterday, he reflected, it had been announced that the ration was to be reduced to twenty grams a week. Was it possible that they could swallow that, after only twenty-four hours? Yes, they swallowed it.”

- George Orwell, ‘1984’

Around the Network
Kudistos Megistos on 05 April 2011
Porcupine_I said:

how do you know that? they supposedly have no leaders, so who is going to tell them when they go too far?


I know that because, unlike the people getting worked up over this, I know how they operate.

They won't go too far because they can't go too far. Anonymous has an extremely short attention span and never knows what to do with personal data once they get hold of it. They have special projects like this against corporations and governments every week, and the only time they managed to get any success was when they raided ACS:Law and their retarded IT monkey made thousands of emails public.

By the end of this week, they'll have forgotten about Sony and will have moved onto some new target, and it will be as if nothing had happened.



Skeeuk on 05 April 2011

sad bastards............



...not much time to post anymore, used to be awesome on here really good fond memories from VGchartz...

PSN: Skeeuk - XBL: SkeeUK - PC: Skeeuk

really miss the VGCHARTZ of 2008 - 2013...

Porcupine_I on 05 April 2011
Kudistos Megistos said:
Porcupine_I said:

how do you know that? they supposedly have no leaders, so who is going to tell them when they go too far?


I know that because, unlike the people getting worked up over this, I know how they operate.

They won't go too far because they can't go too far. Anonymous has an extremely short attention span and never knows what to do with personal data once they get hold of it. They have special projects like this against corporations and governments every week, and the only time they managed to get any success was when they raided ACS:Law and their retarded IT monkey made thousands of emails public.

By the end of this week, they'll have forgotten about Sony and will have moved onto some new target, and it will be as if nothing had happened.

Your words in gods ears



“It appeared that there had even been demonstrations to thank Big Brother for raising the chocolate ration to twenty grams a week. And only yesterday, he reflected, it had been announced that the ration was to be reduced to twenty grams a week. Was it possible that they could swallow that, after only twenty-four hours? Yes, they swallowed it.”

- George Orwell, ‘1984’

Oblivion86 on 05 April 2011
Kudistos Megistos said:
Porcupine_I said:

it's disgusting!


What's disgusting is the sensationalism in the reporting of this story. Looking at this site, I'm reminded of those old Fox News reports on "hackers on steroids" (warning: watching this video might lower your IQ, or might make you realise that VGChartz's reporting is of the same quality).

As someone has said, the worst anonymous is going to do to anyone at Sony or their families is make the internet equivalent of prank calls. Anonymous are not "hackers" (I suspect most journalists don't know what this word means) and their abilities are limited to pressing F5, running LOIC, trawling through the internet for personal information posted in public places, and being potty-mouthed once they've found a target. Anyone who has ever taken part in a 4chan raid or been in a thread in which one has been organised will know how little threat anonymous actually poses.

The way this story is reported is at the same time amusing and frightening. It is certainly based on either ignorance or mendaciousness. Perhaps we can learn something about the old media and the general public in the way they sex-up stories about uncoordinated attacks by 4channers and imagine them as either revolutionary movements or something akin to war or terrorism, an absolutely disgusting comparison that is an insult both to human intelligence and to the memories of people who have actually died as a result of real terrorism.

I think people just want an exciting story.


Just ask HBGary what they are capable of, most them are just internet civilians, but they do have quite a few hackers in their ranks. I mean remotely wiping his iPad, freezing all his bank accounts and social networks, deleting his wow account. They are capable of alot more then internet pranks, but I believe they do need to tread careful with Sony.



Oblivion86 on 05 April 2011
Oblivion86 said:
Kudistos Megistos said:
Porcupine_I said:

it's disgusting!


What's disgusting is the sensationalism in the reporting of this story. Looking at this site, I'm reminded of those old Fox News reports on "hackers on steroids" (warning: watching this video might lower your IQ, or might make you realise that VGChartz's reporting is of the same quality).

As someone has said, the worst anonymous is going to do to anyone at Sony or their families is make the internet equivalent of prank calls. Anonymous are not "hackers" (I suspect most journalists don't know what this word means) and their abilities are limited to pressing F5, running LOIC, trawling through the internet for personal information posted in public places, and being potty-mouthed once they've found a target. Anyone who has ever taken part in a 4chan raid or been in a thread in which one has been organised will know how little threat anonymous actually poses.

The way this story is reported is at the same time amusing and frightening. It is certainly based on either ignorance or mendaciousness. Perhaps we can learn something about the old media and the general public in the way they sex-up stories about uncoordinated attacks by 4channers and imagine them as either revolutionary movements or something akin to war or terrorism, an absolutely disgusting comparison that is an insult both to human intelligence and to the memories of people who have actually died as a result of real terrorism.

I think people just want an exciting story.


Just ask HBGary what they are capable of, most them are just internet civilians, but they do have quite a few hackers in their ranks. I mean remotely wiping his iPad, freezing all his bank accounts and social networks, deleting his wow account. They are capable of alot more then internet pranks, but I believe they do need to tread carefully with Sony.

Again, I completely understand whatever actions they deem neccessary besides acts of violence.