Forums - Sony Discussion - Anonymous is mad ((again) and feel they need to say something (again)

goforgold said:
Galaki said:
hxczuner said:
Galaki said:
hxczuner said:

Or, because they cannot prove that they themselves are NOT responsible

Guilty until proven innocent.

That's not really what I'm saying. If you're the kid in school who always throws things in class, is anyone going to believe it wasn't you when someone else throws something in class? The fact that they have no credibility, and no means to really defend themselves (because they don't exist) is their issue right now.

My point still stand. By putting blame on a "likely" target without solid proof means you could be letting the real target get away.

How do you feel if you get thrown in jail for rape just because you happen to pass by the scene?

when your a known self proclaimed rapist............

Then you would already be in jail....



Around the Network
Galaki said:
goforgold said:
Galaki said:
hxczuner said:
Galaki said:
hxczuner said:

Or, because they cannot prove that they themselves are NOT responsible

Guilty until proven innocent.

That's not really what I'm saying. If you're the kid in school who always throws things in class, is anyone going to believe it wasn't you when someone else throws something in class? The fact that they have no credibility, and no means to really defend themselves (because they don't exist) is their issue right now.

My point still stand. By putting blame on a "likely" target without solid proof means you could be letting the real target get away.

How do you feel if you get thrown in jail for rape just because you happen to pass by the scene?

when your a known self proclaimed rapist............

Then you would already be in jail....

hence the Anonymous



Galaki said:
goforgold said:
Galaki said:
hxczuner said:
Galaki said:
hxczuner said:

Or, because they cannot prove that they themselves are NOT responsible

Guilty until proven innocent.

That's not really what I'm saying. If you're the kid in school who always throws things in class, is anyone going to believe it wasn't you when someone else throws something in class? The fact that they have no credibility, and no means to really defend themselves (because they don't exist) is their issue right now.

My point still stand. By putting blame on a "likely" target without solid proof means you could be letting the real target get away.

How do you feel if you get thrown in jail for rape just because you happen to pass by the scene?

when your a known self proclaimed rapist............

Then you would already be in jail....


But let's say you get parole, and then a rape happens in your neighborhood.  Guess who's number one on the suspects list?   That's the same thing that's happening here for better or for worse, a group of known hackers declared war on Sony and Sony got hacked.  I agree I don't think the same people are involved, but I won't fault people for making the obvious logic leap.



...

Galaki said:

My point still stand. By putting blame on a "likely" target without solid proof means you could be letting the real target get away.

It sounds like you're confusing investigations and legal proceedings with common sense. Naturally suspicion will fall on Anonymous after they, you know, threatened to do this, and whether or not forum dwellers think it was them has fuck all to do with the authorities catching the real perpetrators.



Galaki said:
hxczuner said:
Galaki said:
hxczuner said:

Or, because they cannot prove that they themselves are NOT responsible

Guilty until proven innocent.

That's not really what I'm saying. If you're the kid in school who always throws things in class, is anyone going to believe it wasn't you when someone else throws something in class? The fact that they have no credibility, and no means to really defend themselves (because they don't exist) is their issue right now.

My point still stand. By putting blame on a "likely" target without solid proof means you could be letting the real target get away.

How do you feel if you get thrown in jail for rape just because you happen to pass by the scene?


They're more than a likely target though, they're a repeated offender. Also, their "group" has attacked and threatened Sony already, as we all know, which does nothing for their innocence. To use your example: If I was a known rapist and had recently expressed my intention to rape someone, I wouldn't have a leg to stand on if that person was raped. I get what you're saying, an accusation should not precede the evidence. In this situation though, they've brought it on themselves.



3DS | 2363-5694-1881 | lpfisher

Around the Network
hxczuner said:
Galaki said:
hxczuner said:
Galaki said:
hxczuner said:

Or, because they cannot prove that they themselves are NOT responsible

Guilty until proven innocent.

That's not really what I'm saying. If you're the kid in school who always throws things in class, is anyone going to believe it wasn't you when someone else throws something in class? The fact that they have no credibility, and no means to really defend themselves (because they don't exist) is their issue right now.

My point still stand. By putting blame on a "likely" target without solid proof means you could be letting the real target get away.

How do you feel if you get thrown in jail for rape just because you happen to pass by the scene?


They're more than a likely target though, they're a repeated offender. Also, their "group" has attacked and threatened Sony already, as we all know, which does nothing for their innocence. To use your example: If I was a known rapist and had recently expressed my intention to rape someone, I wouldn't have a leg to stand on if that person was raped. I get what you're saying, an accusation should not preceed the evidence. In this situation though, they've brought it on themselves.

Exactly. They are known to not shy at taken credit for what they did.

Why would they deny credit when they say they are going to hack Sony?



I just bought me a PS3 the slim version.  It's a very sweet system.  We it goes back online, it's going to be even sweeter.



Hackers are poor nerds who don't wash.

Galaki said:

Exactly. They are known to not shy at taken credit for what they did.

Why would they deny credit when they say they are going to hack Sony?

Well, according to the FT report, members of Operation Sony started to wig out after the FBI got involved. That could have some bearing on it.



Galaki said:
hxczuner said:
Galaki said:
hxczuner said:
Galaki said:
hxczuner said:

Or, because they cannot prove that they themselves are NOT responsible

Guilty until proven innocent.

That's not really what I'm saying. If you're the kid in school who always throws things in class, is anyone going to believe it wasn't you when someone else throws something in class? The fact that they have no credibility, and no means to really defend themselves (because they don't exist) is their issue right now.

My point still stand. By putting blame on a "likely" target without solid proof means you could be letting the real target get away.

How do you feel if you get thrown in jail for rape just because you happen to pass by the scene?


They're more than a likely target though, they're a repeated offender. Also, their "group" has attacked and threatened Sony already, as we all know, which does nothing for their innocence. To use your example: If I was a known rapist and had recently expressed my intention to rape someone, I wouldn't have a leg to stand on if that person was raped. I get what you're saying, an accusation should not preceed the evidence. In this situation though, they've brought it on themselves.

Exactly. They are known to not shy at taken credit for what they did.

Why would they deny credit when they say they are going to hack Sony?

That goes back to my original point, their amorphous nature is their weakness. We've had one group of "anonymous members" confirm the group's involvement, and now we've got another that's denying thier involvement. Members of anonymous were definitely involved, but because the entire group isn't accountable they can confirm/deny whatever they want.

 

To lighten it up a little bit, what if this whole thing was just a huge publicity stunt? What if Sony came out and said "Hey, we actually just needed some PSN downtime to implement X new features and Anon. was a good distraction."



3DS | 2363-5694-1881 | lpfisher

hxczuner said:
Galaki said:
hxczuner said:
Galaki said:
hxczuner said:
Galaki said:
hxczuner said:

Or, because they cannot prove that they themselves are NOT responsible

Guilty until proven innocent.

That's not really what I'm saying. If you're the kid in school who always throws things in class, is anyone going to believe it wasn't you when someone else throws something in class? The fact that they have no credibility, and no means to really defend themselves (because they don't exist) is their issue right now.

My point still stand. By putting blame on a "likely" target without solid proof means you could be letting the real target get away.

How do you feel if you get thrown in jail for rape just because you happen to pass by the scene?


They're more than a likely target though, they're a repeated offender. Also, their "group" has attacked and threatened Sony already, as we all know, which does nothing for their innocence. To use your example: If I was a known rapist and had recently expressed my intention to rape someone, I wouldn't have a leg to stand on if that person was raped. I get what you're saying, an accusation should not preceed the evidence. In this situation though, they've brought it on themselves.

Exactly. They are known to not shy at taken credit for what they did.

Why would they deny credit when they say they are going to hack Sony?

That goes back to my original point, their amorphous nature is their weakness. We've had one group of "anonymous members" confirm the group's involvement, and now we've got another that's denying thier involvement. Members of anonymous were definitely involved, but because the entire group isn't accountable they can confirm/deny whatever they want.

 

To lighten it up a little bit, what if this whole thing was just a huge publicity stunt? What if Sony came out and said "Hey, we actually just needed some PSN downtime to implement X new features and Anon. was a good distraction."

The whole board of directors would be asked to resign since it has affected the stock price of Sony. Further, whoever decided to do this wouldn't have the authority to do so without shareholders consent through a vote.