While their commitment to digital freedom and expression is admirable I’m not sure Anonymous is a good role model for change. They kind of come off more as starry-eyed transhumanists than principled freedom-lovers, with that part about things “never being the same” and inevitable changes in the human condition. Good intentions are great, but belief in things like the Singularity seems a bit pie-in-the-sky for people who want freedom here, on earth, now.
Also related, but haven’t you singled out hackers in the past for practicing the same principles that the state does, only on a lesser scale? You mentioned people supporting Dennis Kucinich hacking into a corporate website as “imitators of the state”. Do you agree with Anonymous’ contention that DDoS is non-violent protest?
You mentioned people supporting Dennis Kucinich hacking into a corporate website as “imitators of the state”.
True, though my point was not so much to criticise the hackers as to criticise as hypocritical those Kucinich supporters who condemned the hackers. And I was a bit less of left-libertarian then than I am now.
Do you agree with Anonymous’ contention that DDoS is non-violent protest?
Well, DDoS isn’t violent, exactly. I lean toward thinking it counts as force, though. Whether it’s legitimate or illegitimate force depends on whose site is being hit and just how criminal they are. The site of Spain’s national police force — a chief enforcement arm of the state — strikes me as a legitimate target. CBS News, despite certainly being in various ways a beneficiary of statism, does not so strike me. Sony is perhaps in between, but given the rights-violations on Sony’s part to which Anonymous’s hacking was a response, I lean toward thinking they were a legitimate target too.
While their commitment to digital freedom and expression is admirable I’m not sure Anonymous is a good role model for change. They kind of come off more as starry-eyed transhumanists than principled freedom-lovers, with that part about things “never being the same” and inevitable changes in the human condition. Good intentions are great, but belief in things like the Singularity seems a bit pie-in-the-sky for people who want freedom here, on earth, now.
They’re not perfect, but they’re in the right vicinity.
Very true, Anon73. I think by “marvelous” Roderick meant “a marvelous example of childish, end-of-times fantasizing.”
Also related, but haven’t you singled out hackers in the past for practicing the same principles that the state does, only on a lesser scale? You mentioned people supporting Dennis Kucinich hacking into a corporate website as “imitators of the state”. Do you agree with Anonymous’ contention that DDoS is non-violent protest?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-13749181
True, though my point was not so much to criticise the hackers as to criticise as hypocritical those Kucinich supporters who condemned the hackers. And I was a bit less of left-libertarian then than I am now.
Well, DDoS isn’t violent, exactly. I lean toward thinking it counts as force, though. Whether it’s legitimate or illegitimate force depends on whose site is being hit and just how criminal they are. The site of Spain’s national police force — a chief enforcement arm of the state — strikes me as a legitimate target. CBS News, despite certainly being in various ways a beneficiary of statism, does not so strike me. Sony is perhaps in between, but given the rights-violations on Sony’s part to which Anonymous’s hacking was a response, I lean toward thinking they were a legitimate target too.
What about the collateral damage in the Sony case? Many innocent users were denied what they had paid for.