The Real Role Of Anonymous In Occupy Wall Street | Hacker News Reader

The Real Role Of Anonymous In Occupy Wall Street

fastcompany.com

28 pointsSato16 comments

They deserve credit for jumpstarting this. The first thing I remember about OWS is that Anonymous was promoting it on Twitter. So I don't know if they are the absolute initiators of this movement, but there might not be protests today or they might've lasted only a couple of days if it wasn't for Anonymous supporting and promoting it, and trying to get as many people there as possible every day.

And they deserve credit for building alliances with existing activist networks while they were organizing Operation BART protests. Without these, Anon's impact on OWS wouldn't have been much noticed. It's a wonder to watch a the movement suddenly manifest itself in real space, after half a decade of chaos and lulz.

"V for Vendetta" is becoming real!?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V_for_Vendetta_(film)

Not sure what you're trying to say here. Anonymous was active years before V came out, and they adopted the mask quite a while after the comic and movie popularized the image. Would you prefer they were big black guys in suits and afros? That was their symbol prior to V.

No, I got shocked. I happened to watch the movie only a week ago. With the masks, the Occupy movement would look like the movie.

I hadn't noticed any clues of agitation. Now the movement looks like a terror, rather than a protest...

Think of them in terms of what they threaten, and they seem like a failure. But measure them in attention they've brought to this cause, and they're a pretty significant success. Planned or unintentional?

In addition to the accounting if Anonymous' role in things, this dabbles in a good accounting of the movement that was bubbling from many different places. Good article.

What evidence is there that "anonymous" is an actual group, rather than a label that a bunch of folks self-apply when they want to do things?

I'm annoyed at Anonymous because I strongly supported their first action (picketing the Church of Scientology) but every action since then has just been stupid and destructive.

It seems to be both, it's intended to be the label that folks can self-apply, but in practice it seems there's a core group that are behind a lot of the activist stuff.

Identifying or targeting individual police officers or bankers or protesters, for that matter, misses the entire point of the OWS concept. The banking, investment, "I got mine" culture is the common target of those occupying Wall St

Publishing the names of police officers and bankers seems to me to be a remarkably stupid idea. If people start getting beaten or attacked as a result of the events in NYC whatever support that protestors currently have will quickly dry up as the news changes from peaceful protest to violent riot.

One police officer, who walked up and pepper sprayed the crap out of 2 20-yo girls who were just standing there, then walked away satisfied he'd done his job. Did you see the video? Real tough guy.

That's not to justify vigilante action against him (which hasn't happened), but I'm sure likeminded individuals are a little more aware of what could happen if you do something like that on camera in the 21st century.

I consider a chilling effect on "assaulting 20yo girls because they're hippies" to be a good thing.

"but I'm sure likeminded individuals are a little more aware of what could happen if you do something like that on camera in the 21st century."

It doesn't have to happen on camera. All it takes is one person to take it on himself administer justice, which is kind of the MO of anonymous...

I must have been careless with my pronouns. I meant likeminded as in "think it's a good idea to assault 20yo girls who are peacefully protesting".

Noone's gone after this particular asshole at his house, or even advocated that others should do so, and that's a good thing, but he should lose his job at the least. And, yes, I'm happy that there's a precedent that doing this kind of thing will get you exposed publicly for it.

"I must have been careless with my pronouns. I meant likeminded as in "think it's a good idea to assault 20yo girls who are peacefully protesting"."

If that's what you mean, I'd scrap that whole sentence.

As to advocating retribution; that's what it looks like anonymous is doing if you watch the 'doxing' video. If all they needed to do was identify the man so that he could be more effectively brought to court, there would be no reason to list his address or relatives' names. The video reads like a threat to me and I'm surprised more people aren't put off by it.

What's more, this man isn't the only one who has been threatened in this manner. I'm more concerned about the 'targeted' bankers, while they are probably unethical people and may have had a role in the financial collapse, they should not be treated to mob justice any more than anyone else.

Hopefully mob violence won't happen, but the longer the protests persist, the greater the likelihood that shit's going to go down.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com