Hacker News Reader

Comment by Ohadr | Hacker News Reader

Anonymous just declared that they are not responsible for this:

https://twitter.com/anonyops/status/153969476277248000

"We have no love for Israeli gov't but targeting 1000s for being Israeli? Sorry, you are not #Anonymous pastebay.com/148920"

View on HN

Heh. I like how Anonymous keep on repeating how are they "decentralized" and the only thing really needed to join is to call yourself Anonymous - and at the same time keep on telling trough semi-official twitter accounts, how this Wahhabi attack or that Stratfor attack was not official Anonymous and blah blah blah.

Hypocrisy on hypocrisy.

I would argue that the purpose of allowing anyone to call themselves "Anonymous" places the group's identity on their actions, not who they say they are. It's kind of the whole point of calling themselves "Anonymous" and leads right into the "we are legion" bit. There is no individual, only the movement.

However, by performing actions that are contrary to the Anonymous ideology the Saudi attackers distanced themselves farther from Anonymous than any name could

But what is "Anonymous' ideology" if anyone is part of Anonymous?

Maybe Anonymous should have chosen a different name. Other groups could then remain anonymous, without being assumed to be Anonymous.

Well, actually, Anonymous didn't really chose the name - it was a joke made on default "Anonymous" username on 4chan. And it really grew somehow organically into this point.

That's what I don't like about people saying "You are not true Anonymous". First hackers under the name "Anonymous" posted other people MySpace passwords on 4chan and put blinking lights on epilepsy website. And the whole scientology movement was first meant as a joke, as a reaction to the leaked Tom Cruise video.

Really, people calling other people "not true Anonymous" are hypocritical. I think.

Anonymous is an adjective, not a noun. It's not a group.

Can we just start calling these folks "Anonymous USA" to avoid naming something important with a term that anyone else on the planet can alter at will? Is there really any logic in choosing a brand that is interchangeable with the phrase "anyone on earth"?

Wouldn't that seem to suggest that staying completely anonymous while being taken seriously on the Internet is impossible?

Splitters!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com