Thread: Anonymous - The Plan

I'll agree with people liberating the media from government regulatory systems and rather rely on each and every media contributor being someone with acceptable principles when the world's population raises the average IQ bar a few notches.

Taking away the regulations surrounding what is put into the media for general consumption (and yes, we mean regulations rather than Orwellian control) relies on an intelligent, responsible viewership.

The people that are intelligent and responsible tend to understand how the media works and find the things they want to see, read or hear by themselves.

Goddamn I hate complaints about the government controlling the media. Except. You know, when it comes from countries where that actually happens. Which is not goddamned America.

Originally Posted by Siиdяed

The people that are intelligent and responsible tend to understand how the media works and find the things they want to see, read or hear by themselves.

Yes, I agree. I think that most people would also agree that the content of all of these things contains programming that helps the private organizations that own the mediums through which the media is 'distributed.'

It's how things like racism and homophobia get perpetuated. It's why "gangsta life" gets glorified, and you see ignorant ass kids, almost ENTIRELY of hispanic and black origin shooting each other up for no reason, and then they have kids young, and raise them to keep the cycle going. Everything is fucking marketed in a specific way ON PURPOSE. Nothing about an advertisement is accidental. Every line, every graphic, every color choice and timing is done for very specific reasons. You can go to school to actually study this- this is why marketing companies make so much money.

It's why the news is almost always something bad, some new thing to be afraid of. Something that may not even necessarily be true, but something new to fear. Some new trend to follow. But never about how the government is continuously fluoridating the water supplies (fluoride is a toxin), or how nearly literally all of our politicians are continuously bought off by major corporations, so that such corporations can get bills passed that will help them and screw everyone else. It's everything BUT that.

The radio and the television contain content that is designed to distract. Everything is about advertising. Watch any program on cable. Crawlers at the bottom of the screen constantly. Something always in the corner, advertising yet another show. Did you know that watching television is literally a form of a hypnotic trance? (I don't mean to make that sound dramatic, as there are many forms of trance, such as driving) In a trance state, one's mind is much more open to suggestion. And if that suggestion, or series of suggestions comes very gradually and subtly, in a very VERY precise manner, (such as the manner in which advertisements and news program sets are designed and delivered to the public) the conscious mind won't notice. The subconscious will, and that has a directed effect on THOUGHT.

I mean, it happens on the internet too, don't get me wrong, but on the internet EVERYONE has a voice, and by giving control of it up to private companies just like we did with tv and radio, we are silencing essentially everyone who isn't a millionaire. In other countries, media is literally banned if it doesn't come from the government itself. It's a more direct form of oppression. It's obvious. That's the point. Do you think something like that would fly in trigger-happy, constitution-citin', gun-totin', "free-speech" havin' Amer'kuh? Fuck no. It has to be done with surgical precision. Systematically dumbing people down. If they tried it any other way- if it was ANY less subtle, it would NOT WORK. Look at society man, people are stupider, and lazier than they ever have been.

Idunno, it's 3 am and I'm trying to tie my point in somewhere, I'll have to post tomorrow. But think about it. You throw a lobster into a pot of boiling water, and it will notice right away. Throw it in cold water, and slowly heat it up, and it may not. A similar thing has happened with television and radio. And once internet goes, there will be no voices out there to oppose the people who are really in control. The large corporations and elite bankers who ACTUALLY run the world. If you give them control of this LAST open, neutral form of media, it will give them an official monopoly for what we see. And overtime, feeding people a range of things that you want them to think and believe, and gradually and subtly changing the content from year to year, is much like brainwashing. Well, not much like- IS.

So don't try to tell me it doesn't happen. It may be more subtle in the United States, but it most certainly does happen. In goddamned America. In other countries, they literally shut everything that is not what they desire OFF. But the people still have their MINDS. In this country, they don't shut it off. They twist it to guide the collective mind to a place where it can be easily influenced, controlled, and left generally asleep, and unaware of everything that goes on behind the curtain of Oz. That is MUCH more effective than shutting it off altogether in any case.

Well done explaining the fundamentals of advertising.

But that just became a critique of capitalism. With the usual awkward merging of all people the many different people involved in all the things in the media (all with their own agendas, be it political, recreational, artistic, principled, whatever, for what they present in their media output - some with excessive control, as in good advertising, and some with much looser control) into something homogenous and starkly at odds with all those people on the receiving end.

I get that people don't want the internet 'controlled'. And I get the resentment for the power corporations would get over it if there were regulations put in place.

But at the same time I get why there should be regulations. Because humanity is wildly hit and miss when it comes to being given excesses of freedom. Give someone the day off and there's a hell of a good chance they'll sit in their pants watching the mind-controlling shit on tv all day.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

Most of anonymous are talentless 15 year old trolls. The ones crashing security companies and government websites are a small minority, most of whom probably actually work for as security experts. Anonymous is doing good by me by fighting internet censorship and for freedom of the press. Constitution FTW

Evidence?

My challenge for evidence was not meant to sound as skeptical as it did. I sincerely never heard of this group, so I was actually sincerely asking what kind of evidence is out there that such a large portion of these people are so young, rather than attempting to challenge your claim.

Originally Posted by sloth

Evidence?

Evidence for what? That the few crashing secure websites are probably professionals? Because modern security is incredibly complex, I'm writing part of one now. It takes more than a DoS attack or a SQL injection to crash a website like Visa. Everything is hackable, but the fact that it was done in less than a minute, leads me to believe that it's a professional. There are people paid specifically to break into websites, and they are much much better than teenage hackers. I could almost certainly bring DV down, I wouldn't be able to touch a credit card company.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

Evidence for what? That the few crashing secure websites are probably professionals? Because modern security is incredibly complex, I'm writing part of one now. It takes more than a DoS attack or a SQL injection to crash a website like Visa. Everything is hackable, but the fact that it was done in less than a minute, leads me to believe that it's a professional. There are people paid specifically to break into websites, and they are much much better than teenage hackers. I could almost certainly bring DV down, I wouldn't be able to touch a credit card company.

No...
Evidence for what I clearly asked evidence for, when I said "what kind of evidence is out there that such a large portion of these people are so young".

Originally Posted by Siиdяed

.

Goddamn I hate complaints about the government controlling the media. Except. You know, when it comes from countries where that actually happens. Which is not goddamned America.

Bullshit.
Have you ever been to Wikileaks? Besides Orwellian prophecies do not need to come true for an oppressive order to be in place. Sometimes Huxley's prophecies will do just fine. In Brave New World important media wasn't censored so much as just completely ignored by a complacent population. The problem we face is that our population is perfectly content being lied to and while it is (temporarily) possible to find free information on the web, this is a closing window.

I kind of find it funny that everyone is still trying to describe Anonymous as a set, concrete group.

Originally Posted by Siиdяed

Goddamn I hate complaints about the government controlling the media. Except. You know, when it comes from countries where that actually happens. Which is not goddamned America.

Hasn't war-related news been filtered ever since Vietnam (or was it Korea?).

That's hardly comparable to the state media of some very sketchy dictatorships.

Well duh. Sindred's post implied that the American government doesn't control the media (at least it seemed that way when i read it), I was quipping in to say the it does (even if to a lesser extent).

I think this concept is a really really good idea, and I want to see how it's going to play out. I'm going to try to participate as much as I can.

Originally Posted by Spartiate

That's hardly comparable to the state media of some very sketchy dictatorships.

It goes without saying US is not the worst or even in the same ballgame as the worst offender of censorship and human rights. But there will always be somebody doing it wrong and you can't use them as an excuse to say you're doing it right.

I hate the excuse "oh (insert country) is much worse".

It's a fucking cop out. I'm so sick of that argument.
Just because some other person is doing worse than you, doesn't mean you can't do better than you are.
Just because Korea is fucking shit, doesn't mean other countries should just chill out and stop improving.

Tommo makes a really good point. A lot of people I know do the whole "so and so's worse" shit, and it really doesn't mean anything at all.

Originally Posted by tommo's signature

There's always someone crazier than you are.

I just wanted to point out the irony, despite the fact that I sincerely completely agree with you.

Lol. Well, it's not really irony. It's true. And it's true that some countries are worse off than ours.
Doesn't mean we can't improve, or that we should even be mildly satisfied with the way things are atm.

Originally Posted by tommo

or that we should even be mildly satisfied with the way things are atm.

Seriously? What's so intolerable right now? Have you ever been censored?

Anonymous should also fight for women's suffrage. We already have it, but that's no reason to stop fighting for it!

Again, they're not out to correct any injustices, they're just power-tripping behind the safety of a computer screen.

Originally Posted by Spartiate

Seriously? What's so intolerable right now? Have you ever been censored?

Anonymous should also fight for women's suffrage. We already have it, but that's no reason to stop fighting for it!

Again, they're not out to correct any injustices, they're just power-tripping behind the safety of a computer screen.

So its not censorship when financial institutions do everything in their power to remove a website leaking censored documents?

Obviously censorship IS working well in this country or you would know what you're talking about.

Since when is cutting business ties censorship? You can still go on Wikileaks can't you?

Originally Posted by Rainman

"15 year old trolls"

You just described me.

Originally Posted by Rainman

Comcast is lobbying to get a bill passed that would enable them to filter what gets put on the internet.

WTF. I just moved and now I'm on Comcast, but I don't like the idea of that at all.

Originally Posted by Spartiate

Since when is cutting business ties censorship? You can still go on Wikileaks can't you?

I take you haven't read any of wikileaks. There's a lot of crap that's been publicly released through it that I haven't seen a hair about on the media.

Originally Posted by jarrhead

I take you haven't read any of wikileaks. There's a lot of crap that's been publicly released through it that I haven't seen a hair about on the media.

I take it you haven't paid attention to any of the media. There's a lot of coverage on there dedicated to Wikileaks.

Did everyone flunk English in this thread? Nobody can properly define censorship?