Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Public Face of Anonymous Leaves Group

CmdrTaco posted more than 3 years ago | from the not-very-anonymous dept.

The Internet 191

Gunkerty Jeb writes "Barrett Brown, the reporter who became a media-friendly spokesperson for the shadowy hacking group Anonymous, says that he is quitting the group in the wake of a public feud that has broken out between different hacker factions within the loosely organized collective."

cancel ×

191 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Someone is encouraging the dissension (5, Interesting)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 3 years ago | (#36152602)

Pardon me as I break my tin-foil hat out here. But there are a lot of government agencies and companies who have a vested interest in seeing Anon fall to pieces. The timing on this is almost as convenient as Dominique Strauss-Kahn and Julian Assange being arrested for sexual assault (the former right after he pulled decisively ahead of pro-American Nicolas Sarkozy in the polls and the later just weeks after he released a series of secret documents that embarrassed the U.S.). But then, I've always said [slashdot.org] that pedophilia and sexual assault charges are the quickest way to discredit someone publicly--way better than anything as crude as assassination.

Don't get me wrong, here. I'm not the kind of guy who thinks the moon landings were faked or that the U.S. planned 9-11 or any of that horseshit. But sometimes the timing on certain events just strikes me as a little too convenient for mere coincidence. And as was done with Wikileaks, the first step in a descrediting campaign is to encourage dissension from within and to get some internal plants/buy-offs to publicly bad-mouth the leadership (Daniel Domscheit-Berg [wired.com] , I'm looking in your direction, little plant). Just don't be suprised to see some Anon leaders suddenly facing rape/pedophilia/sexual assault charges in the near future. You'll know for sure if beautiful women suddenly start throwing themselves at 4channers in public.

Re:Someone is encouraging the dissension (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36152666)

Anon won't fall to pieces: they're like a hydra - it'll break a part and there will be just more groups doing what they did.

It's the same as al-Qaeda. Killing bin Laden will not do much.

The only thing Anon enemies can hope for is continued in fighting so that all the Anon factions are fighting each other instead of their internet vigilante activities.

The split and infighting is the best thing to happen to Anon's enemies.

Re:Someone is encouraging the dissension (2)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 3 years ago | (#36152716)

Anon won't fall to pieces: they're like a hydra

You're probably right. But that won't stop interested parties from trying.

Re:Someone is encouraging the dissension (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36152754)

Al-Qaeda as hydra only works if it is in fact decentralized - particularly in terms of skill set/funding. If OBL kept his funds under his own control, that alone would be a significant impact in funding operations. I agree with you if he was in fact a figurehead by the end.

Re:Someone is encouraging the dissension (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36153884)

OBL had no skill set. His only value was his assets which were largely frozen within a month of the Sept 11th attacks. This the reason Bush's butt wasn't on fire about capturing OBL when asked about it in 2002... OBL, without his assets, was nothing more than a token member of Al Qaeda. Too bad most people don't see him for what he was.
 
And this isn't to take away from the recent killing of OBL. He still needed to go but he wasn't a significant threat once the groundwar started in Afganistan. If anything his best value would have been as a suicide bomber, a job normally reserved for unskilled jihadists.

Re:Someone is encouraging the dissension (5, Funny)

zill (1690130) | more than 3 years ago | (#36153138)

Anonymous Coward writes:

It's the same as al-Qaeda. Killing bin Laden will not do much.

Breaking news
A member of the hacktivist group Anonymous has just announced that their organizational hierarchy is identical to that of al-Qaeda's, thus proving the suspicion that both terrorist groups are related and have been working together. The leaders of the two group could not be reached for comments.

Re:Someone is encouraging the dissension (3, Insightful)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 3 years ago | (#36154478)

Having them break up into smaller pieces is a good thing. Because you now have a bunch of small groups with limited resources, and more diverse motive. So there will be more smaller attacks which may more easily be thwarted. Vs. a large organization who can do more tactile large scale attacks.
These people are criminals. The fact that they are using computers to do their crimes doesn't excuse them. It is the same as breaking into a building. They are using "Oh we are protesting" nonsense to try to justify them acting as a criminal, the same way a bank robber justifies robbing the bank stating that the bank is just an evil organization and the money they steal will be covered by FDIC.

OMG a Video Game System (not even the most popular one) has dropped OS Support, This is worth an attack on a company? Seriously? Out of all the unjust things in the world to fight about this is the best you can do and put your resources on? Whats next Hack Wendy's because you don't like the taste of their new fries?

Re:Someone is encouraging the dissension (4, Funny)

idontgno (624372) | more than 3 years ago | (#36152766)

You'll know for sure if beautiful women suddenly start throwing themselves at 4channers in public.

That's not a sign of a covert government action; that's a sign of the Apocalypse.

Re:Someone is encouraging the dissension (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36152878)

You'll know for sure if beautiful women suddenly start throwing themselves at 4channers in public.

That's not a sign of a covert government action; that's a sign of the Apocalypse.

Nah, that's just a camwhore.

Re:Someone is encouraging the dissension (1)

JosKarith (757063) | more than 3 years ago | (#36153074)

You'll know for sure if beautiful women suddenly start throwing themselves at 4channers in public.

That's not a sign of a covert government action; that's a sign of the Apocalypse.

Nah, that's just a camwhore.

GP specified beautiful, not "Passable for human on 320x240 VGA in a dim light at 2fps"

Re:Someone is encouraging the dissension (2)

Inner_Child (946194) | more than 3 years ago | (#36153380)

That's not a sign of a covert government action; that's a sign of the Apocalypse.

So... Saturday?

Re:Someone is encouraging the dissension (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36153450)

Caturday

Re:Someone is encouraging the dissension (5, Insightful)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 3 years ago | (#36153126)

it's the boy who cried wolf syndrome: conspiracy theory is such a favorite currency of the low iq and not quite mentally sound crowd, that if an actual real conspiracy theory happens, no one will believe it

the effect of all the low iq and mentally deficient wack jobs constantly running around and crying wolf on conspiracies is to basically ensure that any rational and realistic consideration of an actual conspiracy theory is discounted up front

all those constantly babbling about conspiracy theories actually help conspiracy theories succeed, because they hide the tiny signals in a fountain of noise

i frequently laugh at and pour derision on conspiracy theory crack pots. however, i readily admit conspiracy theories are real. its just that they are exceedingly rare because they are so hard to pull off in airtight secrecy. but the dumber you are or the more mentally deranged you are, the more they seem likely, because your fear/ paranoia/ schizophrenia or dim perceptive abilities are unable to see just how incredibly hard an actual conspiracy theory is to actually pull off. how many ways it can fail, and continue to fail, long after the fact. how long has it been from the kennedy assassination. no one, NO ONE, the vast conspiracy has issued a peep about it, even accidentally? no one is still interested? come on! a lone asshole shot kennedy, not some mafia/ cia/ cuban/ whatever plot. occam's razor, my deluded friends, occam's razor

but conspiracy theories do have value in this world: entertainment. they are a frequent part of hollywood movies, because, like alien invasions or superheroes, they tickle our fancy. even though we know such things are impossible (well, those of us who are mentally sound realize superheros, aliens, and overarching vast conspiracies by secret black ops agencies are impossible)

please note conspiracy theory proponents: all the noise you dingbats constantly make about conspiracy theories, help to hide the actual real rare ones. not that that fact is going to change your behavior. because you're stupid and/ or deranged. but carry on, i need to laugh. yes, i know: the chemtrails from the government airplanes and the fluoridated water has completely turned me into a sheep. (giggle)

Re:Someone is encouraging the dissension (4, Funny)

AJH16 (940784) | more than 3 years ago | (#36153282)

So what you are saying is that the 9/11 truth movement and moon landing hoax conspiracies were really started by the government so they could get away with real conspiracies without anybody noticing? ;)

Re:Someone is encouraging the dissension (0)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 3 years ago | (#36153406)

LOL ;-)

Re:Someone is encouraging the dissension (1)

Artifex (18308) | more than 3 years ago | (#36154264)

i readily admit conspiracy theories are real. its just that they are exceedingly rare because they are so hard to pull off in airtight secrecy. (giggle)

I think you need to understand the difference between conspiracy theories and actual conspiracies.
Of course theories are real; many people have them. Are they valid? That's a different question.

Re:Someone is encouraging the dissension (5, Insightful)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 3 years ago | (#36153184)

Or they are a bunch of delusional thugs and the delusion is falling apart in the cold light of reality. It has to be big business and the government that wants to see anon fail?
Fail at what? Being mindless jerks that take there revenge on anybody the feel they can? Like this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anonymous_(group)#Epilepsy_Foundation_forum_invasion [wikipedia.org]
and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anonymous_(group)#No_Cussing_Club [wikipedia.org]

The attack on Sony is just the latest example. Anon was at it's best a gang of relatively harmless jerks. Now they are just dangerous jerks with delusions that they have a right to be judge, jury, and executioner.

Re:Someone is encouraging the dissension (0)

horza (87255) | more than 3 years ago | (#36154070)

Wow good links. I had forgotten how funny they can be, as well as trying to stand up for civil rights. The attack on Sony was a simple DoS on their web site trying to highlight the suppression of OtherOS. Hardly a big deal to a company the size of Sony. The Chanology and HBGary were great reads.

I thought they were just a bunch of jerks, but thanks for educating me. I can see their attraction, they do seem a pretty cool bunch.

Phillip.

Re:Someone is encouraging the dissension (1)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 3 years ago | (#36154392)

Hey even a broken clock is right twice a day. Some of the stunts are funny but frankly the attacks on free speech and the other other pranks go too far.

Re:Someone is encouraging the dissension (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36153208)

The above sounds very plausible, and I agree with the OP that it could well be true. Honestly, there's no dirty cheap-ass trick I wouldn't put past today's US administration. Their assaults on freedom, the internet, other countries' democratic processes, and their own citizens prove how wicked and wretched they've become. They are so far from their founding ideals of freedom and democracy they can't even see those founding ideals any more. Give it another 100 years of apathy, another 50 of irritation and cue in another revolution to restart the cycle. Until then, god have mercy on our souls.

Quitting may not be an option. (1)

elucido (870205) | more than 3 years ago | (#36153220)

Barret Brown if he was every really in this group will find out soon that quitting isn't as easy as making a public declaration.
That is perhaps the main reason not to join this sort of group, when you join they own you and you cannot quit.

As far as Barret Brown being the public face, that was a stupid idea in the first place which smelled like a setup. The guy also released a crappy manual on opsec on pastebin. Couldn't he have made a PDF? A website? It didn't have much substance either.

Let's face it, a group like Anonymous was never supposed to have a Public Face. It's a vigilante group. If Mr. Brown has quit the group it's possible he quit because he's been turned informant for the FBI. It's also possible he quit because he's been discovered. It's also possible he quit because of a legitimate dispute. But we cannot just take his word on it.

We need to hear what Anonymous has to say about him.

Re:Quitting may not be an option. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36153804)

Barret Brown if he was every really in this group will find out soon that quitting isn't as easy as making a public declaration.
That is perhaps the main reason not to join this sort of group, when you join they own you and you cannot quit.

What? They're like a street gang now?

If Mr. Brown has quit the group it's possible he quit because he's been turned informant for the FBI. It's also possible he quit because he's been discovered.

It's possible he discovered they're mostly a bunch of dumbass kids. The ones who aren't dumbass kids probably aren't interested in Barret Brown.

FTFA: "I'm tired of the drama," Brown told Threatpost in a phone interview May 10. "You've got kids fighting for control of an IRC channel."

It's also possible that he's a dumbass too.

FTFA: "I'm a researcher. I'm into revolutionary stuff. But there are other people for whom its about exerting power"

OK not only possible, but extremely likely.

Re:Quitting may not be an option. (1)

elucido (870205) | more than 3 years ago | (#36154214)

What? They're like a street gang now?

Some of the members may be members of street gangs and there could be a street gang, mafia, or gangster element to it. It's a criminal organization which relies on extortion so you can expect that if extortion goes on, it would be hard to break free from this sort of organization. Anonymous may have a lot of dirt on Mr. Brown or on any member who gets close to the organization. This could be any embarrassing information, such as that some members are potential pedophiles, or maybe other members have given their nudes to a member of Anonymous and this could be released, or maybe another members identity is in the possession of Anonymous and could be released to the feds(doxed and swatted).

FTFA: "I'm tired of the drama," Brown told Threatpost in a phone interview May 10. "You've got kids fighting for control of an IRC channel."

I'm not interested in what Mr. Brown has to say. I'm interested in what Anonymous has to say about why he left. He's going to spin it any way he likes to be in his favor. What does the group think of him now?

It's also possible that he's a dumbass too.

FTFA: "I'm a researcher. I'm into revolutionary stuff. But there are other people for whom its about exerting power"

OK not only possible, but extremely likely.

It's this anti government attitude that takes down groups like these. If they want to be a human rights organization, they did and can do a lot of good focusing on that. But when they focus on just one government, singling out the USA, this is not going to be very smart or very good for the members of Anonymous. While Libya or Egypt might not be able to do anything about Anonymous, the NSA, FBI, CIA, DEA and other three letter organizations have the resources and assets to wipe Anonymous out. I'm guessing the core members understand this and aren't interested in being tortured like Bradley Manning.

Re:Someone is encouraging the dissension (2)

westlake (615356) | more than 3 years ago | (#36153268)

The timing on this is almost as convenient as Dominique Strauss-Kahn and Julian Assange being arrested for sexual assault (the former right after he pulled decisively ahead of pro-American Nicolas Sarkozy in the polls...

When did Strauss-Kahn arrive in New York and how many people would know where he would be staying?

To make this work, you would need to know quite a lot about the organization, staffing and routine of the hotel.

The plan demands the successful bribery or coercion of a credible victim - in this case a veteran chamber maid with a nine year old daughter.

You have one chance to get this right or the next time you meet she will be wearing a wire.

It demands stagng the "assault" in a way that will convice the SVU - which is probably every bit as good as its fictional counterpart.

The FBI and anyone else likely to be drawn into a case involving a high-profie foreign diplomat.

Re:Someone is encouraging the dissension (1)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 3 years ago | (#36153570)

Actually, all it takes is a big bribe (perhaps coupled with a threat) and charges that only need to hold up well enough to last through the election. The end goal isn't a conviction, it's discrediting. He-said/she-said is more than enough for that.

Re:Someone is encouraging the dissension (1)

Splab (574204) | more than 3 years ago | (#36154298)

He flies with the same airline company every time and you can bet he has his preferred hotels. You don't need to do that much planning, find one maid who is in financial troubles and offer her a $5k bribe, at some point she will have an excuse to go into his room - she doesn't even need to go on a witness stand, the damage is done, even if the charges are withdrawn the man has no political future.

Re:Someone is encouraging the dissension (1)

mseeger (40923) | more than 3 years ago | (#36153286)

There is no need for any conspiracy to make Anon fall apart. This will happen automagically. Loosely organized, ideologicaly motivated, idealistic organisations have appeared and disappeared by thousands during the last century alone.

There are reasons why most organisations don't work like Anon and that's because this model will not work over a prolonged time. Organisations like Greenpeace are slightly more democratic than North-Korea because they wouldn't be as effective and stable otherwise.

I would love to be wrong on that issue....

It even doesn't take an evil character for starting the downward spiral of death. The assholes usually just end on the top at the end because they can stand the endless bickering longer than anyone else.

Sorry, Martin

Re:Someone is encouraging the dissension (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36153316)

Dominique Strauss-Kahn

I know, right? What kind of mindless sheep would believe that a rich, arrogant Frenchman could possibly treat women badly?

And yeah, how about that timing. I mean, it's not like he did the same thing to a French women years ago, and got away with it because he was a hot-shit politician... oh wait.

Re:Someone is encouraging the dissension (5, Insightful)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 3 years ago | (#36153806)

The French Socialist Party gets its best shot in 22 years [economist.com] of winning the Presidency and overthrowing a strongly pro-American regime. But a year before the election, their leading candidate, a guy with no criminal record in his 62 years who is leading by double digits in all the polls, suddenly decides to rape a maid in New York. That's quite a convenient coincidence for the United States and their friend Nicolas Sarkozy, no? That's right up their in convenience with Julian Assange deciding to become a serial rapist just a few weeks after leaking troves of secret U.S. State Department and Pentagon documents.

Isn't it nice when all your enemies decide to become rapists after they cross you?

Re:Someone is encouraging the dissension (5, Insightful)

NeutronCowboy (896098) | more than 3 years ago | (#36154032)

Overthrowing a strongly pro-American regime? Wow, you really don't know Sarkozy or the French very much. He's strongly pro-American only in the context of French foreign politics since de Gaulle, who was almost obsessed with throwing a wrench into American plans in Europe. Sarkozy likes America, but he also likes rich friends who host him during his vacations. The two go hand in hand for him.

As for DSK, he's apparently had a history of treating women in a less than gentlemanly fashion. The reason that DSK is the Socialists' best hope is because the others are intellectual lightweights (Segolene Royal, ugh) with no achievements to show for from a political perspective.

Re:Someone is encouraging the dissension (1)

thePowerOfGrayskull (905905) | more than 3 years ago | (#36153340)

While I see where you're going, we *are* talking about a group where each individual member can do pretty much whatever he wants and claim to be doing it on behalf of Anonymous. From that perspective,it's not so hard to believe that - as this group begins high profile activity - that there's a lot of internal dissent and disagreement; and I don't doubt that many yearn for the "good old days" when all of the members were of a [generally] like mind.

Re:Someone is encouraging the dissension (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36153692)

Anon has gone through such internal conflict before. They do all the time because any member can act on his own and claim to be acting for anon. But until now, there was no outsider-journalist doing an internship within the group.
This journalist discovered nothing new, he simply found out how anon works, he didn't realize this is normal for anon, and he quit thinking the group was now facing a tough challenge. That journalist is saying "Anon is in deep shit, it's unusual" when in fact Anon faces and overcoms internal dissent constantly. But since there usually is no journalist-outsider following Anon, we don't hear about it. And now, because this one time a journalist tells us about this, we're thinking this problem is new to Anon.

Anon will get over it like it never happened.

Re:Someone is encouraging the dissension (1)

spun (1352) | more than 3 years ago | (#36153802)

No tinfoil hat. In the words of Boots Riley from The Coup, "They're tryin' to kill the movement with the new CoIntelPro [wikipedia.org] ." You think that went away when congress shut it down? Yeah, right.

Re:Someone is encouraging the dissension (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36153956)

got enuff tinfoil for two? public deception by disinformation is a long-established tradition. and the media sux it up like a vacuum, then blows it back out over the too-stupid-to-care masses.

Re:Someone is encouraging the dissension (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36153984)

Dude, the CIA OFFICIALLY ANNOUNCED doing this shit [google.com] ! It's not like it's a censored secret!

The problem is with how brainwashed the US population are. Including many here at Slashdot.
You could tell them straight to their faces, that now they are being raped, insert your cock all the way, fuck around until it rips apart and they bleed, and they'd still form those fake-two-sides of the story:
A. "Those fuckin' fearmongers and lie-spreading anti-Americans who try to denounce our heroes!"
B. "Pardon me as I break my tin-foil hat out here. But the timing is almost too convenient. Don't hit me, for daring to even dream about thinking there might be a rape going on here."

NOBODY seems to ACTUALLY take on a opposing side. As if it were China, where that is banned. Just that nobody forced them. Which makes it even worse, as it means they actually believe it!

It's plainly obvious, that this is going on here: http://www.zpub.com/un/chomsky.html

Re:Someone is encouraging the dissension (1)

LinksAwakener (1081617) | more than 3 years ago | (#36154072)

Just don't be suprised to see some Anon leaders suddenly facing rape/pedophilia/sexual assault charges in the near future.

The fact that most Anon members originated from 4chan and other mentionable image boards tells me that a good majority are *actually* guilty of pedophilia (in the sense that they own pornographic pictures of prepubescent children).

Re:Someone is encouraging the dissension (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36154336)

A better question is there ever going to be a time that *isn't* going to be able to fuel tin foil hat ideas?

Really, you need more than that for a plausible conspiracy theory. There are *a lot* of things that have timing and odd circumstances surrounding them. Bin Laden jus happened to be killed when Obama is in desperate need for something to draw attention away from domestic policy problems followed with any proof being hidden and we just have to trust the govt DNA testers? Or how about his birth certificate - he spent how much money and how much time hiding the full version (which i 8do* think was stupid, I figure it was being held to release to discredit at a later point - as he did - but he waited so long he looks like an idiot too *at best*) and then gives us an easily faked copy?

I'll buy that Assange is a case of women spurned coupled with Swiss easy rape laws and I'll even buy something similar with Strauss-Kahn (that one is much harder to buy, it looks much more like he did it right now), but the vast conspiracy to discredit and remove them is plain stupid, at least on the same level a the birthers and deathers.

Its amusing to see each sides conspiracy theories running around now and how they view each others.

Loosely organized? (-1, Offtopic)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 3 years ago | (#36152624)

How about DISorganized, or "not organized at all"? The "Anonymous Group" is slightly less organized than the Libyan rebel force who at least have enough of a notion of teamwork to lift AA guns onto the backs of pickup trucks.

Oh and by the way, to all you fuckers who were laughing at me a couple weeks ago when I made THIS post [slashdot.org] , who is laughing now?

Re:Loosely organized? (0)

Vectronic (1221470) | more than 3 years ago | (#36152916)

Wait... so it's Apple's fault?... Anonymous split into Mac Vs. PC?... gotcha.

Re:Loosely organized? (0)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 3 years ago | (#36153202)

Nah I'm just laughing at all the idiots who told me I was doing the wrong thing when I am now $60k richer and they are not. Not bad for 2 weeks' work.

Re:Loosely organized? (2)

pspahn (1175617) | more than 3 years ago | (#36152994)

I would have chosen "Poorly Unorganized".

woot (5, Funny)

Osgeld (1900440) | more than 3 years ago | (#36152658)

drama from something that doesn't even exist, ladies and gentlemen we have hit web 3.0

Re:m00t (0)

stonewallred (1465497) | more than 3 years ago | (#36152844)

FTFY

it used to be fun (2, Interesting)

aahpandasrun (948239) | more than 3 years ago | (#36152660)

I'm so sick of Anonymous taking itself so seriously. It used to be about raiding barbie message boards, annoying habbo hotel players, and prank calling Tom Green. Even the recent project forever alone, getting guys on okcupid to unsuspectingly meet at a pay phone in times square is what Anonymous was always about. Not this stupid hacker / legion bullshit. It's stupid.

Re:it used to be fun (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36152718)

newfags are a cancer, duh

Re:it used to be fun (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36154044)

It's something that has been said by Anon for years before this shit started you idiot mods, do I have to put fucking quotes around it?

Re:it used to be fun (2)

PhilHibbs (4537) | more than 3 years ago | (#36152900)

It's like the plot to Fight Club, isn't it? You like the fighting, but not Project Mayhem.

Re:it used to be fun (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36152908)

And I'm so sick of newfags constantly proclaiming what Anonymous is about.

Re:it used to be fun (3, Insightful)

PhilHibbs (4537) | more than 3 years ago | (#36152934)

I'm not sure what a "newfag" is, but I agree, there's been a lot of people spouting stuff like "Anyone can be Anonymous", "how can anyone deny it was Anonymous, when Anonymous is my cat", etc. recently, clearly they don't know anything about Anonymous.

Re:it used to be fun (1)

presidenteloco (659168) | more than 3 years ago | (#36153266)

Oh, you mean Anonymous with a capital 'A'. I thought we were talking about anonymous.

Everyone knows anonymous is a mouse (heard in the walls or behind the couch at night) not a cat.

'newfags' (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36153466)

As long as they don't triforce, I'm ok with them.

Re:it used to be fun (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36153626)

From what I read here and elsewhere, Anonymous used to be the "Anonymous is everyone and no one" type of group you're describing. The whole "Organized Underground Hacker Group" seems to be something that popped up in the last 6 months or so. The first place I came across it was the news with an unemployed 20-something claiming he was a lieutenant in Anonymous. The 'organized group' comes off more as people trying to glory hound using Anonymous' name more than anything.

The real reason why he left (4, Funny)

simoncpu was here (1601629) | more than 3 years ago | (#36152672)

Barrett Brown can't Triforce.

Re:The real reason why he left (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36152884)

Bloody Newfags

New low in anon reporting (1)

Vahokif (1292866) | more than 3 years ago | (#36152698)

Good job, you managed to get "public face" and "group" in the same headline. Who the hell is this guy?

Re:New low in anon reporting (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36153110)

He deals with all the media people and keeps things together in the IRC rooms, according to the transcripts of other incidents.

Re:New low in anon reporting (1)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 3 years ago | (#36154352)

it's just some guy who started making reports in the name of anonymous, with his own name attached, making them non reports of dubious quality. maybe he got enough of publicity now to score a real reporter gig? or someone messed with him for making claims, which wouldn't be a surprise at all.

or maybe sony got wind of him. that would be great, actually.

Isn't "the public face of Anonymous"... (3, Funny)

futonrevolutionary (1202545) | more than 3 years ago | (#36152742)

...an oxymoron?

Re:Isn't "the public face of Anonymous"... (1)

Random2 (1412773) | more than 3 years ago | (#36153506)

No, it's media hype. They want something to identify the group, attack, and discredit. Without some defining figure, it becomes pointless to try. Hence why they're trying to make this a big deal, because it allows for a 'target' of slander and disinformation.

It's not like this really hurts Anonymous. Even if they have hissy fits with themselves (not the first time it's happened after all) all it means is the group momentarily shrinks, remembers what it's actually there for, and then resumes it's activity.

Re:Isn't "the public face of Anonymous"... (2)

Random2 (1412773) | more than 3 years ago | (#36153678)

Prime example: The president of the US. Compare how often you hear about 'the Bush/Obama/Regan administration' versus the names of the people who actually did the work, like Jacob Lew, Arthur Laffer, John Roberts, etc. It's far more convenient to brand one person/few people as the label for a group, and then force them to 'take responsibility' for the organization, whether or not they even know of the events.

namefag != Anonymous (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36152816)

namefag != Anonymous
fuck off Barrett Brown, we won't miss you

Re:namefag != Anonymous (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36153362)

Mod parent up. The guy left Anonymous as soon as he chose to identify himself.

Ladies and gentlemen... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36152872)

Locutus has left the collective!

Re:Ladies and gentlemen... (0)

JockTroll (996521) | more than 3 years ago | (#36153702)

Gandalf leaves west. Thorin sits down and starts singing about gold.

Quiting anonymous (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36152902)

Does that mean he's going to shout his name out loud in public spaces now, in order to not be anonymous by obscurity?

Maybe Anonymousnwill go back to being anonymous? (4, Insightful)

mkraft (200694) | more than 3 years ago | (#36152936)

Maybe Anonymous will go back to it's roots instead of having "leaders" and "spokespeople".

Hmm, maybe I should have posted anonymously. :)

Re:Maybe Anonymousnwill go back to being anonymous (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36152992)

Yeah! Back to its roots, before all these NEWFAGS turned up. Remember when /b/ was good?

Re:Maybe Anonymousnwill go back to being anonymous (1)

JosKarith (757063) | more than 3 years ago | (#36153118)

Yeah! Back to its roots, before all these NEWFAGS turned up. Remember when /b/ was good?

No.
Just kidding, but point taken. There's a lot less of that indefinable bastardness that reminded me of Alt.Tasteless and a lot more copypasta nowadays.

Re:Maybe Anonymousnwill go back to being anonymous (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36153250)

/b/ was never good

Re:Maybe Anonymousnwill go back to being anonymous (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36154432)

Trap thread? Trap thread!

Re:Maybe Anonymousnwill go back to being anonymous (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36153216)

In the meantime, ladies and gentleman, I'll be the new spokesperson for Anonymous. If you want to ask me anything, please just shout it loudly in any media.

Thanks.

Re:Maybe Anonymousnwill go back to being anonymous (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36153756)

PROTIP: We never had "leaders" and "spokespeople", we don't, and we never will. Because we are not a group!
Those people are not Anonymous. If you can identify them, they stopped, at that very moment, to be Anonymous. It's that simple. Because that's how Anonymous is defined.
Which shows that those who call themselves or others "Anonymous", haven't even understood what the word (capitalized and non-capitalized) itself means. Let alone the concept of disorganization with spontaneous (dis-)aggregation based on commonalities.

I don't understand how you can have a bazillion of comments repeating that fact to your face 24/7, but it still not entering your head?!
It's a level of ignorance and living in a fantasy world, that's on the brink of schizophrenia / fundamentalist religion / brainwashed by social engineers !
Save yourself, man!

Isn't the public face of Anonymous... (2)

digitaldc (879047) | more than 3 years ago | (#36152962)

...a Guido 'Guy' Fawkes mask?

I didn't know that something called 'Anonymous' could have something called 'public' - seems nonsensical.

Re:Isn't the public face of Anonymous... (1)

TheyTookOurJobs (1930780) | more than 3 years ago | (#36153096)

Sh!t was SO CASH.

Re:Isn't the public face of Anonymous... (1)

Myopic (18616) | more than 3 years ago | (#36153618)

You didn't know that? Huh. Well it shouldn't be surprising at all. For reference, see Primary Colors (by "Anonymous") who had the public face in the form of a book agent.

Post Group Organization??? (1)

jmac_the_man (1612215) | more than 3 years ago | (#36152970)

I thought that Anonymous didn't HAVE members, and that when 4chan was doing something popular (like LOIC) people were "part of" Anonymous and when 4chan was doing something unpopular (like getting raided because of LOIC) people were "not part of" Anonymous.

It seems to me like in this kind of post-group, Mr. Brown could come back when ever he wanted.

Re:Post Group Organization??? (2)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 3 years ago | (#36153276)

Welcome to the myth of Anonymous.
Anonymous didn't take personal data from the Sony Network. Anonymous has no members so just because some people that say they are members of Anonymous did the attack you can not say Anonymous did it.
Followed by.
Anonymous fights for internet freedom!

sigh....

Re:Post Group Organization??? (1)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 3 years ago | (#36154362)

he could, just not with his own name.

the unhol cost of paradise lost (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36152990)

how many 1000 babys going up in smoke again today? how many 1000's of just folks to be killed or displaced again today? hard to put $$ on that. the cost of constant deception, to our spirit? paying to have ourselves constantly spied on & lied to by freaky self chosen neogod depopulationers? the biblically styled fatal distraction holycost is all encompassing, & never ends while we're still alive, unless we cut them/ourselves off at the wmd. good luck with that, as it's not even a topic anywhere we get to see, although in real life it's happening everywhere as our walking dead weapons peddlers are being uncontracted. you can call this weather if it makes you feel any better. no? read the teepeeleaks etchings.

so, once one lie is 'infactated', the rest becomes just more errant fatal history.

disarm. tell the truth. the sky is not ours to toy with after all?

  you call this 'weather'? what with real history racing up to correct
itself, while the chosen one's holycostal life0cider mediots continually
attempt to rewrite it, fortunately, there's still only one version of the
truth, & it's usually not a long story, or a confusing multiple choice
fear raising event.

wouldn't this be a great time to investigate the genuine native elders social & political leadership initiative, which includes genuine history as put forth in the teepeeleaks etchings. the natives still have no words in their language to describe the events following their 'discovery' by us, way back when. they do advise that it's happening again.

who has all the weapons? who is doing MOST of the damage? what are the motives? are our intentions & will as the ones who are supposed to be being represented honestly & accurately, being met? we have no reference to there being ANY public approval for the current mayhem & madness pr firm regime style self chosen neogod rulership we've allowed to develop around us, so we wouldn't have to stop having fun, & doing things that have nothing to do with having to defend from the smoke&mirrors domestic frenetics, of the unproven genocides. rockets exploding in syria fired from Libya? yikes?

  the zeus weather weapon is still being used indiscriminately against the population, our rulers' minions are fleeing under fire.

the whore of babylon has been rescued by the native elders. she has the papers of challenge authored by the hymenical council, & is cooperating wholeheartedly with the disarmament mandate.
disarm. thank you.

censorship, or convenience?
Due to excessive bad posting from this IP or Subnet, anonymous comment
posting has temporarily been disabled. You can still login to post.
However, if bad posting continues from your IP or Subnet that privilege
could be revoked as well. If it's you, consider this a chance to sit in
the timeout corner or login and improve your posting. If it's someone
else, this is a chance to hunt them down. If you think this is unfair,
please email MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "osplanet.org" claiming to be moderation@slashdot.org with your MD5'd IPID and SubnetID,
which are always changing, you butthead

Re:the unhol cost of paradise lost (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36153444)

get some help brother.

please.

i can see your mind and it is in trouble.

lols internet niggers (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36153008)

internet niggers nigger because nigger nigger nigger

My brain is full of F (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36153020)

This headline is like some kind of Euler painting of idiocity.

ugh. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36153140)

there is no group.

there is no anonymous.

please stop posting these horrible "news" stories just to squeeze out a few clicks.

keyword finder (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36153170)

thanks for this site, makes it easy for me to post my link.. please visit this site here [precisionk...finder.com] , thanks

The problem with Anonymous... (1)

Bloodwine77 (913355) | more than 3 years ago | (#36153298)

... is that anybody can be a member. This isn't a borg collective with a unified vision.

As an outsider, the first sign that Anonymous has gone off the tracks is when they poked the WBC. While the WBC are a vile group of human beings, it seemed odd that Anonymous would even bother with them. After that, they started to attack the Koch Brothers. I can't remember a few of their other more recent operations, but the term "jumping the shark" comes to mind.

As an outsider, Anonymous seems to have two major issues: 1) it is spreading itself too thin with a plethora of weak objectives and 2) it has started to take itself too seriously

Re:The problem with Anonymous... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36153608)

The real problem is that they fight against something instead of fighting for somethnig.

Re:The problem with Anonymous... (1)

Steauengeglase (512315) | more than 3 years ago | (#36154054)

I thought the WBC thing was just WBC members getting attention so they could start up a round of lawsuits from honeypots?

You had me at... (1)

davevr (29843) | more than 3 years ago | (#36153352)

"public face of anonymous". No need to read the rest of an article when it starts with that line.

Duh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36153484)

The 1st thing I did when I went to post this was to make sure I clicked the anon post button.

I was once part of 'the scene' and while there is loyalty, if someone has to leave they have to leave. It might have pissed us all off if it was an OCx with gigs (back in the day gigs was good) had to pull their box off the net but it happened. That is why we had multiple dumps.

This story seems like such a non-starter. That a fluid group like anon is gonna be fluid? Ok.

Anonymous does not trust Mr. Brown (1, Flamebait)

elucido (870205) | more than 3 years ago | (#36153504)

And it should be obvious to anyone why. Mr. Brown is focused on the sort of activities designed to elicit the maximum response by the most powerful military and government in the world. He is focusing on finding corruption in the US government, in the US military.

This is either a tactical error of epic proportions, or it's part of a deliberate design by his FBI handlers to turn him into the ultimate informant. I'm not accusing or saying with any degree of certainty that Mr. Brown is an informant. I'm saying that when people deliberately provoke the government, or talk about revolution in the USA, usually the loudest public speaker talking about it is the biggest informant.

I believe Anonymous cut him out of the picture because Anonymous does not trust him anymore. He isn't a hacker, he's a journalist. He came into Anonymous from the perspective of an observer/journalist. If he isn't participating in the ops and does not have a reputation as being an actor, it makes a lot of sense for them to push him out. The attention of the media usually brings the attention of the feds.

No such thing... (2)

HotTuna (928802) | more than 3 years ago | (#36153522)

First of all, if there is such a thing as "Anonymous" then this guy left it the minute he identified himself. Second, 10 minutes on 4chan should be enough to convince anyone that /b/tards can't organize their way out of a paper bag. Third, ponies.

Re:No such thing... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36153680)

>mfw ponies

RAGEQUIT (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36153582)

Please someone tag this story with "ragequit."

Not true Anon. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36153700)

"Brown told Threatpost that he and around two dozen Anonymous members are forming a splinter group to focus on efforts to root out what Brown has described as 'criminality and corruption' within the U.S. Government, U.S. military, corporations and the media."

He wasn't in it for the lulz. He wasn't true Anon just a protestfag.

Where there was but one, now there are many. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36153706)

When you break a rock into two pieces, you get two rocks. No less rock, nor anything else but rock. And so it is with Anonymous. Where there was one large one, now there are several smaller ones. They are still each Anonymous.

tl;dr If you thought that this was how you would be rid of Anonymous, then you don't understand. Anything.

Correct me if I'm wrong... (1)

Millennium (2451) | more than 3 years ago | (#36153770)

Isn't someone claiming to be the public face of Anonymous by definition doing it wrong?

Anonymous' Mother was quoted saying (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36153822)

"He's not the Messiah; he's a very naughty newfag!"

He was never a "member" of Anonymous (1)

snarfies (115214) | more than 3 years ago | (#36153972)

Barrett Brown was NEVER a member of Anoymous.

We know who he is.

Therefore, by definition, he is not part of Anonymous.

And in the end... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36154404)

Nothing of value was lost.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>