Technology and Communication
15 views | +0 today
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Rescooped by Cameron Raymer from Anonymous:Freedom Fighters or Cyber-Terrorists?!

Anonymous: The Good, The Bad, The Ugly

Information of what I recovered about the "group" Anonymous. Show casing their good and bad moments and trying to understand who they really are. Are Anonymous true freedom fighters or cyber-terrorists?

Via Nick Betleski
Nick Betleski's curator insight, June 28, 2013 10:35 PM

Anonymous is a network of hacktivists that come together through the internet and wreak havoc on particular victims for the "Lulz". Anonymous  believes they are "freedom fighters" and not "cyber-terrorists", also they have had some good and bad predicaments in terms of activism and hacktivism. 

The group/gathering/movement of Anonymous was formed in 2003 on the imageboard site 4chan. They arose in the /b/ board which allows users to post anonymously about anything. At first, Anonymous was in it for the lulz which means laughing out loud at someone else's pain. Targeting unsuspecting victims to make a mockery of them out of laughs. Over time, Anonymous began to fight for what they believe using crowdsourcing with other anonymous users. That being said, Anonymous isn't a political party of one believe, they have many and no specific leader. Anonymous' motto is "We are Anonymous. We are legion. We do not forgive. We do not forget. Expect us." They are a decentralized community of hackers coming together to do what they believe is right. 

Before researching Anonymous to this full extent, I thought they have done more bad than good. That is not the case, depending on who you are; Anonymous wants full extension of freedom of speech and they don't want any secrets being kept away from the public. In fact in 2012, Times Magazine put Anonymous as one of the 100 more influential people. When I first heard about Anonymous, it was when Scientology was the big headline. Anonymous didn't like how ridiculous this group was, therefore, they trolled them and made attack after attack. Anonymous is portrayed as the villains because they are hackers, and a lot of the time they hack for good. 

Some notable activism Anonymous too part in were the Occupy Wall Street, they were the ones camping out in tents and making sure all was civil with the police and protestors. One instance in the Occupy Movement, an officer fired at an ex-soldier protesting and Anonymous attacked the officer that fired the shot and leaked out his address and family member names online. They also took part in the Arab Spring movement, hacking official government sites and spreading the word about how countries need freedom. Anonymous also launched attacks toward the US Department of Justice who shut down Megaupload, a file sharing site that was being used to download copyrighted material, but it was stated only some were using it for that, others were sharing and spreading work. Anonymous attacked the Westboro Baptist Church for hating gays and creating the GodHatesFags website, then picking funerals for the Sandy Hook Elementary School victims protesting gays. This lead Anonymous to share their address and names of those protesting still providing the lulz.

Anonymous however does attack politicians if they don't agree with what they are saying. Anonymous is all about freedom of speech, but they attack politicians (who mostly deserve it, but not to that extent) who express their right of freedom of speech. At one point, Anonymous hacked into government sites to steal money then gave that stolen money to charity. Keeping close to the lulz, Anonymous attacks kids like Jessi Slaughter,  a 11 year old who tried to act older and act tough. This led to cyber attacks with her family and herself, prank calls, death threats, and call-girls coming to the door. Another incident, involving two brothers torturing their cat while parents weren't home and filming it. Anonymous got a hold of the video, tracked them down, and attacked the Glenn Brothers just like Jessi Slaughter. Everyone deserves a little wake up call, but with the child incidents Anonymous just goes too far.

Before researching Anonymous, even researching a quarter way through, I thought Anonymous did more bad than good. As it turns out (depending how you look at it) Anonymous does more good, but it a more strict harsher way that follow the lulz.  Anonymous fights for the right to free doing, if one keeps secrets, Anonymous will backlash them to get information out. Anonymous wants the truth; it's a bunch of anonymous hackers trying to do good while keeping that hacking motive. Anonymous enjoys making people miserable, but also leaking the truth. Anonymous does not want censorship they want freedom, and that is what these hackers will stop at nothing until that is achieved. 

Rescooped by Cameron Raymer from Transmedia: Storytelling for the Digital Age!

On Anita Sarkeesian, Sexism In Video Games, And Why We Need To Have The Conversation

On Anita Sarkeesian, Sexism In Video Games, And Why We Need To Have The Conversation | Technology and Communication |

Erik Kain: "Blatant sexism and misogyny in gaming culture may be the work of a minority of gamers, but it’s still an important issue that deserves an open conversation. The ugly backlash to Anita Sarkeesian’s Tropes vs. Women Kickstarter project is an illustration why."

Via The Digital Rocking Chair
Mariana Soffer's comment, July 15, 2012 12:44 PM
this things are a bit disgusting that is why people should be warned
Rescooped by Cameron Raymer from iGeneration - 21st Century Education (Pedagogy & Digital Innovation)!

Students More Concerned About Privacy Than You Might Think

Students More Concerned About Privacy Than You Might Think | Technology and Communication |
Infographic shows that teens who use mobile apps understand the importance of protecting personal data.

Via Tom D'Amico (@TDOttawa)
No comment yet.
Rescooped by Cameron Raymer from Digital Media Literacy + Cyber Arts + Performance Centers Connected to Fiber Networks!

How Free Should Speech Be on Twitter? | The New Yorker

How Free Should Speech Be on Twitter? | The New Yorker | Technology and Communication |

In 2011, with the help of Bitch magazine, a young media critic named Anita Sarkeesian hosted a Web-video series called “Tropes vs. Women.” Over six segments, she critiqued archetypes of females in film, comic books, and TV, from the bubbly so-called Manic Pixie Dream Girl to the wild-eyed Evil Demon Seductress and the self-serious Straw Feminist. The following spring, Sarkeesian launched a Kickstarter campaign for a project called “Tropes vs. Women in Video Games,” to delve into what she saw as the objectification of women in gaming culture, where skimpy armor and bulbous breasts abound. (Developers have even bragged about how they have perfected the physics of female curvature by going “hands on.”) Sarkeesian aimed to raise six thousand dollars for her project; after thirty days she had accumulated $158,917 from nearly seven thousand donors.


To conscientious parents, or just casual observers of the current video-game landscape, the overwhelming support for Sarkeesian’s project may come as no surprise. What was surprising, however, was the intensity of the reaction from some of the Web’s more caustic pockets, like Reddit’s Men’s Rights forums.


Sarkeesian, a Canadian-American of Armenian descent, became the target of a stream of Internet harassment, which included hateful words for Jews, blacks, and gays. Her Wikipedia page was edited to state that she was a “hooker who focuses on drugs in popular culture and their associations with tropes.” Bunitar Sarkereszian, as the Wiki-vandals renamed her, also “holds the world record for maximum amount of sexual toys in the posterior.” Abusive video gamers (called griefers) doctored pornographic images of Sarkeesian, while others tried to hack into her accounts, get Kickstarter to ban her project, flag her YouTube videos as terrorism.


Click headline to read more--

Via Chuck Sherwood, Senior Associate, TeleDimensions, Inc
No comment yet.