Anonymous Hierarchy emerges

Anonymous Hierarchy emerges

Guardian

They were described as a leaderless, anarchic group of "hacktivists" who briefly brought down MasterCard, Visa and PayPal after those companies cut off financial services to WikiLeaks.

But inside Anonymous, the Guardian has found that the organisation is more hierarchical – with a hidden cabal of around a dozen highly skilled hackers co-ordinating attacks across the web.

(visit the link for the full news article)

I find this interesting because I thought anyone can identify themselves as "Anonymous§" for any cause whatsoever. According to this article Anonymous appears to be more of an official group with an official chain of command and official goals than previously thought. This would also make sense because the targets dont seem random but very much coordinated with a number of people in agreement on what those targets are.

From the article:

"One member said the group's "command and control" centres are invite-only, adding: "It's to protect people, but if you have proven trustworthy you get invited – it's not hard to do. It's not some elitist structure but a way to keep the press and the odd bit of law enforcement seeing who issues commands."

Guardian
(visit the link for the full news article)

Also interesting:

Members of the group and outside experts such as Gabriella Coleman, a New York University professor who has studied Anonymous, estimate that up to 1,000 people are members of the broader network, who make their computers available to co-ordinated cyber attacks. But the majority of members – put at 99% by one insider – have virtually no influence over the direction of the group or its strategy.

"Our project has no leader structure, only different roles. The degree of leadership and organisation in the various projects various a lot," one long-term insider explained. "It's all very chaotic, but we communicate and co-operate with each other. I see us as different cells of the same organism."

Beautiful.

A model for the future!

Just the beginning of " people " rising up to the occasion. As long as they continue to remain legit, and fighting for right of the people to be informed, I'm all for there actions.

reply to post by Skyfloating


I'm not sure why you put Wikileaks in the headline. Anonymous and Wikileaks are two separate entities - and Assange has even expressed concern about their attacks. They say they are defending free speech, not Wikileaks per se, and Wikileaks has acknowledged no connection between themselves and Anonymous.
And the article is not about WL at all, just Anonymous.

Originally posted by wcitizen
reply to post by Skyfloating

 

I'm not sure why you put Wikileaks in the headline. Anonymous and Wikileaks are two separate entities - and Assange has even expressed concern about their attacks. They say they are defending free speech, not Wikileaks per se, and Wikileaks has acknowledged no connection between themselves and Anonymous.

You are correct. It is a rule to copy headlines exactly as they appear in the newspaper, but in this case its good to make an exception. And I will do just that right now by editing the title.

So not even Anon is anon these days when everybody wants give own stupid face to things,why is this ?

Now they have made the contact, they get busted. Maybe they dont care but they sure aren't anon.

Originally posted by thelastlineofwhat
So not even Anon is anon these days when everybody wants give own stupid face to things,why is this ?

I guess people feel uncomfortable with secret or mysterious groups. The public then gets the urge to label, identify, categorize those groups.

I am not going to even pretend to know what you kids with your rap and roll are even talking about.

But it does seem as if "Anonymous" is not quite what most thought if this is true. Of course, that could be good or bad, depending on the "core group" and their ideals/motivations.

For me, ideal is stripping all laws that are not emanating directly from the constitution of our nation, and each state, and going from there.

Regardless, it would seem that if there is a group that is not anonymous leading Anonymous, then they are no longer anonymous enough to be Anonymous.

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Originally posted by thelastlineofwhat
So not even Anon is anon these days when everybody wants give own stupid face to things,why is this ?

I guess people feel uncomfortable with secret or mysterious groups. The public then gets the urge to label, identify, categorize those groups.

S-Dog's Velvet Rope....humans have a love/hate relationship with the Velvet Rope. We only love it when we are on the "other side" of it.

It is funny that. Nothing is nearly as mysterious once you are part of it.

any effective entity of scale has an organization chart...I would expect nothing less from anon, taliban, wiki, cia, ncaa, starbucks etc.

I've known for a long time that this was a specific group who called themselves "anonymous" but also understood that they had many like minded people who follow their philosophy and executed like minded actions.

I also understand that US agencies have been monitoring them for years and have even tried to infiltrate their elite.

If someone is claiming to be offering "insights", then I would be weary of just who they are and why they are leaking information. I imagine TPTB would love to discredit them to create the illusion of them being more terrorist than activist.

There's some interesting documentaries about them if you search hard enough. Meanwhile, vive l'anonymous.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan

Regardless, it would seem that if there is a group that is not anonymous leading Anonymous, then they are no longer anonymous enough to be Anonymous.

Hilarious.

I actually think this piece of news takes away from the mystique a little bit. It makes anonymous look like...well...like an official group with an official agenda. Thats less appealing than the group we knew nothing at all about.

In any case, Im with you on the Constitution thing

reply to post by Skyfloating


Hmmm.....

Where have I heard this before? A loose group of affiliates. Hiding in the shadows. Attacking big, juicy targets. Soon to be nefarious, enemies of the state. Whose actions precipitate further erosion of civil liberties disguised as protection of the people.

Naaa......

I guess I had nothing after all. Anyway, DWTS is back on. Yipppeee!!!!!!!!!!!

I believe that they are creating this story so that they will make us believe that there is a structure and goal of this organisation.

I feel the reason they are saying this is to try and portray that they have something that they can pursue and stop.

They want us to believe that its more than beating a cloud of smoke with a stick!!

Only the stupid and foolish hackers will get caught and will be made an example of.

Originally posted by Irish Matador
I believe that they are creating this story so that they will make us believe that there is a structure and goal of this organisation.

I feel the reason they are saying this is to try and portray that they have something that they can pursue and stop.

But a previous poster (nerbot) said he is aware of a structure and specific agenda...and he seems to know a thing or two about Anonymous...

reply to post by Skyfloating


I am no expert on this matter and will gladly bow to superior knowledge of the subject at hand

You're likely watching a bunch of glory hounds parading themselves in front of the news media for 15 minutes of fame, who have no connection to anything, or worse these are disinfo agents saying all sorts of disreputable things to turn opinion against public protest by "anonymous". Anyone can go off and create their own version of it and claim anything they want. The media doesn't grasp that what they're dealing with is a bunch of hormonal teens and tweeners obsessed with their web cams and pointing their LOIC at the target-du-jour for the lulz.

Honestly, it makes perfect sense that amid all the swarm of seeming chaos there is a hidden group that provides some level of direction.

Without some form of direction a mob is just a mob after all and will act as such. If you notice, Anon doesn't act like a mob and that speaks of some form of direction. That direction can only come from some from of leadership providing guidance. Even 99% of the mob doesn't realize they are being guided.