reply to post by purplemer
But they DO need excuses. Fights for freedom in the modern age are never won by direct action - look at OWS, what came of that? Nothing. The protests
were shut down and the hype surrounding it gradually cut off. Ask someone on the street what they think of the movement now, most of them won't
remember it and those who do won't care.
If a government proposed a SOPA or PIPA type act which affected the majority of internet users i.e. wikipedia and facebook, and the acts were
publicised by facebook and wikipedia, many of those people would write strongly worded letters to their MPs, senators etc, and threaten to oust them
democratically if they voted in favour of the bill, then it wouldn't pass.
If "Anonymous" and other groups continue to engage in "internet terrorism" (which things like this are advertised as) then the politicians have a
response to the average voter - we need to protect your safety!
The harder the internet fights against the government, the more reasonable the government looks to the majority of people.
As for your postulation that TYLER is necessary due to the vulnerability of WL, I don't believe that. If WL survived one of the biggest and most
devastating attacks from one of the most cryptologically advanced nations on the planet, it can withstand anything. Even if we accept that TYLER is a
necessary evolution, my earlier point stands, do it quietly. The massive launch of this project is unnecessary, it will reach many more people than it
would if it was released without a fanfare. The thing is, most of these people won't know how to or won't want to use it. The only difference is
that TYLER is now a thing. It's real. It exists in our collective minds.
TYLER will be the next piece of rhetoric used to describe how internet terrorists are stealing muh freedoms.
You can't compare this to women's rights or America's formation. The difference between then and now is the fact that in those cases, the
revolutionaries had nothing to lose. Right now we have an unregulated internet for the most part where anything goes. There are some cases where
political sacrificial lambs are slaughtered (mostly British, unfortunately) but they're the exception, not the rule. We can do whatever we like, and
it takes dedicated effort to track us down. The internet is the wild west. In those cases, the fighters didn't have basic rights they could lose if
they fought for more. I like my internet, it's the only thing I feel this strongly about. It's really the only thing we have absolute freedom of
In short, Anonymous is not Legion. Most people don't care about the internet as long as they have their facebook and their youtube and so on. If
anyone tries to detract from the majority's experience on facebook, they will be angry and complain - the majority is in fact legion, there are many
many more normal people than "Anonymous." They have power. If Anonymous tries to fight the government loudly and publicly, they will be branded
internet terrorists and used as an example to silence the majority. The restrictive acts will then pass, and everyone loses.