[smbwrs]

What interests me most about Anonymous is the fact that it's actually two groups: the small group of technically-competent individuals, and the LOIC script-kiddie griefer minions who can be dispatched at will. The griefers get the media attention and do it "for the lulz", while the folks with actual skills penetrate systems and expose private information. If I had to guess, I'd say that HBGary got a little information on a bunch of the griefers, and near nothing on the people who can do real damage.

If I were a hacker, Anonymous - that is, the 4chan script-kiddie bunch - would make for incredible front line. They generate an unbelievable amount of noise, and a very particular kind of hacker-ish noise, which I'd imagine is fantastic for redirecting attention and covering tracks as necessary. The recent FBI raids, for example. http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20110128/tc_afp/britainarrestwik...

[lsb]

So as long as you can convince impressionable young people that some entity is acting against Freedom, you will be able to mobilize them to give you cover for your activities.

That seems true in other circumstances also.

[duairc]

How I wish that were true! Most people, young and old, really don't care at all.

[vacri]

"Don't care" in the form of getting out and proactively doing something, yes.

"Don't care" in the form of clicking a preorganised button ("sign online petition", "retweet this travesty", "join this voluntary botnet"), plenty of folk care that way.

If your engagement in the nominated activity can be fully completed before you finish your beverage of choice, the internet is full of caring individuals...

[wh-uws]

I would totally agree with this.

They raided a kid at my university and all he was doing was administrating one of the IRC channels

[RK]

Sort of a 4chan version of Mechanical Turk.

[ohyes]

More like a human shield.

[alphaoverlord]

Meat shield