[nextparadigms]

Could it be that LulzSec/Anonymous are the revolutionaries of the next decade?

Early revolutionaries are always seen as criminals. Only in retrospect and only after they provoke major changes in the society does the society recognize them as some kind of heroes. But until that happens, they will be persecuted and some of them caught and treated like criminals. And I'm not saying they are completely innocent or anything. But all revolutionaries eventually provoke some damage. But that damage is insignificantly small compared to the changes they eventually cause.

Things are definitely getting really interesting, and I think this is just the beginning. The more the Governments will try to censor the Internet (which seems like the case lately), the more of these people will rise to fight against them. My money is on them.

[michaelchisari]

Early revolutionaries are always seen as criminals.

Relevant quotes:

"Those who make revolutions half way only dig their own graves" and "History is written by the victors."

[i386]

Early revolutionaries are criminals by definition since the system of which they revolt against cast them as such. To rebel is to be an outcast of any label.

[qF]

Anon has somewhat of a cause they're fighting for, they are pretty consistent when it comes about picking targets and their motives. But despite the amount of media attention it still feels like a drop on a hotplate to me.

LulzSec on the other hand just wants 'lulz', they'll try to hack anyone and anything, and probably fail a lot, but when they succeed they get a lot of media coverage. They pretend to be doing it to make people aware of security, but either it's a front or they're just that naive.

Anon has a goal, and what they do is an attempt to achieve it, LulzSec's goal is to do damage. I for one fear that LulzSec will push governments into cracking down on w/e is left of the 'free' internet.

[nextparadigms]

Anon started out doing pretty silly things, too, I believe, and soon their mission "matured" and became more serious. I'm starting to feel the same trend for LulzSec, and they even said so in a very recent BBC interview. They were asked if the "lulz" and the "antisec" missions are at odds with each other. They said for now they will keep doing a bit of each, but they think they'll start getting more serious as it's more fulfilling to have a cause like bringing down a few notches the corrupt officials, etc.

So we'll see if that's what will happen. They are pretty unpredictable, but I think they'll get caught up in this and continue doing it for the good of everyone.

[__rkaup__]

What BBC interview?

[aklemm]

This one: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-13912836

Lots of talk in there about goals beyond lulz.

[coderdude]

Here's an IRC log that will give you some insight into how Anonymous thinks:

http://th3j35t3r.wordpress.com/2010/12/10/time-to-speak-up-p...

These people are certainly not the Thomas Jeffersons of our time.

[scythe]

Of course they aren't. Thomas Jefferson wasn't on the battlefield, he was in the Continental Congress writing things to inspire people.

Y'know, like... here.

[coderdude]

Yeah, they're not George Washingtons either.