Do You know about the Neocons written, published goal to control the Internet?

[Indy Vidual]

"We have assumed control..."

Do RPF members know about the Neocons written, published goal to control the Internet?


CONTROL THE NEW “INTERNATIONAL COMMONS” OF SPACE AND “CYBERSPACE,”
(FYI: the "all caps format" for this phrase is from the original document)

source: Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century (http://newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf) (just scroll about ~20% of the way down the .pdf to see this in black and white for yourself)

/ How many at RPF's even know about this?
// Anyone care to comment on whether 'they' are succeeding or falling short of the goal?

[amy31416]

Anonymous could handle these sleazebags quite deftly.

[BuddyRey]

Bump!

[Indy Vidual]

Anonymous could handle these sleazebags quite deftly.

What good is 'Anonymous' when they are (probably) paying agents to help control the conversation, and opinions, of the 'average' Web user?
You can try to be anonymous, but 'they' have still assumed control, right? :eek:

[Indy Vidual]

Wild-weekend bump...

[jake]

:mad: bump

[pcosmar]

Yup.
Enjoy it while you got it.
:(

[wizardwatson]

I think transparency is the winning strategy for us. Over-emphasis on privacy and scaring everyone with this "Identity Theft" garbage works more in favor of those that would like to control others.

I also don't think a philosophy that has the non-agression axiom as one of its core components has anything to fear from infiltrators trying to gain control. Anyone who tries to gain control and centralize power in any way will make themselves known all too easy.

[Vessol]

Anonymous could handle these sleazebags quite deftly.

"Anonymous" isn't a single "entity", it's just a bunch of white high school kids that goes to show that mob mentality works even when there is no mob physically. That and the mask of being able to post anonymously and thus reap no consequences breeds a culture of shock where you try to outshock others. Take away that anonymousity and confront any of these kids IRL and they'll be totally different.

And yeah, they wouldn't like their drug/escapism being cut off from them, they'd whine and cry and not be able to do a thing about it as most of the kids don't know jackshit about networking. Their 'attacks' are just DDOS attacks where they basically zerg servers with their numbers.

So pretty much "Anonymous"=a bunch of kids who prove that people act like pieces of shit when they can't be held responsible for anything they do or say. They also go to prove that it's incredibly easy to control a mob of people whether it be in person or over the internet.

So no, "Anonymous" isn't 'paid agents', you're giving the mob too much credit. They go with what they collectively 'believe' which is what they are fed, and if it is popular or right or 'morally' right, then in their shock culture of anonymousity, they will attack it.

[Rael]

Good luck trying. There are new privacy technologies coming out everyday.

This stuff will backfire...if they push it to the point where everyone feels the need to use anonymous technologies, they won't be able to monitor ANYONE.

[Vessol]

Good luck trying. There are new privacy technologies coming out everyday.

This stuff will backfire...if they push it to the point where everyone feels the need to use anonymous technologies, they won't be able to monitor ANYONE.

You're missing the fact that only a handful of ISP's exist. Control these and you control the web.

[Rael]

You're missing the fact that only a handful of ISP's exist. Control these and you control the web.

I think the market will take care of this problem. And there are other options-packet radio, etc. I could see a scenario where there are no real ISPs anymore, just a giant network of people with their own transmitter receivers. Imagine all the people with wireless routers, but with much more power, linked together in a giant network.

[wizardwatson]

"Anonymous" isn't a single "entity", it's just a bunch of white high school kids that goes to show that mob mentality works even when there is no mob physically. That and the mask of being able to post anonymously and thus reap no consequences breeds a culture of shock where you try to outshock others. Take away that anonymousity and confront any of these kids IRL and they'll be totally different.

I agree 100% and this is so true. When I was around 15 I got a CB radio and used to totally act like a douche to the old farts who used to sqawk on there all the time. I'd cuss and hurl insults just for laughs (in violation of law really, I was pretty immature at the time, but I thought it was funny). One dude got pissed and said he would find me. I thought he was bluffing, but he did find me and told me he'd rip that thing out of my car and smash it if I didn't stop being a prick. Once I found out local people could actually track the signal I stopped.

This 'anonymity' response is common human trait. It's why people act like dicks on the highways when they would never do that shit in real life. It's why people get rude with each other on the phone, saying things they would never say in a restaurant or in someones place of business.

This same human trait is exploited by gangs when they initiate members by having them kill a random person. And by African warlords when they train children to kill without being remorseful by having them shoot some random hostage that's been bound and gagged.

French philosopher Simone Weil references it in this quote:


As soon as men know that they can kill without fear of punishment or blame, they kill; or at least they encourage killers with approving smiles. - Simone Weil


And yeah, they wouldn't like their drug/escapism being cut off from them, they'd whine and cry and not be able to do a thing about it as most of the kids don't know jackshit about networking. Their 'attacks' are just DDOS attacks where they basically zerg servers with their numbers.

So pretty much "Anonymous"=a bunch of kids who prove that people act like pieces of shit when they can't be held responsible for anything they do or say. They also go to prove that it's incredibly easy to control a mob of people whether it be in person or over the internet.

So no, "Anonymous" isn't 'paid agents', you're giving the mob too much credit. They go with what they collectively 'believe' which is what they are fed, and if it is popular or right or 'morally' right, then in their shock culture of anonymousity, they will attack it.

I agree, and I'd say that 'anonymity', as I said in my earlier post, is not our ally.

We always get irritated by that "if you've got nothing to hide, it shouldn't bother you" stuff. We need to turn that around on our government. Let the public be transparently identified, but lets also have ALL the government officials and employees and beneficiaries identified and accountable as well.

Let's do the same with our money. One easy way to demand fiscal sanity is to actually know the real numbers of what is collected and where it is going.

Things like malkusm's www.freedomatlas.com (http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?hl=en&ie=UTF8&msa=0&msid=108435522685399031870.00047ef9181ddbc25c3d5&ll=38.61687,-65.039062&spn=30.947933,56.513672&z=4) project are good starts in this direction.

[Vessol]

I think the market will take care of this problem. And there are other options-packet radio, etc. I could see a scenario where there are no real ISPs anymore, just a giant network of people with their own transmitter receivers. Imagine all the people with wireless routers, but with much more power, linked together in a giant network.

Those people with wireless routers are connected through their ISP's DNS server.

What you are paying for when you get the internet is to be connected to their DNS server which acts as a middle man to the rest of the web.

It would be possible, but it would be highly unlikely.

It's infrastructure really. Just like highways and such, we could build them on a free market level. But if suddenly they were destroyed or blocked off by the authorities, we couldn't suddenly rebuild all the highways, it would take time.

[Indy Vidual]

Update:
CONGRESS RUBBER STAMPS OBAMA'S SECRET CYBERSECURITY PLAN
One provision in the bill should send shivers down the collective spines of those who treasure freedom of the Internet and the right to privacy.
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?389941-CONGRESS-RUBBER-STAMPS-OBAMA-S-SECRET-CYBERSECURITY-PLAN&p=4646085&posted=1#post4646085

They are making too much progress...

[UWDude]

"Anonymous"... ...just a bunch of white high school kids...

Just because you and everyone else that dislikes anonymous types this cliche statement about what anonymous is, does not make it so.


What you are paying for when you get the internet is to be connected to their DNS server which acts as a middle man to the rest of the web.

Oh really? So All I have to do is memorize the IP addresses of my favorite sites, and I don't have to pay $60 a month for internet anymore?

Cool! I'm glad we have you as a cyber-expert on these boards to give us all the technical details and sound like he has any idea what he is talking about!

[FrankRep]

Anonymous could handle these sleazebags quite deftly.
Anonymous could be "Problem, Reaction, Solution" controlled by the Feds.

[Indy Vidual]

Anonymous could be "Problem, Reaction, Solution" controlled by the Feds.

...or partially controlled by the Feds is also possible.

[thoughtomator]

Anonymous could be "Problem, Reaction, Solution" controlled by the Feds.

I agree with this assessment. If Anonymous was what they purport to be, why haven't they done any real damage, like destroying IRS or FBI databases?

[Danan]

I agree with this assessment. If Anonymous was what they purport to be, why haven't they done any real damage, like destroying IRS or FBI databases?

Because that's neither easy, nor safe for them. I seriously doubt that they are "controlled by the Feds".

For instance the "Austrian division" (at least they claim to be the real anonymus, which proves that they don't even understand the concept properly) is most certainly not. They hacked some websites of political parties as well as the agency responsible for collecting the compulsory fees for the public broadcasting stations* and published customer data (most people hated that agency anyway) and even the web servers of the police and published a list of all names of Austrian policemen as well as bank account information of some guys higher up the ladder, after they came out with though rhetoric against anonymous.

IRS and FBI seem to have better security policies.

Also, the right people have to be fed up with those agencies. Not all hackers are libertarians who hate the IRS. For some companies like Sony are a better target. Of course that's totally stupid. But that's what most people are in every social sub-set, stupid.


*This one was btw especially humorous. I really hate that agency, they knock on your door and ask you, whether or not you posess devices capable of recieving broadcasted signals. If you say yes, you have to pay them, no matter whether or not you actually watch the government propaganda channels. If you say no, they can sneak around your home and wait for suspecious sounds, that could be tv or radio programs. If they have "reasonable" evidence, that you posess a device they can get the police and a warrant and search your house. Disgusting a-holes!
What anonymus did was that they hacked their website, which had a lousy security policy. They then changed it to show a My Little Pony and play a song from Portal 2. Simultaniously they forced the agency to admit publicly, that their security was weak as hell and that anonymous has all customer data. They refused to admit that, so anonymous published the data. So basically what they did there was to humiliate a vile government institution and cause many citizens to quit their payment to them. Great stuff.

So when it comes to anonymous, I'm undecided. It always depends on the actual case at hand.