This thread is permanently archived
G/u/rls what's your opinion on the fake anonymous 2

| Since the old thread got closed down[and I didn't explain myself well] I'll put it here.

Uhh what I meant was Everyone on sites like Twitter praising the hacking group called anonymous for just ddosing some police site and not doing anything, and people becoming anon-stans and shit. What do you think of that?

| I get anyone can become "anonymous" but there's no official account on social media like they're claiming to be

| I'm not sure I get what you mean. If any hacker can be anonymous then how can there be fake anonymous?

No one can give praise/criticism to the individuals behind the hacks because no one knows who they are. If people called anonymous does something then people called anonymous will get the praise.

Or am I misunderstanding your post?

| >>668358
I think op means the group "anonymous"

| >>668370
Yeah, I got that part. The thing is there's no central group called anonymous. It's a hacker collective that anyone can take part of.

| >>668378

It's not even necessarily a hacker collective. Most people who claim to be anonymous or "work for" anonymous are really just randoms who do so out of boredom or because of some vague need to join a cause they believe in.

This concept was stronger years ago back when the biggest fish Anonymous ever fried was Scientology, speaking as an oldfag myself. Very few of us ever had "hacking" abilities, and the few that did have either retired, been imprisoned, or supposedly, got scouted to work for the government.

| Anyway OP, eh, business as usual. I'd rather that they attack something like a police website than get their hands muddied in elections. IMO Anonymous was, and still is, most effective as a force of chaotic neutral.

Total number of posts: 7, last modified on: Sun Jan 1 00:00:00 1591752384

This thread is permanently archived