API tools faq
paste
Guest User

Anonymous Waxes Philosophic

a guest
Jul 26th, 2011
1,541
0
Never
Add comment
Not a member of Pastebin yet? Sign Up, it unlocks many cool features!
text 67.06 KB | None | 0 0
raw download clone embed print report
  1. [11:33] <NetworkSecurity> Hi guys, mind if I ask a few questions?
  2. [11:33] <~Anonymous9> Eh
  3. [11:33] <+biella> NetworkSecurity: we are busy, can you see? :-)
  4. [11:33] <~Anonymous9> NetworkSecurity: absolutely
  5. [11:33] <m0nkywitar0cket> lol
  6. [11:33] <meddle> lol
  7. [11:33] <~Anonymous9> biella: Shhh :P
  8. [11:33] <meddle> :P
  9. [11:33] <~Anonymous9> NetworkSecurity: Welcome to the world of bickering Anons :D
  10. [11:33] <m0nkywitar0cket> lmao
  11. [11:34] <+biella> wonder if reporter is paying attention
  12. [11:34] <m0nkywitar0cket> not bickering, just conversing
  13. [11:34] <meddle> ohai NetworkSecurity
  14. [11:34] <+biella> true and interesting one
  15. [11:34] <meddle> hope he read all we wrote
  16. [11:34] <NetworkSecurity> I chatted with joepie91 the other day & got some good responses, but want to clarify a couple of points. This is for a feature that will go into the tech journal Network Security.
  17. [11:35] <NetworkSecurity> I've been talking to some people - some in the infosec bus and a couple with an inside track (but not part of) Sony, and have been getting some interesting responses.
  18. [11:35] <NetworkSecurity> Wanted to get your feedback.
  19. [11:35] <~Anonymous9> Right, fire away
  20. [11:36] <~Anonymous9> Just remember, usual criteria apply: We are not spokespeople or leaders, and none of this is "official" comment
  21. [11:36] <NetworkSecurity> check
  22. [11:36] <~Anonymous9> We are merely the Anons who are interested in speaking out, we are neither appointed nor do we hold any particular "status"
  23. [11:36] <@marduk> hey a9
  24. [11:37] <NetworkSecurity> First up, there is a clear antipathy towards 'whitehats'. The comments I've seen run along the lines of...
  25. [11:37] <~Anonymous9> Hey marduk
  26. [11:37] <~Anonymous9> Can I PM you in fact?
  27. [11:37] <~Anonymous9> Sorry NetworkSecurity go on, didn't mean to interrupt
  28. [11:37] <NetworkSecurity> ...sec firms bill milliions and provide no security. But this is a pretty broad brush. What kind of sec firms do you think are failing?
  29. [11:38] <~Anonymous9> Well there are two issues there
  30. [11:38] <~Anonymous9> I'll take the white hats first
  31. 03[11:38] * lolatu ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  32. 03[11:38] * Chuck sets mode: +v lolatu
  33. [11:38] <~Anonymous9> White hat is an incredibly vague term
  34. [11:39] <~Anonymous9> They like to think of themselves as "the good guys" of hacking, but are they really?
  35. [11:39] <~Anonymous9> Is providing services to governments to allow them to spy on people, to allow them to cover up their abuses, to allow them to break the law - is this positive?
  36. [11:40] <NetworkSecurity> What kinds of companies are you thinking of when you say that? RSA?
  37. [11:40] <~Anonymous9> "White hat" is a term which essentially describes someone who co operates with the authorities, and often includes co operating with their crimes. So I for one object to the term white hat because it implies they are doing good, when in fact in many cases, they are aiding corruption.
  38. [11:40] <~Anonymous9> NetworkSecurity: Well for instance, I'm sure HBGary called themselves "White hats"
  39. [11:41] <~Anonymous9> Because they were working for the government and for established firms.
  40. [11:41] <~Anonymous9> But my point is, it doesn't matter. The activities they were engaged in were still unethical at best, illegal at worst.
  41. [11:42] <~Anonymous9> White hats are so described not by their activities but by their allegiances, and this is fundamentally wrong in my view.
  42. [11:42] <~Anonymous9> Again, this is just one Anon's opinion
  43. [11:42] <NetworkSecurity> So all government and corporate activity is immoral?
  44. [11:43] <meddle> more all spying activity and harrassing conducted by corporates and governments maybe
  45. 06[11:43] * snowy tries to read where A9 said that
  46. [11:44] <~Anonymous9> Absolutely not
  47. [11:44] <~Anonymous9> NetworkSecurity: Sorry if I didn't make that clear
  48. [11:44] <NetworkSecurity> Isn't part of you message to highlight poor security? Doesn't that mean that orgs should have *more* security?
  49. [11:44] <~Anonymous9> NetworkSecurity: My point is, you can't describe yourself as a good guy or bad guy based on your allegiances.
  50. [11:44] <~Anonymous9> NetworkSecurity: Just because, for instance, HBGary were working for the Chamber of Commerce, it doesn't change the fact that the activities and services they were offering were downright illegal in many cases and certainly wholly unethical by most standards.
  51. [11:44] <~Anonymous9> Yes I was about to come to that, that's the second aspect of AntiSec
  52. [11:45] <~Anonymous9> (Bear in mind I'm not directly involvedi n AntiSec I've just been observing it, so anyone who is involved should jump in and call me out if I'm getting things wrong)
  53. [11:46] <~Anonymous9> snowy: Where I said what?
  54. [11:46] <~Anonymous9> NetworkSecurity: This is the second aspect. Consumer protection, essentially.
  55. [11:46] <~Anonymous9> What AntiSec is trying to expose, and hopefully is exposing, is just how woeful data protection actually is.
  56. [11:46] <~Anonymous9> For example, you would hope to trust a company like Viacom with your data when you subscribe to them. You're handing over your credit card, contact details, media preferences, the lot.
  57. [11:47] <~Anonymous9> Now, how do you feel knowing that a small team of Lulzsec hackers managed to breach their servers and download an absolutely colossal amount of information from them?
  58. [11:48] <~Anonymous9> Those hackers are not in it for financial gain, but that is mere luck. It was lulzsec then, it could have been a card theft cartel the month before.
  59. [11:48] <~Anonymous9> Do you see the point?
  60. [11:48] <NetworkSecurity> I'll come back to that in a minute ;) Let's focus on the commercial/corporate side of things for a minute, as government stuff carries a lot of other political baggage...
  61. [11:48] <NetworkSecurity> ...I'd like to know what effect you'd *like* to have on corporates with your activities
  62. [11:48] <snowy> A9 NetworkSecurity> So all government and corporate activity is immoral?
  63. [11:48] <~Anonymous9> Well again this is just my opinion, I can't speak for the movement as a whole
  64. [11:50] <~Anonymous9> But personally I would like to create a climate where illegal and unethical behaviour simply becomes impossible.
  65. [11:50] <~Anonymous9> It's the same reason I support Wikileaks
  66. [11:50] <~Anonymous9> With Wikileaks, I am hoping that governments will be forced to stop lying to the people, if they know it's very likely their lies will be exposed and they will be ambarrassed
  67. [11:50] <~Anonymous9> Secondly, I would hope they will take serious measures to protect their consumers.
  68. [11:50] <~Anonymous9> Actually there are two desired effects here. The first is on corporations, that corruption and dishonesty will become unviable due to the likelihood of getting caught.
  69. [11:51] <~Anonymous9> Secondly, on consumers. That people will think twice before they hand over their identities online. That people will stop and say "Do I KNOW this data is safe? Do I KNOW no one can hack into this system and use my information against me?"
  70. [11:51] <m0nkywitar0cket> its a form of public checks & balances that have few loops holes in my opinion
  71. [11:51] <~Anonymous9> "Is it REALLY a good idea to give Google my mobile phone number to retrieve a lost password? Do I know some advertising agency isn't going to hack in and sell it to telemarketers?"
  72. [11:51] <~Anonymous9> Etc.
  73. [11:52] <NetworkSecurity> Do you expect corporates to improve their security as a direct result of high-profile hacks?
  74. [11:52] <~Anonymous9> Well I would certainly hope so.
  75. [11:52] <meddle> i expect people being more cautious too
  76. [11:53] <meddle> about giving away personal data that could be stolen or sold
  77. [11:53] <~Anonymous9> I can definitely say AntiSec has change MY perceptions.
  78. [11:53] <~Anonymous9> I myself won't be so "willy nilly" about throwing my private information around in future. And I would have said I was already more paranoid than most people.
  79. [11:53] <NetworkSecurity> Okay, I have some feedback from people I've been speaking to and I'd like to get your response...
  80. [11:54] <NetworkSecurity> The first is that many infosec pros feel that these hacks have been good ... for the infosec business. It has raised awareness at board level...
  81. [11:55] <NetworkSecurity> ... which will result in more business for sec firms. But this is likely to be short-lived. How do you feel about that?
  82. 02[11:55] * Bourne ([email protected]) Quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
  83. [11:55] <snowy> I think anonymous/antisec has already changed behaviours within governments and corporations. Whether it is more attention paid to security, or having second thoughts on dubious practices.
  84. [11:55] <~Anonymous9> Well provided they're actually going to do their job, fine
  85. 02[11:55] * Acorn ([email protected]) Quit (Connection closed)
  86. 03[11:55] * Acorn ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  87. 03[11:56] * shitstorm ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  88. 03[11:56] * Chuck sets mode: +ao shitstorm shitstorm
  89. [11:56] <NetworkSecurity> That brings me on to the next point... this may take several lines to explain...
  90. [11:56] <~Anonymous9> I cannot abide the ones which use "psuedo science" to sell you a security product which does things you could easily do yourself with a command prompt
  91. [11:56] <~Anonymous9> As long as they're going to sell genuinely protective software rather than gimmicks and buzz words, I'm all for it.
  92. [11:56] <NetworkSecurity> Another strong message I'm getting is that, long-term, and seen overall, the changes that will be made (including those by some of the firms attacked) will be...
  93. 03[11:57] * Isis ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  94. 03[11:57] * Chuck sets mode: +ao Isis Isis
  95. [11:57] <NetworkSecurity> ...nothing. Here's the reason. The analysis is that the material leaked (remember we're talking about corps here, not govs) carries very little risk for the companies.
  96. 03[11:58] * HomoCarnula ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  97. [11:58] <~Anonymous9> Well that depends
  98. [11:58] <~Anonymous9> Let's take viacom again for an example, they had many gigabytes of stuff leaked
  99. [11:58] <~Anonymous9> Now tell me, after seeing that, would you be so easy to persuade into giving them your details?
  100. [11:58] <NetworkSecurity> All firms make risk analyses and balance those against cost. What I'm hearing is that the material leaked is "low grade". Yes, they've been embarrassed...
  101. [11:58] <~Anonymous9> the next time they ask you for an online subscription, would you just hand it over without question?
  102. [11:58] <~Anonymous9> I believe the leaks will hurt confidence in the companies which have been exposed as having bad security.
  103. [11:58] <~Anonymous9> Overall it SHOULD be good for consumers.
  104. [11:59] <HomoCarnula> (hai ^^)
  105. [11:59] <NetworkSecurity> ...but reputational damage is short-lived. (I hear Sony works on a quarterly basis)
  106. [11:59] <meddle> the point is not in the material leaked only, but in the fact a leak was possible
  107. [12:00] <~Anonymous9> Sony is a bad example for this conversation I think because it is exceptional. It has, apparently, been hacked dozens of times in several months, by dozens of different groups
  108. [12:00] <~Anonymous9> I highly doubt their reputation will recover from the hit it's taken. Not fully, and not for a long time.
  109. [12:00] <NetworkSecurity> Sotry I'm hearing is that, in a year, if anyone remembers the Sony hack at all it'll be "oh yeah, some bad guys got some email addresses".
  110. [12:00] <NetworkSecurity> Story*
  111. [12:00] <m0nkywitar0cket> i think the more important point (and this is just my opinion) for lulzsec and maybe even anonymous is to raise awareness, not bring down companies
  112. [12:00] <~Anonymous9> But it's exceptional. Sony has been repeatedly assaulted from all fronts by tons of different groups.
  113. [12:00] <~Anonymous9> I mean it awes me and I think it awed everyone
  114. [12:01] <~Anonymous9> They literally got slammed again and again, and just whenever we thought it was all over, another attack from another group.
  115. [12:02] <NetworkSecurity> Point is, though, that firms like Sony simply might not *care* and therefore won't be encouraged to improve security
  116. [12:02] <~Anonymous9> That's rare. But personally I feel it will severely damage them. You may be of the opinion that in a year no one will care, I would have to disagree.
  117. 02[12:02] * +enoch ([email protected]) Quit (*.net *.split)
  118. 02[12:02] * decayratio ([email protected]) Quit (*.net *.split)
  119. 02[12:02] * CWN ([email protected]) Quit (*.net *.split)
  120. 02[12:02] * dsprr ([email protected]) Quit (*.net *.split)
  121. 02[12:02] * bmcd ([email protected]) Quit (*.net *.split)
  122. 02[12:02] * reporter ([email protected]) Quit (*.net *.split)
  123. 02[12:02] * nullbyte ([email protected]) Quit (*.net *.split)
  124. 02[12:02] * %Mit ([email protected]) Quit (*.net *.split)
  125. 02[12:02] * Thought_Criminal ([email protected]) Quit (*.net *.split)
  126. 02[12:02] * rob ([email protected]) Quit (*.net *.split)
  127. 02[12:02] * NetworkSecurity ([email protected]) Quit (*.net *.split)
  128. 02[12:02] * +biella ([email protected]) Quit (*.net *.split)
  129. 02[12:02] * Her0z ([email protected]) Quit (*.net *.split)
  130. 02[12:02] * ~Anonymous9 ([email protected]) Quit (*.net *.split)
  131. 02[12:02] * HarryBotter ([email protected]) Quit (*.net *.split)
  132. 02[12:02] * +lolatu ([email protected]) Quit (*.net *.split)
  133. 02[12:02] * SilverLords ([email protected]) Quit (*.net *.split)
  134. 02[12:02] * velcroballz ([email protected]) Quit (*.net *.split)
  135. 02[12:02] * %n0pants ([email protected]) Quit (*.net *.split)
  136. 02[12:02] * toad ([email protected]) Quit (*.net *.split)
  137. 02[12:02] * MattieTK ([email protected]) Quit (*.net *.split)
  138. 02[12:02] * @elChe ([email protected]) Quit (*.net *.split)
  139. 02[12:02] * yui-san ([email protected]) Quit (*.net *.split)
  140. 02[12:02] * m0nkywitar0cket ([email protected]) Quit (*.net *.split)
  141. 02[12:02] * @TVXQ ([email protected]) Quit (*.net *.split)
  142. 02[12:02] * DrPizza ([email protected]) Quit (*.net *.split)
  143. 02[12:02] * @c0s ([email protected]) Quit (*.net *.split)
  144. 02[12:02] * speakeasy ([email protected]) Quit (*.net *.split)
  145. 02[12:02] * darkspline ([email protected]) Quit (*.net *.split)
  146. 02[12:02] * %UnknownUser ([email protected]) Quit (*.net *.split)
  147. 02[12:02] * IceCube ([email protected]) Quit (*.net *.split)
  148. 03[12:03] * darkspline ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  149. 03[12:03] * yui-san ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  150. 03[12:03] * CWN ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  151. 03[12:03] * Her0z ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  152. 03[12:03] * nullbyte ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  153. 03[12:04] * speakeasy ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  154. 03[12:04] * toad ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  155. 03[12:04] * SilverLords ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  156. 03[12:04] * dsprr ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  157. 03[12:04] * decayratio ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  158. 03[12:04] * bmcd ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  159. 03[12:04] * velcroballz ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  160. 03[12:04] * IceCube ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  161. 03[12:05] * biella ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  162. 03[12:05] * bmcd is now known as AnonGuest39622
  163. 03[12:05] * n0pants ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  164. 03[12:07] * UnknownUser ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  165. 03[12:07] * Chuck sets mode: +h UnknownUser
  166. 03[12:08] * Mit ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  167. 03[12:08] * Chuck sets mode: +h Mit
  168. 03[12:08] * Riotday ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  169. 03[12:08] * Chuck sets mode: +ao Riotday Riotday
  170. 03[12:08] * Anonymous9 ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  171. 03[12:08] * Chuck sets mode: +qo Anonymous9 Anonymous9
  172. 03[12:08] * c0s ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  173. [12:09] <~Anonymous9> Apologies
  174. [12:09] <~Anonymous9> networkSecurity: Still here?
  175. 03[12:09] * NetworkSecurity ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  176. 03[12:10] * MrHat ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  177. 03[12:10] * MrHat ([email protected]) has left #reporter
  178. [12:10] <NetworkSecurity> Damn connection bombed out... you guys still there?
  179. [12:11] <~Anonymous9> NetworkSecurity: Yep
  180. [12:12] <meddle> *me waves
  181. 06[12:12] * meddle waves
  182. 03[12:13] * HomoCarnula is now known as InformationTerrorism
  183. [12:13] <NetworkSecurity> Okay:) Here's what I was saying (and again, this isn't my opinion, it's what I'm hearing)...
  184. 03[12:13] * m0nkywitar0cket ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  185. 03[12:13] * j12pln ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  186. 03[12:14] * AnonGuest39622 is now known as bmcd
  187. 03[12:14] * rob ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  188. [12:14] <NetworkSecurity> Firms do risk analysis, decide the material leaked by Lulz etc is low-grade & not damaging to them except for short-term reputational damage which they can ride out. And this is cheaper that securing thousands of servers. Comment?
  189. 03[12:14] * j12pln ([email protected]) has left #reporter
  190. 03[12:14] * enoch ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  191. 02[12:14] * bmcd ([email protected]) Quit (Quit: We are anonymous.)
  192. [12:15] <~Anonymous9> Here's where I think you're going wrong: The reputational damage is not always short lived. It depends what is leaked.
  193. [12:15] <~Anonymous9> Like I said, Sony is a bad example, but I for one will absolutely never give them so much as my first name again.
  194. 03[12:15] * Anon2T ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  195. [12:15] <Anon2T> Hey! Tomorrow morning, we will be releasing a .csv with every single restaurant in california as of 3/2011.
  196. [12:15] <NetworkSecurity> That's not my opinion - that's what some corps have decided...
  197. [12:15] <Anon2T> Reporters, I am here for 20 mins.
  198. [12:16] <fresh_fries> Anon2T, don't we call that a phonebook>
  199. 03[12:16] * bmcd ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  200. [12:16] <~Anonymous9> Anon2T: Eh..... ok?
  201. [12:16] <Anon2T> But
  202. [12:16] <Anon2T> its all consolidated.
  203. [12:16] <Anon2T> CSV
  204. [12:16] <Anon2T> perfect for any online mass mailing program
  205. [12:16] <~Anonymous9> NetworkSecurity: I'm afraid I have to run, is there any chance we could continue this later?
  206. [12:16] <Anon2T> I was already offered $ for it haha
  207. [12:17] <NetworkSecurity> I'm on deadline, alas - time for one more quickcomment?
  208. [12:17] <~Anonymous9> Yes indeed
  209. [12:17] <~Anonymous9> My train's in 7 minutes though :P
  210. [12:17] <fresh_fries> Anyone available for comment on the Westborough Baptist Church Saga?
  211. [12:18] <NetworkSecurity> The situation would be very different if leaked data put firms in breach of stiff regs like PCI DSS. As you know this means stuff like credit card info. Would you ever leake stuff like that, given it might be damaging to the people involved?
  212. 02[12:18] * &daboogieman ([email protected]) Quit (Quit: Remember: Where ever you go, there you are.)
  213. [12:18] <~Anonymous9> Well again I'm not part of AntiSec so I can't comment on what they would or wouldn't do
  214. [12:18] <~Anonymous9> But I would imagine not.
  215. [12:18] <~Anonymous9> the goal here is not to hurt consumers.
  216. [12:19] <NetworkSecurity> Okay, thanks for your time A9 - appreciated...
  217. [12:19] <~Anonymous9> Sorry I couldn't be more help
  218. [12:19] <Anon2T> Found a random guest list to a dinner at the white house :)
  219. 03[12:19] * snowy ([email protected]) has left #reporter
  220. 03[12:20] * daboogieman ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  221. 03[12:20] * Chuck sets mode: +ao daboogieman daboogieman
  222. [12:20] <fresh_fries> Anon2t, no dis, but a lit of resataurants and a guestlist hardly seems like a hack.
  223. [12:21] <Anon2T> Its not a hack.
  224. [12:21] <Anon2T> Its a help to marketers :)
  225. [12:21] <Anon2T> I dont hack haha
  226. [12:21] <fresh_fries> marketers already have that list, lol
  227. [12:21] <~Anonymous9> Prank calls maybe? :P
  228. [12:22] <fresh_fries> lulz
  229. [12:22] <~Anonymous9> "Hello I'd live to book a table for over 9,000"
  230. [12:22] <~Anonymous9> "Booking in the name of David Davidson"
  231. [12:22] <Anon2T> Hahaha
  232. [12:22] <Anon2T> 36,000
  233. [12:22] <Anon2T> in the list
  234. [12:22] <meddle> lol
  235. [12:22] <NetworkSecurity> Quick question for everyone else here: anyone yet posted a hacked version of Anders Behring Breivik's manifesto? I'd like to get hold of a modified copy to use in the article... URL would be useful...
  236. [12:22] <@marduk> http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2096871/anonymous-lulzsec-manning-stuxnet-pwnie-award -- nice news
  237. [12:22] <Anon2T> I will find it
  238. [12:22] <&joepie91> uh
  239. [12:22] <&joepie91> a 'hacked version'?
  240. [12:22] <&joepie91> elaborate?
  241. [12:22] <fresh_fries> Anyone available for comment on the Westborough Baptist Church Saga?
  242. [12:22] <meddle> Networksecurity, not yet
  243. [12:22] <NetworkSecurity> as in modified
  244. [12:22] <meddle> #OperationUnManifest
  245. [12:22] <&joepie91> oh god
  246. [12:22] <&joepie91> wbc
  247. [12:22] <~Anonymous9> LULZ
  248. [12:23] <&joepie91> and lulz was had
  249. [12:23] <fresh_fries> shirley is so lulztastic
  250. [12:23] <~Anonymous9> I wish I could stick around to talk about that but I have to go :P
  251. [12:23] <~Anonymous9> ttys
  252. [12:23] <meddle> nai A9
  253. [12:23] <meddle> bai
  254. [12:24] <Anon2T> Found a link
  255. [12:24] <&joepie91> westboro baptist church... let me summarize... they posted a fake press release on anonnews that gets to the frontpages of reddit, digg, and slashdot, that causes a massive traffic spike, then they post a response against it, after which anon responds with 'wtf are you doing, we didn't post the initial PR', after which people decide to have some lulz and pwn their site live during a radio show
  256. [12:25] <fresh_fries> thanks joe, but I know how to use google
  257. [12:25] <&joepie91> y u so troll
  258. [12:26] <fresh_fries> my question is a little more nuanced than a summary of thes events
  259. [12:26] <Anon2T> http://t.co/OEil500
  260. [12:26] <Anon2T> ;)
  261. [12:27] <NetworkSecurity> thx
  262. 02[12:28] * ~Anonymous9 ([email protected]) Quit (Quit: http://www.mibbit.com ajax IRC Client)
  263. 02[12:28] * NetworkSecurity ([email protected]) Quit (Quit: )
  264. [12:29] <fresh_fries> joepie91, i guess my question is: who/how was it decided that it was not an anonymous action?
  265. 03[12:30] * Thought_Criminal ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  266. [12:30] <&joepie91> fresh_fries: noone actually owned up to it, it was completely different in style than anything that had been seen before and very much resembled the way of writing of the WBC response
  267. [12:30] <&joepie91> noone was actually coordinating anything
  268. [12:30] <&joepie91> anywhere
  269. [12:30] <fresh_fries> since it was jester in this case (?), more to the point" whats stops anyone from simple launching actions in anon's name?
  270. [12:30] <&joepie91> it was just a press release that claimed something, didn't deliver, noone owned up
  271. [12:30] <&joepie91> not to mention that the wbc responded WAY too fast
  272. [12:31] <fresh_fries> joepie91, who is the person who speaks on behalf of anonymous in the datapak video?
  273. [12:31] <&joepie91> datapak video?
  274. [12:31] <&joepie91> also, jester had extremely little to do with the entire wbc story, other than jumping on the bandwagon afterwards
  275. [12:31] <m0nkywitar0cket> i think hes refering to the english chap speaking
  276. [12:31] <fresh_fries> bingo
  277. [12:31] <&joepie91> oh
  278. [12:32] <&joepie91> that was Topiary
  279. [12:32] <fresh_fries> "The David Pakman Show"
  280. [12:32] <fresh_fries> "MidweekPolitic" channel on youtube
  281. [12:32] <&joepie91> <joepie91>that was Topiary
  282. [12:33] <fresh_fries> so Topiary is a spokesperson for anonymous?
  283. [12:34] <m0nkywitar0cket> he is no different than joepie talking to you right now fresh_fries
  284. [12:34] <fresh_fries> I think anon's view of itself is rather schizophrenic
  285. [12:34] <fresh_fries> on the one hand completely decentralized, on the other it has a clear and identifiable leadership...?
  286. [12:35] <&joepie91> <m0nkywitar0cket>he is no different than joepie talking to you right now fresh_fries
  287. [12:35] <&joepie91> that
  288. [12:35] <@marduk> where is identifiable leadership? :o
  289. [12:35] <&joepie91> fresh_fries: if that is the case, you tell me who the leadership of anon are, huh?
  290. [12:35] <&joepie91> you will undoubtedly be able to pinpoint the leaders
  291. [12:35] <&joepie91> in under 5 minutes
  292. [12:35] <m0nkywitar0cket> lol
  293. [12:35] <&joepie91> no?
  294. [12:35] <fresh_fries> the spokespersons and those who "maintain infrastructure" such as the ops and hops on this IRC server?
  295. [12:36] <&joepie91> how hard is it to understand that anonymous does not equal anonops?
  296. [12:36] <@marduk> the last one who claimed that got his emails owned, his company closed, his life ruined.
  297. [12:36] <&joepie91> rofl
  298. [12:36] <m0nkywitar0cket> i think its the exact opposite of schizophrenic actually
  299. [12:36] <&joepie91> fresh_fries
  300. [12:36] <&joepie91> if you look up
  301. [12:36] <&joepie91> and read the topic
  302. [12:36] <m0nkywitar0cket> this is multiple minds under one name, not one mind under multiple names
  303. [12:36] <&joepie91> then look a bit to the right
  304. [12:36] <fresh_fries> i'm not trying to upset anyone
  305. [12:36] <&joepie91> to the very end of the topic
  306. [12:36] <&joepie91> and right there
  307. [12:36] <&joepie91> it answers your question
  308. [12:36] <fresh_fries> just genuinely interested in how all of this works
  309. [12:36] <&joepie91> "(AnonOps != Anonymous)"
  310. [12:36] <@marduk> you don't. we usually take stuff with humor
  311. [12:37] <&joepie91> fresh_fries: the point is, you can't just claim that anon has an identifiable leadership, if you are curious to know how it works
  312. [12:37] <&joepie91> claiming that something is the case would imply you already know or think to know how it works
  313. [12:37] <fresh_fries> joepie91, notice the question mark at the end of my statement
  314. [12:37] <&joepie91> a question mark doesn't make every word a question
  315. [12:37] <m0nkywitar0cket> and i would hardily call it a clear identifiable leadership
  316. [12:37] <meddle> topiary is not the spokeperson, he's just got a sexy voice. that's all
  317. [12:38] <m0nkywitar0cket> haha
  318. [12:38] <m0nkywitar0cket> ^^^^
  319. [12:38] <fresh_fries> Ok, back to the core question: What stops anyone from carrying out actions in Anonymous' name?
  320. [12:38] <&joepie91> nothing./
  321. [12:38] <meddle> nothing
  322. [12:38] <fresh_fries> isn't that problematic?
  323. [12:38] <&joepie91> possibly.
  324. [12:38] <@marduk> also he chose to be most vocal which isn't anyones treat. but he certainlynever claimed any leadership over anonymous nor did he have any.
  325. [12:38] <&joepie91> does everything have to work the same way and have the same pros and cons?
  326. [12:38] <@marduk> he was very active.
  327. [12:38] <@marduk> ppl often confuse these two
  328. [12:38] <m0nkywitar0cket> but there are often clean identifiers on whether an action was one person or a consented action
  329. [12:39] <fresh_fries> let me elucidate: If i'm the head of China's cyberops, from now on we would just impersonate Anonymous
  330. [12:39] <&joepie91> anonymous has its pros and cons like everything in the world
  331. [12:39] <toad> more or less all the people who work on infrastructure for this irc are no longer involved in anonymous operations
  332. [12:39] <&joepie91> that someone can do what he wants as anon is both a pro and a con
  333. [12:39] <biella> fresh_fries: lets grant that topiary acted as a spokesperson, how is that leadership?
  334. [12:39] <&joepie91> fresh_fries: point being?
  335. [12:39] <fresh_fries> hey biella
  336. 03[12:40] * Bob ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  337. [12:40] <biella> a number of folks have appeared on TV, not just Topiary, because they are good at it, or got lulz, or are eloquent
  338. [12:40] <biella> hi fresh_fries
  339. [12:40] <@marduk> cool, china blackops people hacking in the name of #AntiSec? No coplaints from my side.
  340. [12:40] <biella> how would that even translate into "leader"
  341. [12:40] <@marduk> complaints*
  342. [12:40] <&joepie91> lol marduk
  343. [12:40] <fresh_fries> point being: Anonymous stands a vert good chance of being aligned with significatnly more malevolent cyber actions, without any recourrse other than retribution
  344. [12:40] <&joepie91> fresh_fries: welcome to Anonymous.
  345. [12:40] <biella> there are so many other instances like Indymedia that had NO leader
  346. [12:40] <biella> Anonymous is not unique
  347. [12:40] <fresh_fries> and seeing as how anon has shyed away from taking on China, or anything remotely related to China, this seems like a very likey occurence
  348. 03[12:41] * mib_wx3vdy ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  349. [12:41] <biella> there is no leader to my department at the university, though the chair has the sucky job of dealing with the administration
  350. [12:41] <&joepie91> fresh_fries: yet again, welcome to Anonymous.
  351. [12:41] <m0nkywitar0cket> fresh fries, how does that differ from china posing as the United States to hack Russie?
  352. [12:41] <m0nkywitar0cket> Russia*
  353. [12:41] <toad> I have seen people trying to be leader who imploded
  354. [12:41] <fresh_fries> m0nkywitar0cket, it doesn't.
  355. [12:41] <toad> anyone remeber jeremey and lol?
  356. [12:41] <biella> there are certainly nodes of authority
  357. [12:41] <biella> more prominent people
  358. [12:41] <m0nkywitar0cket> so then the discussion is moot
  359. [12:41] <fresh_fries> m0nkywitar0cket, but I hardly think Anon would like to be painted in American broadstorkes either
  360. [12:41] <toad> what was jeremy called when he went nuts h something?
  361. [12:42] <biella> but it boggles me how people keep obsesseing on something that is not even unique to anonymous
  362. [12:42] <toad> healgae
  363. [12:42] <toad> that was it
  364. [12:42] <&joepie91> fresh_fries: Anonymous is what it is
  365. [12:42] <@marduk> i rather think it's very unlikely. it hasn't happened so far. most likely reason: Anonymous is LOUD and like to shout out what they do to the world. Criminal blackhats who do industrial espionage or pwn shit for money prefer to be VERY quiet.
  366. [12:42] <&joepie91> nothing you can do about it
  367. [12:42] <toad> back in the early days
  368. [12:42] <fresh_fries> nodes of authority ok.. see now we are getting somewhere
  369. [12:42] <&joepie91> welcome to what Anonymous really is
  370. 02[12:42] * mib_wx3vdy ([email protected]) Quit (Quit: http://www.mibbit.com ajax IRC Client)
  371. [12:42] <toad> he tried to run shit and got laughed out of town
  372. [12:42] <&joepie91> also, authority =/= power =/= leader
  373. 03[12:42] * Anon2T ([email protected]) has left #reporter
  374. [12:42] <&joepie91> you have authority when you are recognized as being capable of organizing/instructing/etc
  375. [12:42] <&joepie91> peoples choice, so to sauy
  376. [12:42] <&joepie91> say*
  377. [12:43] <&joepie91> the moment you do something they disagree witjh
  378. [12:43] <&joepie91> you lose authority
  379. [12:43] <&joepie91> even if you would have some degree of power
  380. [12:43] <fresh_fries> Well marduk , according to what ive read, someone already impersonated anonymous in the Sonynet hack?
  381. [12:43] <&joepie91> it works like that for everything
  382. [12:43] <biella> fresh_fries: here is more about it http://mediacommons.futureofthebook.org/tne/pieces/anonymous-lulz-collective-action
  383. [12:43] <&joepie91> only within anonymous, the power usually vanishes with the authority
  384. [12:43] <@marduk> fresh_fries: uh which one of the hacks?
  385. 03[12:43] * frogzilla ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  386. 03[12:43] * frogzilla ([email protected]) has left #reporter
  387. [12:43] <@marduk> there were like over 20 in the last months
  388. [12:43] <m0nkywitar0cket> ^
  389. [12:43] <fresh_fries> marduk, the one on Sony that anon denies
  390. [12:43] <fresh_fries> the first one I believe
  391. [12:43] <&joepie91> fresh_fries: noone 'impersonated' anon, Sony put out a bullshit story
  392. [12:43] <biella> as per impersonating, people can claim "it did not happen on this network, on anonops" and such like that
  393. [12:44] <biella> it is not total amorphousness
  394. [12:44] <fresh_fries> the millions of usernames and password with the 'we are legion' breadcrumb left on their servers
  395. [12:44] <&joepie91> I can not recall any even remotely believable claim of 'I'm anon and I did it' other than Sonys claim they left a note
  396. [12:44] <&joepie91> fresh_fries
  397. [12:44] <&joepie91> why do you believe in the first place
  398. 03[12:44] * v3rsus ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  399. [12:44] <&joepie91> that they REALLY found a note?
  400. [12:44] <@marduk> Frankly, I don't care. Anonymous can afford to take the blame.
  401. [12:44] <&joepie91> what evidence is there to support it?
  402. [12:44] <@marduk> Remdinds me of a Quite from Nietzsche
  403. [12:44] <biella> also, authority =/= power =/= leader as joepie91 said
  404. [12:44] <fresh_fries> joepie91, im not a fan of reality, and neither is the rest of the world. image is everything it would seem, so ...
  405. [12:44] <biella> there is a ton of parallel actions
  406. [12:44] <m0nkywitar0cket> the point is, even if anonymous did take the blame, i cant really see much happening
  407. [12:44] <&joepie91> fresh_fries: how is this any different from any other organization?
  408. [12:45] <fresh_fries> no idea what "=/=" means
  409. [12:45] <&joepie91> sony can claim something
  410. [12:45] <biella> which keeps things from pooling power
  411. [12:45] <&joepie91> and either people believe sony
  412. [12:45] <&joepie91> or they don't
  413. [12:45] <meddle> fresh_fries what is your point actually?
  414. [12:45] <&joepie91> =/= does not equal
  415. [12:45] <v3rsus> hi there...
  416. [12:45] <%Effexor> hi, v3rsus
  417. [12:45] <m0nkywitar0cket> hey
  418. [12:45] <fresh_fries> joepie91, because almost every other organization has appoitned leaders, figureheads, spokespersons and so on. Also recourse to legal systems. Sony cant suffer a hack and say Simens did it
  419. 03[12:45] * lolatu ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  420. [12:45] <&joepie91> fresh_fries: yes they can.
  421. [12:45] <lolatu> any news today?
  422. [12:45] <fresh_fries> siemens
  423. [12:46] <biella> fresh_fries: i recommend this http://www.amazon.com/Freedom-Endless-Meeting-Democracy-Movements/dp/0226674495
  424. [12:46] <biella> to see how different social movements in different eras organized without leaders
  425. [12:46] <fresh_fries> biella; yes im far too poor to order books from amazon
  426. [12:46] <biella> as per spokespeople
  427. [12:46] <biella> fresh_fries: library
  428. [12:46] <&joepie91> 1. There are no anons that claimed to have executed the attack on Sony.
  429. [12:46] <&joepie91> 2. The claim of Sony that they 'left a note' is, considering the rest of their coverups, highly improbably to be true.
  430. [12:46] <&joepie91> 3. The single claim of an anon that he knew *another* anon did it was completely unsourced and as such cannot be taken as a reliable statement
  431. [12:46] <biella> i am sure has it
  432. [12:46] <&joepie91> result:
  433. [12:46] <&joepie91> anon didn't do it
  434. [12:46] <&joepie91> simple as that
  435. [12:47] <biella> anyway spokespeople is an interesting question and has plagued many of these groups
  436. [12:47] <fresh_fries> joepie91, yes you're bang on with 3: no statements, even the legite ones, can be attributed to anonymous
  437. [12:47] <biella> different nodes of anons have relied of different people to speak on its behalf but that is why this channel is so interesting
  438. 03[12:47] * Chuck sets mode: +v biella
  439. [12:47] <fresh_fries> so by extension, the organization itself can hardly be said to even exist? in that it cannot define its own extremities (ie what is and is not anonymous)
  440. [12:48] <&joepie91> fresh_fries: any statement can be attributed to anonymous
  441. [12:48] <&joepie91> that does not mean that any statement ABOUT anonymous is also true
  442. [12:48] <lolatu> I wrote a whole article on this exact topic
  443. [12:48] <+biella> it is not an organization fresh_fries
  444. [12:48] <fresh_fries> joepie91, on whos authority?
  445. [12:48] <lolatu> if you're interested I've got a link
  446. [12:48] <&joepie91> everyones authority.
  447. [12:48] <+biella> there are many different nodes that organize under it
  448. [12:48] <+biella> spend some time with the chanology folks fresh_fries on anonnet
  449. [12:48] <fresh_fries> ok so then my statements can also be attributed to anonymous?
  450. [12:48] <&joepie91> if you say you are anonymous, you are anonymous and as such can represent anonymous to a degree where you can attribute an action or statement to anonymous
  451. [12:48] <&joepie91> yes.
  452. [12:48] <+biella> if you make it compelling
  453. [12:49] <fresh_fries> biella, i want to ask about one of our earlier convos
  454. [12:49] <+biella> shoot
  455. [12:49] <&joepie91> any boundaries of what anon can or cannot do derive from logic rather than from decision
  456. [12:49] <fresh_fries> biella; is aked you if 'the people h/ops can more accurately be believed to be repsentatives of anonymous' and you replied that 'they just maintain ifrastructure'
  457. [12:49] <fresh_fries> member?
  458. [12:49] <meddle> fresh_fries, could u tell us what do u want please?
  459. [12:50] <+biella> i said some ops maintain infra, others maintain it and participate in ops
  460. [12:50] <+biella> some just participate in opertations and have been given voice
  461. [12:50] <+biella> some of their opinions carry more weight
  462. [12:50] <+biella> but it depends on the channel and context and is shifting
  463. [12:50] <fresh_fries> ok, so it is not a perfectly egalitarian system then?
  464. [12:51] <+biella> what is a perfectly egalitarian system?
  465. [12:51] <v3rsus> anonymous needs a philosophy that the core agrees on...
  466. [12:51] <fresh_fries> i agree
  467. [12:51] <v3rsus> kind of like animal liberation front
  468. 06[12:51] * fresh_fries nods at v3rsus
  469. [12:51] <&joepie91> fresh_fries
  470. [12:51] <&joepie91> I mentioned this before
  471. [12:51] <&joepie91> anonymous DOES NOT EQUAL ANONOPS.
  472. [12:51] <&joepie91> it is. not. the. same. thing.
  473. [12:51] <fresh_fries> meddle, i dont particularily "want" anything...
  474. [12:52] <&joepie91> anonymous is leaderless, an operation may not be
  475. [12:52] <fresh_fries> joepie91, according to yall nohing = anaonymous
  476. [12:52] <+biella> fresh_fries: have you spent time with chanology
  477. [12:52] <+biella> on anonnet
  478. [12:52] <+biella> or WWP
  479. [12:52] <fresh_fries> i dont know what that is
  480. [12:52] <+biella> ok they are different and active anonymous nodes
  481. [12:52] <&joepie91> anonymous can be considered an anarchist organization.
  482. [12:52] <&joepie91> anarchy is not the forced absence of a system, but the absence of a forced system.
  483. [12:52] <meddle> maybe you want to know something, cuz i see some circular debate and i cannot gete your point straight
  484. [12:53] <fresh_fries> I want to know what keeps the whole cohesive
  485. [12:53] <+biella> there is not cohesive wholes
  486. [12:53] <fresh_fries> thats bs
  487. [12:53] <+biella> there are cohesive nodes
  488. [12:53] <&joepie91> nothing prevents someone from setting up his own control structure WITHIN anonymous, BUT who set up that control structure cannot influence anything OUTSIDE his control structure
  489. [12:53] <+biella> fresh_fries
  490. [12:53] <+biella> can you grant the difference there cohesive whole vs cohesive nodes
  491. [12:53] <&joepie91> fresh_fries: you appear to be CONVINCED that something like anonymous cannot work without a leader, and keep desperately looking for one because otherwise you cannot understand it
  492. 03[12:53] * chang ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  493. [12:53] <&joepie91> it would help if you started thinking with an empty mind
  494. [12:54] <+biella> and fresh_fries if you dont know what anonnet is or chanology is, you cant call BS
  495. [12:54] <&joepie91> and actually looked into how it actually works
  496. [12:54] <meddle> maybe fresh_fries just want to be hired by anon leaders
  497. [12:54] <fresh_fries> joepie91, its a little bit arrogant to assume Anonymous is "working" now isn't it?
  498. [12:54] <dsprr> whats up guys
  499. [12:54] <&joepie91> fresh_fries: elaborate?
  500. [12:54] <fresh_fries> What great problem has Anonymous actually solved to be said the current system "works"?
  501. [12:54] <m0nkywitar0cket> fresh_fries, think of it like networked computers, they have no leaders or authority, but each have their own set of information, when networked then can combine/trade and remove data
  502. [12:54] <&joepie91> fresh_fries: why do you assume the purpose of anonymous is 'to solve great problems' in the first place?
  503. [12:55] <v3rsus> isn't hierarchies are part of the problem... therefore anonymous HAS to be leaderless
  504. [12:55] <m0nkywitar0cket> anonymous is a network if anything, not an organization
  505. [12:55] <fresh_fries> m0nkywitar0cket, DNS is a good example of an authority system in the system you describe, or even TCPIP
  506. [12:55] <+biella> fresh_fries: i would say anonymous has fundamentally and materially changed how Scientology can go after its critics
  507. [12:55] <+biella> it has brought to the table new modes of digital dissent and mass protest
  508. [12:55] <dsprr> how come some people have @whatever.they.like @anonymo.us etc. and some a hidden IP?
  509. [12:55] <+biella> and it has raised conscioussness in all sorts of arenas
  510. [12:56] <meddle> dsprr is the vhost
  511. [12:56] <&joepie91> as for your question what anonymous has solved: what you are doing now is looking at the foundation of a house and screaming to the builders: "HEY, YOU CANT EVEN LIVE IN THAT, ITS POINTLESS! WHY ARE YOU EVEN BOTHERING, IT DOESNT EVEN HAVE A ROOF!"
  512. [12:56] <m0nkywitar0cket> theyre a means to an ends, dns, tcpip don't tell a computer what to do, they are the ground work for commmunication. that is all
  513. [12:56] <fresh_fries> biella, anonymous broadsheets long predate the internet
  514. [12:56] <meddle> fresh_fries plz join #anonopspersonelldept for further investigations
  515. [12:56] <+biella> fresh_fries: i never said anonymous was unique nor singular
  516. [12:56] <&joepie91> problems don't get solved in motnhs
  517. [12:56] <&joepie91> or even years
  518. [12:56] <+biella> and i am not sure what you mean my braodsheets
  519. 03[12:56] * AnonGuest21278 ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  520. [12:56] <+biella> by
  521. [12:56] <+biella> i cant believe i am feeding the troll
  522. [12:57] <+biella> all right lunch over
  523. [12:57] <&joepie91> lol
  524. [12:57] <fresh_fries> broadsheets: ie. the papers which carried rhymes like 'humpty dumpty' ie. thinly veiled attacks on the ruling noble
  525. [12:57] <fresh_fries> im sorry, but not all difficult questions are trolling
  526. [12:57] <fresh_fries> some are just difficult
  527. [12:58] <meddle> some like?
  528. [12:58] <m0nkywitar0cket> i dont think its a difficult question, you are just looking for a concrete answer to an abstract question
  529. [12:58] <+biella> fresh_fries: seriously you ignore things we say and focus in on others in a trollish way, if you hang out with anonnet and do a little more research and dive into WWP, i would be mor than happy to answer more questions
  530. [12:59] <v3rsus> if you don't like the answer, it doesn't make the question difficult... asking it over and over again won't get you to hear what you want to hear...
  531. [12:59] <&joepie91> <joepie91>fresh_fries: why do you assume the purpose of anonymous is 'to solve great problems' in the first place?
  532. [12:59] <+biella> see the nodes and then come back and lets talk again, otherwise trollunch is over
  533. [12:59] <fresh_fries> because y'all have a certain level of self-aggrandizement in your public statements
  534. [12:59] <fresh_fries> "We never forget" and so on and so forth
  535. [12:59] <@marduk> ah i found the Nietzsche quote i was reminded of blaming Anonymous for stuff they did not do: "Shared injustice is half justice. And he who can bear it, shall take the injustice upon himself!" (Thus spoke Zarathustra)
  536. [13:00] <+biella> meddle: check out marduk quoting N, we have another N-ster here
  537. [13:00] <&joepie91> fresh_fries
  538. [13:00] <+biella> cool quote marduk
  539. [13:00] <&joepie91> ..
  540. [13:00] <meddle> <3 marduk
  541. [13:00] <&joepie91> why am I even bothering
  542. [13:00] <fresh_fries> My original question, many days ago was 'What is the unifying philosophy pf Anonymous'
  543. [13:00] <fresh_fries> and the answer was "there is none"
  544. [13:00] <&joepie91> there IS no unifying philosophu
  545. [13:00] <@marduk> hai meddle <3
  546. [13:00] <&joepie91> philosophy*
  547. [13:00] <fresh_fries> nonetheless your targets ar very political
  548. 03[13:00] * marduk sets mode: +h meddle
  549. [13:00] <&joepie91> no
  550. [13:00] <%meddle> hai marduk :P
  551. [13:00] <@marduk> joepie91: addhim?
  552. [13:01] <fresh_fries> ie. police who arrest homeless feeders
  553. [13:01] <&joepie91> the anonops targets are very political
  554. [13:01] <fresh_fries> in defence of wikileaks, and so on
  555. [13:01] <&joepie91> not the anonymous targets
  556. [13:01] <&joepie91> you are mixing them up AGAIN.
  557. [13:01] <m0nkywitar0cket> the unifying philosophy is self-interest, whatever reason each one of us personally wants to be here for
  558. [13:01] <&joepie91> anonops does NOT equal anonymous
  559. [13:01] <m0nkywitar0cket> each has their own reasons for being here
  560. [13:01] <v3rsus> hahaha... is this journalism in progress?
  561. 02[13:01] * nullbyte ([email protected]) Quit (Quit: Leaving)
  562. [13:01] <fresh_fries> joepie91, ok, wtf is anonops? a channel? an irc server? a seperate group? please elaborate
  563. [13:01] <&joepie91> anonops is an irc network.
  564. [13:01] <@marduk> an irc network
  565. [13:01] <&joepie91> you are on it.
  566. [13:02] <&joepie91> right now.
  567. [13:02] <%meddle> lol guise
  568. [13:02] <fresh_fries> ok ty
  569. [13:02] <%meddle> he doesn't know where he is
  570. [13:02] <&joepie91> meddle: I doubt it, he's not using webchat.
  571. [13:02] <@marduk> it serves as a huge communication hub for anonymous. but it is not the only one.
  572. [13:02] <%meddle> @joe lol
  573. [13:02] <fresh_fries> can i get a couple brownie points for IRC over SSL?
  574. [13:02] <%meddle> sure
  575. [13:02] <fresh_fries> marduk, what are the others?
  576. 06[13:03] * %meddle gives 2 brownie points to fresh_fries
  577. 06[13:03] * fresh_fries cheers!
  578. [13:03] <%meddle> as biella said, anonnet is another
  579. [13:03] <fresh_fries> oh ok. what is the server?
  580. [13:03] <&joepie91> fresh_fries: noone will ever be able to give you an absolutely complete list of all communication infrastructures that are used by anon.
  581. [13:03] <&joepie91> just throwing that out in the open, to be sure,
  582. [13:03] <%meddle> fresh_fries i think u can google well
  583. [13:03] <%meddle> as u said before
  584. [13:04] <fresh_fries> joepie91, im really trying to answer the question of "What is Anonymous' political philosophy'.. the no leadership thing is just a stumbling block on that path
  585. [13:04] <+biella> fresh_fries: irc.anonnet.org
  586. [13:04] <+biella> i am there on many channels though not now and i am outtie here 2
  587. [13:04] <&joepie91> fresh_fries: as has been told a few times now
  588. [13:04] <+biella> appointment, later folks
  589. [13:04] <&joepie91> THERE. IS. NONE.
  590. [13:04] <v3rsus> sabu was right when he got annoyed with charles arthur...
  591. [13:04] <&joepie91> stop looking for one
  592. [13:04] <m0nkywitar0cket> fresh_fries each are very nebulous questions, philosophy and leadership
  593. [13:04] <@marduk> fresh_fries: i dont know all. but there are other irc networks like anonnet for instance (which sprang into existance when Chanology was big). There are forums, image boards, etc etc etc
  594. [13:04] <&joepie91> there is no universal ideology
  595. [13:04] <v3rsus> reporters start asking without doing their research
  596. [13:05] <&joepie91> no universal philosophy
  597. [13:05] <&joepie91> no universal anything
  598. [13:05] <&joepie91> except for the name
  599. [13:05] <fresh_fries> m0nkywitar0cket, the only nebulous things are your answers! lol
  600. [13:05] <&joepie91> Anonymous.
  601. [13:05] <%meddle> later biella
  602. [13:05] <+biella> fresh_fries: i would say there is a comittment to many civil liberties, i wrote about it in that piece
  603. [13:05] <m0nkywitar0cket> thats exactly what you need to come to terms with
  604. [13:05] <&joepie91> fresh_fries: you are looking for something that does not exist. Either you are wasting your time, or you are wasting ours - depending on whether you are a troll or not.
  605. [13:05] <m0nkywitar0cket> that we cant answer your questions because there are many answers
  606. [13:05] <+biella> it does not exhaust the possibiliites and there is a great range of political committements
  607. [13:05] <+biella> despite some consistent tendencies
  608. [13:05] <%meddle> bbl
  609. [13:06] <+biella> bye meddle
  610. [13:06] <+biella> i gotta go too
  611. [13:06] <%meddle> bai biella
  612. [13:06] <fresh_fries> biella, link to article?? ^^
  613. [13:06] <&joepie91> bai
  614. [13:07] <+biella> fresh_fries: http://mediacommons.futureofthebook.org/tne/pieces/anonymous-lulz-collective-action
  615. [13:07] <+biella> there and there are a shitload of talks too if you google for them and 3-4 other pieces
  616. [13:07] <v3rsus> @joepie91... do you think there's a chance to catch sabu or topiary one of these days? would like to chat a little for v3rsus.org
  617. [13:07] <@marduk> biella: will you be at blackhat?
  618. [13:08] <&joepie91> v3rsus: no clue, depends on whether they wander in here or not
  619. [13:08] <+biella> fresh_fries: i would be more than happy to engage again when you come back with questions that refer back to what i have said, lets debate there
  620. [13:08] <+biella> marduk: no :-( i am going to CCC camp
  621. [13:08] <+biella> though
  622. [13:08] <+biella> which should be fun
  623. [13:08] <fresh_fries> biella sure and thanks!
  624. [13:08] <@marduk> biella: oh nice.
  625. 02[13:08] * dsprr ([email protected]) Quit (Quit: )
  626. 03[13:08] * dsprr ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  627. [13:08] <+biella> yea very excited marduk
  628. [13:08] <+biella> very
  629. [13:08] <+biella> ok i am going to be late
  630. [13:08] <@esc> biella: you are going? damn...and I can't be there :(
  631. [13:08] <v3rsus> @joepie91: are they still coming here or are they rather withdrawn these days?
  632. [13:09] <+biella> marduk: yea spam ME but dont tell me who you are :-)
  633. [13:09] <+biella> esc: i got my plane tickets and everything
  634. [13:09] <+biella> i am SO pscyhed!
  635. [13:09] <@marduk> biella: you should know me :)
  636. [13:09] <+biella> ok later guise, boyz, girls
  637. [13:09] <+biella> marduk: i should :-))
  638. [13:09] <m0nkywitar0cket> later
  639. [13:09] <+biella> erase my memory afterwards, ok, well only select parts
  640. [13:09] <&joepie91> idk
  641. [13:09] <@marduk> biella: nah no problem, i will approach you anonymously lolol
  642. [13:10] <@marduk> but damn, it would be great to have one of the men in black thingies...
  643. [13:10] <+biella> lawl ok it wont be easily to explain to my doc why i am late
  644. [13:10] <+biella> later for real
  645. [13:11] <@marduk> cya biella :)
  646. [13:11] <fresh_fries> v3rsus, i find sabu answers more stuff on twitter than on here
  647. [13:12] <fresh_fries> but then again "Sabu is multiple people"
  648. [13:13] <v3rsus> that's funny, cause "one Sabu" said on twitter that he wouldn't answer on twitter, but rather in irc
  649. [13:13] <v3rsus> the one that battled charles arthur
  650. [13:13] <fresh_fries> hey im just a reporter man, i have no fucking idea how it works
  651. [13:14] <InformationTerrorism> \o/
  652. [13:14] <fresh_fries> but there is the real sabu account and the fake one
  653. [13:14] <fresh_fries> anonymousabu is real, anonymoussabu is fake
  654. [13:15] <m0nkywitar0cket> has sabu spread more light on your subject then us? lol
  655. [13:15] <v3rsus> hehehe
  656. [13:15] <fresh_fries> sabu made some errant comments about many things, oslo, etc... i dont pay them too much mind
  657. [13:15] <&joepie91> http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=26902.0
  658. [13:15] <v3rsus> now that's research... anonymoussabu is fake... how did you figure that out?
  659. [13:16] <fresh_fries> cuz sabu told me.. on irc lol
  660. [13:16] <m0nkywitar0cket> i read that little twitter feed, it was entertaining
  661. [13:16] <v3rsus> the real sabu or the fake one? lol
  662. 03[13:17] * TVXQ ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  663. 03[13:17] * Chuck sets mode: +o TVXQ
  664. 03[13:17] * InformationTerrorism is now known as HomoCarnula
  665. [13:18] <fresh_fries> ok, so is it a fair appraisal to say that the only thing that keeps people from impersonating Anonymous is the threat of retribution from anonymous?
  666. [13:19] <v3rsus> so many great journalistic achievements out there... my all time favorite is still the louise boat... rofl
  667. 03[13:19] * SaintPeter ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  668. [13:20] <m0nkywitar0cket> im sure there are a lot of reasons not to impersonate anonymous, retribution being one of them
  669. [13:20] <&joepie91> I suppose retribution would be one of the most present 'dangers'
  670. [13:20] <&joepie91> for impersonators
  671. [13:20] <v3rsus> @joepie9: i'm a reporter too... can you tell me more about the connection between anonymous and the louise boat? hehehe
  672. [13:20] <m0nkywitar0cket> not to say all of anonymous would threaten, but im sure a few would
  673. [13:20] <fresh_fries> yes, it does seem that fear is the best tool in Anon's arsenal
  674. [13:20] <&joepie91> but most importantly it's important to understand what is impersonation and what is not
  675. [13:20] <m0nkywitar0cket> i dissagree fresh_fries
  676. [13:20] <&joepie91> claiming something that a lot of anons do not agree with is not impersonation
  677. [13:21] <&joepie91> however
  678. [13:21] <&joepie91> claiming you are anon while you do not really believe you are anon, is impersonation
  679. 06[13:21] * HomoCarnula jumps in :3
  680. 03[13:21] * SaintPeter ([email protected]) has left #reporter
  681. [13:21] <&joepie91> also, the best tool in Anons arsenal is media
  682. [13:21] <&joepie91> and not just mainstream media
  683. [13:21] <fresh_fries> joepie91, ooooooo....k
  684. [13:21] <m0nkywitar0cket> and comments like those sound like you have a smear campaign against anonymous rather than an journalistic endeavor of incite..
  685. [13:21] <&joepie91> but yeah, if the WBC does not identify themselves with anon, but *pretends* to do so, they are impersonating.
  686. [13:22] <fresh_fries> m0nkywitar0cket, i call em like i seem
  687. [13:22] <&joepie91> if they hold a protest like they always do, but under the banner of anon, they would NOT be impersonating.
  688. [13:22] <fresh_fries> see em
  689. [13:22] <&joepie91> as long as intentions match claims, it can't be impersonation
  690. [13:22] <fresh_fries> ok, different track: is it safe to say that anonymous leans left?
  691. [13:23] <&joepie91> no.
  692. [13:23] <m0nkywitar0cket> no
  693. [13:23] <fresh_fries> libertarian?
  694. [13:23] <&joepie91> there is no unified opinion, philosophy, political 'color', or anything else
  695. [13:23] <&joepie91> you can't define it, other than that anonymous as a whole has an anarchistic structure
  696. [13:23] <&joepie91> but that says nothing about the political opinion of anons
  697. [13:23] <fresh_fries> joepie91, certainly there are class markers amonst the anonymous massive
  698. [13:23] <&joepie91> no
  699. [13:24] <&joepie91> there is no unified anything of any sort except for the name anonymous
  700. [13:24] <&joepie91> and even THERE there is discussion about Anonymous vs anonymous vs Anon
  701. [13:24] <&joepie91> etc
  702. [13:24] <m0nkywitar0cket> fresh_fries, what you are trying to do equates to trying to define americans or russians etc. their citizens all have different opinions and viewpoints and you are trying to generalize a group that has many different opinions
  703. [13:24] <fresh_fries> bro, you're on RIC chat at 2 oclock in the afternoon... you dont work, you have a computer and internet connection... you're clearly earning more than 2 dollars a day
  704. [13:24] <&joepie91> you simply can't classify anonymous, and any attempt at classification is wrong regardless of what you are trying to classify it at
  705. [13:24] <&joepie91> it as*
  706. [13:24] <&joepie91> stereotyping simply doesn't work, deal with it
  707. [13:25] <&joepie91> so to say
  708. [13:25] <m0nkywitar0cket> this is just bad journalism
  709. [13:25] <&joepie91> so, fresh_fries, what magazine/organization do you work for?
  710. [13:25] <v3rsus> really? it's journalism?
  711. [13:25] <m0nkywitar0cket> any article you write would be based on your perceived opinions and self-proclaimed stereotyping
  712. [13:25] <fresh_fries> im sorry, is anyone in this chat living below the UN's baseline for poverty?
  713. 06[13:26] * &joepie91 recalls a claim of being a journalist
  714. [13:26] <fresh_fries> any takers?
  715. [13:26] <m0nkywitar0cket> what does that have to do with anything fresh_fries
  716. [13:26] <v3rsus> people can claim a lot...
  717. [13:26] <fresh_fries> it has to do with the claim that 'nothing unifies anonymous'
  718. [13:26] <&joepie91> fresh_fries: for the five millionth goddamn fucking time
  719. [13:26] <&joepie91> THIS IS NOT ANONYMOUS
  720. [13:26] <&joepie91> ANONOPS DOES NOT EQUAL ANONYMOUS
  721. [13:26] <&joepie91> IT IS A PART OF IT
  722. [13:26] <&joepie91> read that
  723. [13:26] <&joepie91> remember it
  724. [13:26] <fresh_fries> joepie91, i understand that part of it clearly
  725. [13:26] <&joepie91> and think about it every time before you ask a question
  726. [13:26] <&joepie91> ffs
  727. [13:27] <&joepie91> who are in this chat has nothing to do with who anons are or what conditions they live in
  728. [13:27] <&joepie91> NOTHING AT ALL.
  729. [13:27] <&joepie91> christ
  730. [13:27] <m0nkywitar0cket> if you are indeed trying to write an article, what is it about?
  731. [13:27] <&joepie91> how hard is it to understand?
  732. [13:27] <v3rsus> maybe there should be a little test for journalists before they can get into this chat room... to make sure they did their research... hehehe
  733. [13:27] <fresh_fries> the political philosophy of anonymous m0nkywitar0cket
  734. [13:27] <HomoCarnula> what does "un's baseline for poverty" have to do with an interview in anonops o_O
  735. [13:27] <&joepie91> v3rsus: that is actually not a bad idea
  736. 02[13:28] * @TVXQ ([email protected]) Quit (Quit: Leaving)
  737. [13:28] <&joepie91> fresh_fries: THERE. IS. NONE.
  738. [13:28] <&joepie91> FUCKING DEAL WITH IT.
  739. [13:28] <fresh_fries> 1) Technical Acumen
  740. 03[13:28] * TVXQ ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  741. 03[13:28] * Chuck sets mode: +o TVXQ
  742. [13:28] <fresh_fries> 2) Access to a Computer
  743. [13:28] <fresh_fries> 3) Access to the Internet
  744. [13:28] <fresh_fries> so theres 3 things that unify anonymous
  745. [13:28] <&joepie91> fresh_fries: and you just made up in your mind that being an anon requires a computer and internet?
  746. [13:28] <HomoCarnula> v3rsus at least they should have read the wikipedia entry o_O i get so angry everytime somebody enters and asks "how did anonymous start" "oh yeah you're a group. how can one become member"
  747. [13:28] <fresh_fries> im sure there more
  748. [13:28] <&joepie91> yet another assumption?
  749. [13:28] <&joepie91> tell me WHERE does it say
  750. [13:28] <&joepie91> that to be part of anon
  751. [13:28] <&joepie91> you need to be oin the internet
  752. [13:28] <&joepie91> behind a pc
  753. [13:28] <&joepie91> or even know what a goddamn fucking computer is
  754. [13:29] <HomoCarnula> fresh_fries that's bullshit! there are lots of Anonymous out there offline
  755. [13:29] <&joepie91> other than in your own goddamn fucking imagination
  756. [13:29] <&joepie91> STOP ASSUMING SHIT
  757. [13:29] <fresh_fries> HomoCarnula, examples?
  758. [13:29] <HomoCarnula> fresh_fries chanology? (google it)
  759. [13:29] <HomoCarnula> for example
  760. [13:29] <HomoCarnula> demonstrators in madrid
  761. [13:29] <m0nkywitar0cket> so fresh_fries, with that ideaology, you agree that you are then part of anonymous?
  762. [13:29] <&joepie91> honestly, people like you should not be doing journalism, seeing as you are obviously completely unable to take a neutral stance
  763. [13:29] <&joepie91> in your investigation
  764. [13:29] <HomoCarnula> eberybody who goes conform with the ideals of Anonymous IS anonymous.
  765. [13:30] <&joepie91> HomoCarnula: wrong
  766. [13:30] <HomoCarnula> srsly oO why are you journalist and i'm not
  767. [13:30] <&joepie91> everyone who identifies himself with anonymous is anonymous
  768. [13:30] <&joepie91> if you say and believe you are anon, you are anon
  769. [13:30] <fresh_fries> "Message to Scientology", on January 21, 2008. The video states that Anonymous views Scientology's actions as Internet censorship, and asserts the group's intent to "expel the church from the Internet"
  770. [13:30] <fresh_fries> ok so let me return to something i asked earlier.. regarding work and success
  771. [13:30] <fresh_fries> has Anonymous been able to "expel Scientology from the internet"?
  772. [13:31] <&joepie91> fresh_fries: can someone live in that house around the corner that they just finished laying the foundation of?
  773. 03[13:31] * AlbaandOmegle ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  774. [13:31] <&joepie91> you appear to be entirely ignoring
  775. [13:31] <&joepie91> everything that people say
  776. [13:31] <&joepie91> and asking the same questions over and over
  777. [13:31] <HomoCarnula> joepie91 O_o that's what i meant <3
  778. [13:31] <&joepie91> expecting people to give a different answer
  779. [13:31] <&joepie91> that meets your expectations
  780. [13:31] <&joepie91> well, protip
  781. [13:31] <&joepie91> it's not going to happen
  782. [13:31] <&joepie91> the answers are what they are
  783. [13:31] <fresh_fries> joepie91, im getting yelled at by 8 different people, none of whom will actually claim to speak *FOR* anonymous, so ya i have to ignore some stuff sorry
  784. [13:32] <&joepie91> if you cannot deal with it, you should probably be doing something else, rather than trying to fit anonymous in some classification where it doesn't fit
  785. [13:32] <v3rsus> unbelievable
  786. [13:32] <v3rsus> that's what journalism has come to
  787. [13:32] <@TVXQ> anonymous doesnt have a speaker
  788. [13:32] <@TVXQ> for all we know fresh_fries you are also anonymous
  789. [13:32] <v3rsus> and that's why i call myself a writer... hahaha
  790. [13:32] <&joepie91> if you REALLY claim you are a journalist, I suggest you look for another sayjob
  791. [13:32] <&joepie91> because really
  792. [13:32] <&joepie91> this isn't it
  793. [13:32] <&joepie91> dayjob*
  794. [13:32] <m0nkywitar0cket> fresh_fries you are basing a lot of your information on assumptions
  795. [13:32] <fresh_fries> TVXQ, im not converting until I know what political views actually inform anonymous' behaviour
  796. [13:33] <fresh_fries> and apparently that is impossible
  797. [13:33] <@TVXQ> there is no convertion
  798. [13:33] <&joepie91> 40 minutes ago
  799. [13:33] <&joepie91> <joepie91>as for your question what anonymous has solved: what you are doing now is looking at the foundation of a house and screaming to the builders: "HEY, YOU CANT EVEN LIVE IN THAT, ITS POINTLESS! WHY ARE YOU EVEN BOTHERING, IT DOESNT EVEN HAVE A ROOF!"
  800. [13:33] <@TVXQ> you are on our network
  801. [13:33] <&joepie91> there
  802. [13:33] <&joepie91> are
  803. [13:33] <&joepie91> no
  804. [13:33] <HomoCarnula> fresh_fries suggestive questions and tried manipulation in your writing. seriously, you're here definitely wrong
  805. [13:33] <&joepie91> gopddamn
  806. [13:33] <&joepie91> fucking
  807. [13:33] <&joepie91> political
  808. [13:33] <&joepie91> views
  809. [13:33] <fresh_fries> for the record, i like what anonymous does
  810. [13:33] <&joepie91> deal with it
  811. [13:33] <&joepie91> ffs
  812. [13:33] <m0nkywitar0cket> that homecarnula
  813. 03[13:33] * Anon-Voice ([email protected]) has joined #reporter
  814. [13:33] <fresh_fries> but the judge+jury+execution style concerns me quite a bit
  815. [13:33] <HomoCarnula> fesh again manipulation
  816. [13:33] <HomoCarnula> °fresh_fries
  817. [13:34] <m0nkywitar0cket> its not judge+jury+execution, its a form of protest
  818. [13:34] <fresh_fries> yes i understand that
  819. [13:34] <fresh_fries> i like that part of it
  820. [13:34] <m0nkywitar0cket> in no way have we executed anyone, we see certain injustices and we protest
  821. [13:34] <v3rsus> for what media outlet are you writing, fresh_fries?
  822. [13:34] <fresh_fries> justice and politics are intertwined...no?
  823. [13:35] <fresh_fries> v3rsus, my own blog
  824. [13:35] <m0nkywitar0cket> no
  825. [13:35] <v3rsus> just want to make sure i'm not reading it in the future... hehehe
  826. [13:35] <m0nkywitar0cket> liberties are inalienable
  827. [13:35] <m0nkywitar0cket> to being human
  828. [13:35] <m0nkywitar0cket> you have liberties without government
  829. [13:35] <fresh_fries> m0nkywitar0cket, i agree
  830. [13:35] <HomoCarnula> v3rsus your BLOG? wtf?
  831. [13:35] <&joepie91> fresh_fries: what is your definition of politics?
  832. [13:35] <HomoCarnula> oO
  833. [13:35] <HomoCarnula> sorry meant fresh_fries xD
  834. [13:35] <fresh_fries> joepie91, nothing exists outside of politics is my definition
  835. [13:36] <fresh_fries> "the personal is political" and so on...
  836. [13:36] <&joepie91> can't use the word itself in the definition
  837. [13:36] <m0nkywitar0cket> so this article is political in nature?
  838. [13:36] <&joepie91> so what is your definition?
  839. [13:36] <%meddle> lol @tautological
  840. [13:36] <%meddle> definitions
  841. [13:36] <HomoCarnula> so this article appears in a BLOG? oO
  842. [13:36] <v3rsus> @fresh_fries: so nature doesn't exist?
  843. [13:36] <v3rsus> what about the universe?
  844. [13:36] <HomoCarnula> <- IS journalist then \o/
  845. [13:36] <fresh_fries> m0nkywitar0cket, meh, havent decided which way to go... but that was my original query...
  846. [13:36] <%meddle> the answer is 42?
  847. [13:36] <fresh_fries> joepie91, protesting is a political action.. do we agree?
  848. [13:37] <&joepie91> I was asking what your definition of politics was.
  849. [13:37] <&joepie91> answer that first.
  850. [13:37] <m0nkywitar0cket> no
  851. [13:37] <m0nkywitar0cket> you can protest against religions
  852. [13:37] <fresh_fries> religions are political
  853. [13:37] <&joepie91> because in my answers I will play by your definition.
  854. [13:37] <%meddle> protesting with mummy for moar sweeties is a political action too?
  855. [13:37] <&joepie91> to avoid any more assumption bullshit
  856. [13:37] <fresh_fries> meddle, yup
  857. [13:37] <&joepie91> <joepie91>I was asking what your definition of politics was.
  858. [13:38] <%meddle> your definition is too naive and to broad fresh_fries
  859. [13:38] <m0nkywitar0cket> well good luck with your article, doesnt look like a good start
  860. [13:38] <%meddle> plz come back when u have a good one
  861. [13:38] <v3rsus> i have to take a break... my head is starting to hurt...
  862. [13:38] <fresh_fries> m0nkywitar0cket, i have more than enuff material just from twitter... plus im very observant...
  863. [13:38] <Cloud> ola
  864. [13:38] <%meddle> ohai cloud
  865. [13:38] <Anon-Voice> omg!
  866. [13:39] <Anon-Voice> fresh_fries, do you know what politics are?
  867. [13:39] <m0nkywitar0cket> well good luck, hope your article isn't strewn with libel..
  868. [13:39] <Anon-Voice> sounds like your mixing up politics and the word "quantum"
  869. [13:39] <fresh_fries> Anon-Voice, do you know what they aren't?
  870. [13:39] <Cloud> a discussion over what politics is? this could be juicy
  871. [13:39] <&joepie91> fresh_fries: I suggest you come back when you 1. can define what politics are in the first place 2. dismissed all the assumptions you have anonymous and start from scratch
  872. [13:39] <fresh_fries> m0nkywitar0cket, lol.. libel.. never thought id hear that from anon
  873. [13:39] <&joepie91> because this is pushing against the mount everest
  874. [13:39] <Anon-Voice> yes, what I eat, not politcal
  875. [13:39] <Anon-Voice> when I shit in the morning
  876. [13:40] <fresh_fries> Anon-Voice, really... all that pg shit openining up the ozone... or the 'go local' movement all have to do with eating and are inherently political
  877. [13:40] <%meddle> breathing is political, fresh_fries told me so
  878. [13:40] <m0nkywitar0cket> i already know what fresh_fries is going to write about, he's going to present a straw man discussion about anon and then promptly beat the stuffing out of it
  879. [13:40] <fresh_fries> meddle, once oxygen becomes a commodity yes... the same way that water is now deemed a 'basic human right' by the UN
  880. [13:40] <%meddle> fresh_fries may i suggesto to look into chronicle.us, expecially for kilgore trout
  881. [13:41] <fresh_fries> m0nkywitar0cket, im trying really hard to present a defence of anonymous
  882. [13:41] <fresh_fries> m0nkywitar0cket, but its very difficult
  883. [13:41] <%meddle> fresh_fries, don't u know we don't breath pure oxygen?
  884. [13:41] <&joepie91> rofl
  885. [13:41] <Cloud> In intro to american politics I had to write an essay on the question. What is Politics? Must I bring it out for you
  886. [13:41] <HomoCarnula> srsly o_O waste of time... big waste of time talking to this wannabe-journalist
  887. [13:41] <&joepie91> fresh_fries: be sure to submit your article to anonnews when it's done
  888. [13:41] <&joepie91> somehow I have an idea
  889. [13:41] <m0nkywitar0cket> a defense for what?
  890. [13:41] <&joepie91> of what kind of rating it will get
  891. [13:41] <fresh_fries> HomoCarnula, im not making you sit here in #-fucking-REPORTER
  892. [13:41] <%meddle> lol joe
  893. [13:41] <&joepie91> if your responses in here are anything to measure by
  894. [13:42] <&joepie91> -_-
  895. 03[13:42] * Fractal ([email protected]) has left #reporter
  896. [13:42] <Anon-Voice> lol@joepie91
  897. [13:42] <v3rsus> i sure hope nobody has to ever read this useless attempt to answer @fresh_fries idiotic questions..
Add Comment
Please, Sign In to add comment
Public Pastes
We use cookies for various purposes including analytics. By continuing to use Pastebin, you agree to our use of cookies as described in the Cookies Policy.  OK, I Understand
Not a member of Pastebin yet?
Sign Up, it unlocks many cool features!