[hackerspaces] Open letter to Anonymous (please distribute)

Sylva1n sylv41n at gmail.com
Sat Jun 11 20:33:08 CEST 2011


On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 3:44 AM, Jaromil <jaromil at dyne.org> wrote:
> ultimately i feel the urge to address all the investments flowing into
> cyber-security that has just been announced between the last G8 and
> this NATO release. ACTA, DRM and various other threats to civil rights
> which will be justified as policy and funded by tax payers.
> ultimately, this is their strategy, if you didn't catch it yet.

Jaromil, are you under the impression that, if the carriers* of the
Anonymous meme stop monkeying around, our glorious leaders will stop
their power grab, or dial down the authoritarians laws?

I'm not.

If it's not Anonymous, it'll be pedophiles, nazis, gamblers,
eco-terrorists, pedo-terrorists, etc. Whatever. Our leaders have a
serious problem with the internet: it's way more democratic than they
are comfortable with. That's all.
In every country I know, being "friend" or having coercive powers over
10 to 100 people max (think TV station owners, key journalists, public
figures) is all it takes to exert a very strong influence on what your
citizens see, and don't see. As a result, in most democracies,
dissenting voices tend to be practically inaudible.
The internet break that, there is too much players, with the
possibility of information spreading way faster than what it used to.
Now, small players can have a global voice when the social network
effects come into play.

Given what is at stake, what government wouldn't want DPI and
data-retention laws to be able to track the whistleblowers, and
black-lists to be sure most of their citizens didn't get access to too
much information? They want libel laws and their chilling effect, the
want security cameras (aka log), they want checkpoints and borders.
They want control.

On top of that, there is the US military-intelligence-industry complex
that is trying really hard to invent new bogeymen to justify the
ginormous amount of money they receive despite less than stellar
results in their last crusades, the "War on terror" and defense
against WMD.
This time, they're betting the farm on cybersecurity. Given that most
companies operating in the field are bozos of the HBGarry kind, you
know that all they want is a made-up threat. If the threat was real,
they would have to work... for real, instead of selling snake oil and
useless gizmo's to clueless generals.

Anonymous is an excuse.
At best they're just some sand in the cogs, preventing the internet to
be transformed entirely into a sterilized mall.
Realistically, there's barely a speed bump.

Give them a break.
Grab some popcorn.
Enjoys the free lulz.

*: given the nature of this meme/stand alone complex, the virus
analogy seems right


More information about the Discuss mailing list