Fox "news" under attack?

Well, article sums it all up. I don't know what to make of the article personally, as I would hate myself for argreeing with of "taking" either side of this issue.

**Make sure you watch the embedding video there (it's 1:52 long).

http://www.digitaltrends.com/web/anonymous-threatens-to-destroy-fox-news-on-guy-fawkes-day/

I can't stand how Anonymous thinks they're so badass. It's just cheesy.

But, if they're attacking Fox News, go for it.

I support it.

Desert Sleepy wrote:I can't stand how Anonymous thinks they're so badass. It's just cheesy.

But, if they're attacking Fox News, go for it.

They dont think they are "badass" but they know what they can do. They have the power to do a lot of damage if they really want to.

Tophat 44 wrote:

Desert Sleepy wrote:I can't stand how Anonymous thinks they're so badass. It's just cheesy.

But, if they're attacking Fox News, go for it.

They dont think they are "badass" but they know what they can do. They have the power to do a lot of damage if they really want to.

On that note, I'm tired of everyone attributing the frequently news-worthy Anonymous as 4chan. From my understanding, the Anonymous that actually does things interact through tor.

And Anonymous won't do anything. They're really nothing special.

Tophat 44 wrote:

Desert Sleepy wrote:I can't stand how Anonymous thinks they're so badass. It's just cheesy.

But, if they're attacking Fox News, go for it.

They dont think they are "badass" but they know what they can do. They have the power to do a lot of damage if they really want to.

They say things like "We are legion. We do not for-" you know, that unbearably cheesy "We're badasses who don't forget, we're coming for you" line. I really hope they start to realize just how supremely cheesy it is. And all they can do is maybe take down Fox's website for a couple days. In that case, I'm sure Fox's fans can just turn on the TV and tune into Fox News.

If they can somehow dismantle the website or get the TV station off-air, that's "something". Blocking a website that caters to people who by and large hate reading is just a waste of their time. It's not going to solve anything, it's just them being attention whores.

Desert Sleepy wrote:I can't stand how Anonymous thinks they're so badass. It's just cheesy.

But, if they're attacking Fox News, go for it.

Tophat 44 wrote:I support it.

Suppression of Freedom of Speech is in any case, automatically NEVER OK, and none of you should give even a modicum of support.

Tophat 44 wrote:

Desert Sleepy wrote:I can't stand how Anonymous thinks they're so badass. It's just cheesy.

But, if they're attacking Fox News, go for it.

They dont think they are "badass" but they know what they can do. They have the power to do a lot of damage if they really want to.

In my opinion they're just a bunch of punk ass kids with no reasonable goal.

Fox News? Not surprising.

I think Anon should attack Rupert Murdoch instead.

Desert Sleepy wrote:I can't stand how Anonymous thinks they're so badass. It's just cheesy.

But, if they're attacking Fox News, go for it.

Anon wasn't always like this. Back in my day, we didn't go around threatening major news networks in masks worn by some dick from the 15th century. There was no organization. There was no slogan. There were only some /b/tards trolling for lulz. Then this internet vigilante crap started, then the DDoS attacks and Scientology bullshit. Now it's mostly newfags going by Anonymous for media attention.

Excuse me while I face desk a million times at this thread. I don't know much about "Anonymous" but I can make a pretty good guess that it's not all the same group, and a lot of people use the title.

I'll let you guys educate yourselves on their accomplishments. This entire topic is horrendously silly.

.ADestroyer360 wrote:Anon wasn't always like this. Back in my day, we didn't go around threatening major news networks in masks worn by some dick from the 15th century. There was no organization. There was no slogan. There were only some /b/tards trolling for lulz. Then this internet vigilante crap started, then the DDoS attacks and Scientology bullshit. Now it's mostly newfags going by Anonymous for media attention.

If anything, that sounds even cheesier. But for the record, it's a mask of a dick from the 15th century, not a mask he wore.

The mask represents guy fawkes who is probably the only human to have lived to enter the british house of commons with honest intentions. Anon are hypocrites, no offense .ADestroyer360

I wonder if this is the same Group Of anons that Threatened wall street when the Protest were Really News heavy.

@KGBOOM
Non taken, it's true :3. I was never associated with Anon, I'm just a fan of good trolling.

@DesertSleepy
Eh, po-tay-to po-tah-to.

Anonymous is a joke.

Script kiddies who think they're all powerful because they learned to DDoS'd a site.

If you think they're amazing in any way, you're probably 12.

Slacker Hero wrote:Anonymous is a joke.

Script kiddies who think they're all powerful because they learned to DDoS'd a site.

If you think they're amazing in any way, you're probably 12.

They ruined V for Vendetta for me

Slacker Hero wrote:Anonymous is a joke.

Script kiddies who think they're all powerful because they learned to DDoS'd a site.

If you think they're amazing in any way, you're probably 12.

+1

hey whats going on in this.........................nvm

They must have thought the mask was cool.

if you haven't seen V for vendetta,Please go watch it.

funny thing about this it has tophats old avatar and he said he was going to get the mask.

Jagdgeschwader wrote:

Desert Sleepy wrote:I can't stand how Anonymous thinks they're so badass. It's just cheesy.

But, if they're attacking Fox News, go for it.

Tophat 44 wrote:I support it.

Suppression of Freedom of Speech is in any case, automatically NEVER OK, and none of you should give even a modicum of support.

Tophat 44 wrote:

Desert Sleepy wrote:I can't stand how Anonymous thinks they're so badass. It's just cheesy.

But, if they're attacking Fox News, go for it.

They dont think they are "badass" but they know what they can do. They have the power to do a lot of damage if they really want to.

In my opinion they're just a bunch of punk ass kids with no reasonable goal.

Well actually the government can take away some of it during war times, kind of like they did in WWI, but of course this is unheard of now

JawBuster. wrote:

Jagdgeschwader wrote:

Desert Sleepy wrote:I can't stand how Anonymous thinks they're so badass. It's just cheesy.

But, if they're attacking Fox News, go for it.

Tophat 44 wrote:I support it.

Suppression of Freedom of Speech is in any case, automatically NEVER OK, and none of you should give even a modicum of support.

Tophat 44 wrote:

Desert Sleepy wrote:I can't stand how Anonymous thinks they're so badass. It's just cheesy.

But, if they're attacking Fox News, go for it.

They dont think they are "badass" but they know what they can do. They have the power to do a lot of damage if they really want to.

In my opinion they're just a bunch of punk ass kids with no reasonable goal.

Well actually the government can take away some of it during war times, kind of like they did in WWI, but of course this is unheard of now

...

Jagdgeschwader wrote:

JawBuster. wrote:Well actually the government can take away some of it during war times, kind of like they did in WWI, but of course this is unheard of now

...

So, how about that? Is suppression of freedom of speech okay in that case, or still not okay?

Slacker Hero wrote:Anonymous is a joke.

Script kiddies who think they're all powerful because they learned to DDoS'd a site.

If you think they're amazing in any way, you're probably 12.

...and stole almost everyone's psn info....

Anon aren't script kiddies. They aren't geniuses however, most of them have a decent background in computers. So give credit where credit is due.

That being said, have they every really accomplished anything? I just find them humorus in their attacks against the Westburo Baptist Church and most other attacks. While I admire the "rage against the machine" philosophy, are they really doing anything to truly further a better world? If they are the future, do I really want to live in a world that is ruled by the creators of longcats and "over 9000" jokes?

On a final note, I would like to point out that the negative connotation with the word "terrorist" should be dismissed. Our history is littered with "terrorists" including Anonymous. What do you think each revolution in this country was?

ABigSoggy Wafle wrote:

Slacker Hero wrote:Anonymous is a joke.

Script kiddies who think they're all powerful because they learned to DDoS'd a site.

If you think they're amazing in any way, you're probably 12.

...and stole almost everyone's psn info....

Anon aren't script kiddies. They aren't geniuses however, most of them have a decent background in computers. So give credit where credit is due.

That being said, have they every really accomplished anything? I just find them humorus in their attacks against the Westburo Baptist Church and most other attacks. While I admire the "rage against the machine" philosophy, are they really doing anything to truly further a better world? If they are the future, do I really want to live in a world that is ruled by the creators of longcats and "over 9000" jokes?

On a final note, I would like to point out that the negative connotation with the word "terrorist" should be dismissed. Our history is littered with "terrorists" including Anonymous. What do you think each revolution in this country was?

The PS3 hack wasn't difficult at all. A script kiddie could have easily done it. That's the point, that the PS3 security was -so- bad.

Also, the PS3 hack was done by LulzSec.