Bennett_J
Steel Member
They do "hack for good" but good being defined loosely, and typically "good" is something that governments, corporations, or people get somewhat hurt by. Thus nullifying the whole "white hat" deal. The mentality is that all actions are white in nature, but it is really all perspective. I label it all as grey hat, as there are the good and bad operations. They help some while hurting others. If that makes sense.
And no, they're not. Thats a theory which I will be sharing, for the lulz.
Rebels is word that fits. The next sentence, not so much, many rebellious groups with names have been demonized, the agenda sets the emotion towards them. Technically the compounds scattered throughout the country that stockpile weapons are rebels, they have names, but where are those calling them genius? Literally no where.
Some do fight for the internet's freedom, others go out to seek vigilante justice. But what you are still failing to grasp is that Anonymous isn't a set group, just a name for those who act without a name.
People keep citing 4chan as a place where members go, I can rightfully inform you that no hackers currently access that board, the posts announcing things are trickle down reposts from twitter. Post ID's and increased site traffic pushed out the older people in 06-07, if you wanted up to date news on such things one would have to go deeper. As for your rant on gore, /b/ = random, you can't complain if people are posting things you don't like, the theme is random. Logical fallacy right there.
