Anarchy see Selmallia, Anarchy meens NO law, No gorvenemts, NO rules, well the one rule that does apply to a anarchy is the law of the jungle. Red in tooth and claw.
So in this case it is ok to damage others proptary and disrupte others lives, all for fun? It is what thoes who want anarchy are calling for...Stuiped. If you want anarchy they want the law of the gun.
Anarchy see Selmallia, Anarchy meens NO law, No gorvenemts, NO rules, well the one rule that does apply to a anarchy is the law of the jungle. Red in tooth and claw.
So in this case it is ok to damage others proptary and disrupte others lives, all for fun? It is what thoes who want anarchy are calling for...Stuiped. If you want anarchy they want the law of the gun.
Nonsense, in the first instance. Thats warlordism, not anarchy. Second, The Law is the collective whim of what ever politicians happened to be in power at any given time. It may, or may not have anything to do with justice. But anarchy is by definition the lack of a *coersive* state. It does not mean a lack of order. It simply means that any order that exists is not imposed by a state. Self government is another way of saying anarchy. The "law of the gun" describes the power of the nation state rather well.
In terms of these hacking incidents, they may well be just some people with way too much time on their hands, coupled with the typical corporate lack of concern about real security(as opposed to security theater) on the part of way too many suits. On the other hand, it may be a mix of such types, and corporate/government sponsored attacks on competitors or what is known as false flag activities. What better way to influence public opinion, than through the usual fear nexus? This could also explain the wide coverage we are seeing in the corporate mass media.
Originally posted by Wraithone One of which is; Since these types of incidents have been rather common for years now, why the current mass media focus?
Media sensationalize things. It was really Sony's 100 million users hacked that caught their eyes, as 100 million can catch anybody's eyes. If the number was more like 50,000, you wouldn't see so much coverage. Kind of like crime, there are people dying every day in the United States. But you only really hear about the big stories, like when someone goes on a rampage or something involving a lil girl of some sort.
Media will capture stories that they think will draw people in to watch them. 100 million users hacked opened that door for them, because that is a lot of people. Then the hackers caught the publicity flu and started doing more and more, and thus now we hear about it more and more because hackers want us to talk about it. The media sees their ratings go up so they keep reporting them. And through even more publicity, hackers want to do even more. Thus the dominos effect as it escalates.
Actually the more common definition Anarchy is the lack of cohesive order. Yes there are definitions talking about government and the rule of law but the reality is that when people work together for a common goal you do not have anarchy, when people work for themselves only anarchy persists.
Venge
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Should just make some new laws making penalties for doing these types of attacks more stringent.
Maybe a 5~10K$ fine?
I know if I had kids and ended up having to pay 10K dollars because they were dicking around on the internet doing DDoS on some random stupid company... they'd lose their computer pretty fast.
I'm pretty sure 5 - 10 years in prison would be a better deterrent.
Thats disproportional for the crime and you know it.
Your right, should be 5-10 years in prison + a fine.
Actually the more common definition Anarchy is the lack of cohesive order. Yes there are definitions talking about government and the rule of law but the reality is that when people work together for a common goal you do not have anarchy, when people work for themselves only anarchy persists.
Venge
People always only work for their own values. It is logically impossible to do otherwise. An observer may say, "oh look he's working for others" but that is not the case. So long as the individual is choosing freely "to work for others" he is still working for himself, it just happens to be, that whatever the activity, he finds it more valuable than some other option.
Actually the more common definition Anarchy is the lack of cohesive order. Yes there are definitions talking about government and the rule of law but the reality is that when people work together for a common goal you do not have anarchy, when people work for themselves only anarchy persists.
Venge
People always only work for their own values. It is logically impossible to do otherwise. An observer may say, "oh look he's working for others" but that is not the case. So long as the individual is choosing freely "to work for others" he is still working for himself, it just happens to be, that whatever the activity, he finds it more valuable than some other option.
Yes they do always work for their own values but very very often there is a collective value that also adds benefit to the individual. This is why societies and rules were formed: Mutual protection, food, warmth...
Once again the lack of cohesive order is anarchy. When people work together towards a common goal there is cohesive order. There is lots of discussion about how to achieve that order - hierachical governments are one way, but not the only way but there still needs to be some cohesive order or live is brutal and short.
Venge
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Actually the more common definition Anarchy is the lack of cohesive order. Yes there are definitions talking about government and the rule of law but the reality is that when people work together for a common goal you do not have anarchy, when people work for themselves only anarchy persists.
Venge
People always only work for their own values. It is logically impossible to do otherwise. An observer may say, "oh look he's working for others" but that is not the case. So long as the individual is choosing freely "to work for others" he is still working for himself, it just happens to be, that whatever the activity, he finds it more valuable than some other option.
Very true. Self interest is what drives any effective, rational market. Collectvists of what ever type seriously hate that, and seek to discredit it at every opportunity. Murray was a great man, and a tireless opponent of the state and its many vices and abuses of power. As for the above, if they freely choose to work together, it could well be anarchy. Anarchy is simply the absence of a coercive state/system. The linkage in the publics mind with chaos/destruction and other such, serves the ends of the state and its collectvists.
I can't bring myself to call these guys hackers. The 'hack' on the US Senate and CIA was just a DDOS attack on a web page. Whoopty Doo. The CIA probably doesn't even host it's own website. These guys are just a bunch of 12 year old kids with easily obtained tools.
Actually the more common definition Anarchy is the lack of cohesive order. Yes there are definitions talking about government and the rule of law but the reality is that when people work together for a common goal you do not have anarchy, when people work for themselves only anarchy persists.
Venge
People always only work for their own values. It is logically impossible to do otherwise. An observer may say, "oh look he's working for others" but that is not the case. So long as the individual is choosing freely "to work for others" he is still working for himself, it just happens to be, that whatever the activity, he finds it more valuable than some other option.
Yes they do always work for their own values but very very often there is a collective value that also adds benefit to the individual. This is why societies and rules were formed: Mutual protection, food, warmth...
Once again the lack of cohesive order is anarchy. When people work together towards a common goal there is cohesive order. There is lots of discussion about how to achieve that order - hierachical governments are one way, but not the only way but there still needs to be some cohesive order or live is brutal and short.
Venge
No, there is no "collective value" because only an agent can evaluate. A collective is an abstraction and has no corporeal existence. A "collective value" is simply a concept to describe a state of affairs where many actors more or less value the same thing. It is still just an emergent property of the individuals involved.
Anarchy = absense of cohesive order?? Wha? Maybe "absence of coerced order" be better.
I can't bring myself to call these guys hackers. The 'hack' on the US Senate and CIA was just a DDOS attack on a web page. Whoopty Doo. The CIA probably doesn't even host it's own website. These guys are just a bunch of 12 year old kids with easily obtained tools.
Actually the more common definition Anarchy is the lack of cohesive order. Yes there are definitions talking about government and the rule of law but the reality is that when people work together for a common goal you do not have anarchy, when people work for themselves only anarchy persists.
Venge
People always only work for their own values. It is logically impossible to do otherwise. An observer may say, "oh look he's working for others" but that is not the case. So long as the individual is choosing freely "to work for others" he is still working for himself, it just happens to be, that whatever the activity, he finds it more valuable than some other option.
Yes they do always work for their own values but very very often there is a collective value that also adds benefit to the individual. This is why societies and rules were formed: Mutual protection, food, warmth...
Once again the lack of cohesive order is anarchy. When people work together towards a common goal there is cohesive order. There is lots of discussion about how to achieve that order - hierachical governments are one way, but not the only way but there still needs to be some cohesive order or live is brutal and short.
Venge
No, there is no "collective value" because only an agent can evaluate. A collective is an abstraction and has no corporeal existence. A "collective value" is simply a concept to describe a state of affairs where many actors more or less value the same thing. It is still just an emergent property of the individuals involved.
Anarchy = absense of cohesive order?? Wha? Maybe "absence of coerced order" be better.
There is a collective value. Very frequently. Towns form why? because there is safety in numbers and more people can grow more food. That is collective value. A collective is not an abstraction, a collective is a group and a group is physical prescence. The value is an abstraction but is no less real or valued because it is not tangible.
A "collective value" is simply a concept to describe a state of affairs where many actors more or less value the same thing
Your right thats exactly what it is. And that is why it is valued, and does in fact occur.
Some definitions do have anarchy as an absence of coercerd, but not many, the more family one is absence of cohesive order, or even absence of recognized authority, but cohesive order is more common.
Venge
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
A "collective value" is simply a concept to describe a state of affairs where many actors more or less value the same thing
Your right thats exactly what it is. And that is why it is valued, and does in fact occur.
Some definitions do have anarchy as an absence of coercerd, but not many, the more family one is absence of cohesive order, or even absence of recognized authority, but cohesive order is more common.
Venge
That's why it is valued? Because it is valued? So it being valued produces it's value... this doesn't work. How do you bootstrap the concept? The initial value must come from something more direct. Of course, valuing something more due to everyone else valuing it also does happen. This is precisely what happens when a good becomes a money, for example. But said thing doesn't just appear out of nowhere.
As for the anarchy. I think it is better to treat anarchy and "order" as orthogonal concepts. Anarchy = absence of agression, or at least institutionalized aggression. Order = ? How do you define the term? Does a population of totally isolated individuals possess order? It's obviously anarchic, as their isolation prevents by definition any aggression.
A "collective value" is simply a concept to describe a state of affairs where many actors more or less value the same thing
Your right thats exactly what it is. And that is why it is valued, and does in fact occur.
Some definitions do have anarchy as an absence of coercerd, but not many, the more family one is absence of cohesive order, or even absence of recognized authority, but cohesive order is more common.
Venge
That's why it is valued? Because it is valued? So it being valued produces it's value... this doesn't work. How do you bootstrap the concept? The initial value must come from something more direct. Of course, valuing something more due to everyone else valuing it also does happen. This is precisely what happens when a good becomes a money, for example. But said thing doesn't just appear out of nowhere.
As for the anarchy. I think it is better to treat anarchy and "order" as orthogonal concepts. Anarchy = absence of agression, or at least institutionalized aggression. Order = ? How do you define the term? Does a population of totally isolated individuals possess order? It's obviously anarchic, as their isolation prevents by definition any aggression.
Collective value is the name - the concept is that like minded people with common goals group together. These grouping has value and increases the value their goal.
Anarchy is not the absence of aggression - it is the absence of cohesiver order.
Order is an arrangement or disposition of people or things in relation to each other according to a particular sequence, pattern, or method. It's a condition of logical or comprehensible arrangement among the separate elements . Because there is an arrangement - the arrangement has rules founded by a group based on the groups value - the cohesive order.
Venge
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Classify them as what they are... international terrorists... then apply rendition to the little pricks... we'll see how long being a minor holds up.
If that doesn't work, just publish their names... I'm sure some pipe-wielding heavy hitting mo'frakers can be arranged.
Abbatoir / Abbatoir Cinq Adnihilo Beorn Judge's Edge Somnulus Perfect Black ---------------------- Asheron's Call / Asheron's Call 2 Everquest / Everquest 2 Anarchy Online Shadowbane Dark Age of Camelot Star Wars Galaxies Matrix Online World of Warcraft Guild Wars City of Heroes
Collective value is the name - the concept is that like minded people with common goals group together. These grouping has value and increases the value their goal.
Anarchy is not the absence of aggression - it is the absence of cohesiver order.
Order is an arrangement or disposition of people or things in relation to each other according to a particular sequence, pattern, or method. It's a condition of logical or comprehensible arrangement among the separate elements . Because there is an arrangement - the arrangement has rules founded by a group based on the groups value - the cohesive order.
Venge
By your definition of anarchy, that being the lack of "cohesive order", we are always in a state of anarchy since there is no universal cohesion. What is the difference between order and cohesive order? Is there such a thing as uncohesive order?
People have begun to use the term "hacked" too loosely nowdays. CCP just had a bunch of data thrown at them, not like any intellectual property was stolen.....
Even in WOW, oh I got my account "hacked". No you dummy, you fail @ computer security. You gave it away.
People have begun to use the term "hacked" too loosely nowdays. CCP just had a bunch of data thrown at them, not like any intellectual property was stolen.....
Even in WOW, oh I got my account "hacked". No you dummy, you fail @ computer security. You gave it away.
In honor of the direction this thread as taken: You can't "steal" intellectual property because the supposed victim is still in possession of said "property" after the crime. The property has been duplicated. There is no victim.
I enjoy even more the fact that anything they do is referred to as "hacking". It reminds me of the good old days of AOL script kiddies thinking they're "hackers".... until they get themselves hacked for annoying the wrong people.
Collective value is the name - the concept is that like minded people with common goals group together. These grouping has value and increases the value their goal.
Anarchy is not the absence of aggression - it is the absence of cohesiver order.
Order is an arrangement or disposition of people or things in relation to each other according to a particular sequence, pattern, or method. It's a condition of logical or comprehensible arrangement among the separate elements . Because there is an arrangement - the arrangement has rules founded by a group based on the groups value - the cohesive order.
Venge
By your definition of anarchy, that being the lack of "cohesive order", we are always in a state of anarchy since there is no universal cohesion. What is the difference between order and cohesive order? Is there such a thing as uncohesive order?
No that is not correct. By and large the majority of people living in a population agree to certain rules. Those rules provide the order. More often than not those rules come with a punishment - that would be your govenment arguement. However whether there is a government or not we still agree to live by these rules, ones that do not are ostracized in some way.
Actually there is such as thing as uncohesive order. This is an order that exists when two things are moving against each but still have a common effect.
Polar molecules like water useuncohesive order where the distance between the molecules are constantly shrinking and expanding based on the molecules around it. So the molecule is both pushing and pulling - allowing it to be both malleable and providing tension.
Order is just any pattern or sequence of arragment. Cohesion is the resultant of the forces acting on the group to remain together - that could be forced or it could be mutual survival. So a cohesive order would than be the forces acting ona group to remain together in specific arrangement, pattern, method....
edit:
e.g cohesion - wanting to band together to get all the fields cleared in an area before harvest.
Order - starting with this field and then moving to another, or one group does this area, another does this area...
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Comments
Anarchy see Selmallia, Anarchy meens NO law, No gorvenemts, NO rules, well the one rule that does apply to a anarchy is the law of the jungle. Red in tooth and claw.
So in this case it is ok to damage others proptary and disrupte others lives, all for fun? It is what thoes who want anarchy are calling for...Stuiped. If you want anarchy they want the law of the gun.
Nonsense, in the first instance. Thats warlordism, not anarchy. Second, The Law is the collective whim of what ever politicians happened to be in power at any given time. It may, or may not have anything to do with justice. But anarchy is by definition the lack of a *coersive* state. It does not mean a lack of order. It simply means that any order that exists is not imposed by a state. Self government is another way of saying anarchy. The "law of the gun" describes the power of the nation state rather well.
In terms of these hacking incidents, they may well be just some people with way too much time on their hands, coupled with the typical corporate lack of concern about real security(as opposed to security theater) on the part of way too many suits. On the other hand, it may be a mix of such types, and corporate/government sponsored attacks on competitors or what is known as false flag activities. What better way to influence public opinion, than through the usual fear nexus? This could also explain the wide coverage we are seeing in the corporate mass media.
Media sensationalize things. It was really Sony's 100 million users hacked that caught their eyes, as 100 million can catch anybody's eyes. If the number was more like 50,000, you wouldn't see so much coverage. Kind of like crime, there are people dying every day in the United States. But you only really hear about the big stories, like when someone goes on a rampage or something involving a lil girl of some sort.
Media will capture stories that they think will draw people in to watch them. 100 million users hacked opened that door for them, because that is a lot of people. Then the hackers caught the publicity flu and started doing more and more, and thus now we hear about it more and more because hackers want us to talk about it. The media sees their ratings go up so they keep reporting them. And through even more publicity, hackers want to do even more. Thus the dominos effect as it escalates.
EQ1-AC1-DAOC-FFXI-L2-EQ2-WoW-DDO-GW-LoTR-VG-WAR-GW2-ESO
Actually the more common definition Anarchy is the lack of cohesive order. Yes there are definitions talking about government and the rule of law but the reality is that when people work together for a common goal you do not have anarchy, when people work for themselves only anarchy persists.
Venge
Your right, should be 5-10 years in prison + a fine.
+10000000 to Wraithone
People always only work for their own values. It is logically impossible to do otherwise. An observer may say, "oh look he's working for others" but that is not the case. So long as the individual is choosing freely "to work for others" he is still working for himself, it just happens to be, that whatever the activity, he finds it more valuable than some other option.
Yes they do always work for their own values but very very often there is a collective value that also adds benefit to the individual. This is why societies and rules were formed: Mutual protection, food, warmth...
Once again the lack of cohesive order is anarchy. When people work together towards a common goal there is cohesive order. There is lots of discussion about how to achieve that order - hierachical governments are one way, but not the only way but there still needs to be some cohesive order or live is brutal and short.
Venge
Very true. Self interest is what drives any effective, rational market. Collectvists of what ever type seriously hate that, and seek to discredit it at every opportunity. Murray was a great man, and a tireless opponent of the state and its many vices and abuses of power. As for the above, if they freely choose to work together, it could well be anarchy. Anarchy is simply the absence of a coercive state/system. The linkage in the publics mind with chaos/destruction and other such, serves the ends of the state and its collectvists.
I can't bring myself to call these guys hackers. The 'hack' on the US Senate and CIA was just a DDOS attack on a web page. Whoopty Doo. The CIA probably doesn't even host it's own website. These guys are just a bunch of 12 year old kids with easily obtained tools.
No, there is no "collective value" because only an agent can evaluate. A collective is an abstraction and has no corporeal existence. A "collective value" is simply a concept to describe a state of affairs where many actors more or less value the same thing. It is still just an emergent property of the individuals involved.
Anarchy = absense of cohesive order?? Wha? Maybe "absence of coerced order" be better.
This ^
script kiddies = hardcore! lol
Missleading thread title, DDoS'ing is not hacking
Sony, Nintendo and Bethesda was hacked
CIA and CCP/EVE servers was DDoS'ed
Kevin Mitnick could do these 'hacks' in his sleep.
There is a collective value. Very frequently. Towns form why? because there is safety in numbers and more people can grow more food. That is collective value. A collective is not an abstraction, a collective is a group and a group is physical prescence. The value is an abstraction but is no less real or valued because it is not tangible.
A "collective value" is simply a concept to describe a state of affairs where many actors more or less value the same thing
Your right thats exactly what it is. And that is why it is valued, and does in fact occur.
Some definitions do have anarchy as an absence of coercerd, but not many, the more family one is absence of cohesive order, or even absence of recognized authority, but cohesive order is more common.
Venge
That's why it is valued? Because it is valued? So it being valued produces it's value... this doesn't work. How do you bootstrap the concept? The initial value must come from something more direct. Of course, valuing something more due to everyone else valuing it also does happen. This is precisely what happens when a good becomes a money, for example. But said thing doesn't just appear out of nowhere.
As for the anarchy. I think it is better to treat anarchy and "order" as orthogonal concepts. Anarchy = absence of agression, or at least institutionalized aggression. Order = ? How do you define the term? Does a population of totally isolated individuals possess order? It's obviously anarchic, as their isolation prevents by definition any aggression.
Collective value is the name - the concept is that like minded people with common goals group together. These grouping has value and increases the value their goal.
Anarchy is not the absence of aggression - it is the absence of cohesiver order.
Order is an arrangement or disposition of people or things in relation to each other according to a particular sequence, pattern, or method. It's a condition of logical or comprehensible arrangement among the separate elements . Because there is an arrangement - the arrangement has rules founded by a group based on the groups value - the cohesive order.
Venge
Classify them as what they are... international terrorists... then apply rendition to the little pricks... we'll see how long being a minor holds up.
If that doesn't work, just publish their names... I'm sure some pipe-wielding heavy hitting mo'frakers can be arranged.
Abbatoir / Abbatoir Cinq
Adnihilo
Beorn Judge's Edge
Somnulus
Perfect Black
----------------------
Asheron's Call / Asheron's Call 2
Everquest / Everquest 2
Anarchy Online
Shadowbane
Dark Age of Camelot
Star Wars Galaxies
Matrix Online
World of Warcraft
Guild Wars
City of Heroes
By your definition of anarchy, that being the lack of "cohesive order", we are always in a state of anarchy since there is no universal cohesion. What is the difference between order and cohesive order? Is there such a thing as uncohesive order?
I enjoy the fact that they have a twitter feed.
Why did Sony deserve it? Because they banned people that were pirating games?
Cyber terrorist should be treated like the alternative.... I guess.
People have begun to use the term "hacked" too loosely nowdays. CCP just had a bunch of data thrown at them, not like any intellectual property was stolen.....
Even in WOW, oh I got my account "hacked". No you dummy, you fail @ computer security. You gave it away.
In honor of the direction this thread as taken: You can't "steal" intellectual property because the supposed victim is still in possession of said "property" after the crime. The property has been duplicated. There is no victim.
I enjoy even more the fact that anything they do is referred to as "hacking". It reminds me of the good old days of AOL script kiddies thinking they're "hackers".... until they get themselves hacked for annoying the wrong people.
No that is not correct. By and large the majority of people living in a population agree to certain rules. Those rules provide the order. More often than not those rules come with a punishment - that would be your govenment arguement. However whether there is a government or not we still agree to live by these rules, ones that do not are ostracized in some way.
Actually there is such as thing as uncohesive order. This is an order that exists when two things are moving against each but still have a common effect.
Polar molecules like water useuncohesive order where the distance between the molecules are constantly shrinking and expanding based on the molecules around it. So the molecule is both pushing and pulling - allowing it to be both malleable and providing tension.
Order is just any pattern or sequence of arragment. Cohesion is the resultant of the forces acting on the group to remain together - that could be forced or it could be mutual survival. So a cohesive order would than be the forces acting ona group to remain together in specific arrangement, pattern, method....
edit:
e.g cohesion - wanting to band together to get all the fields cleared in an area before harvest.
Order - starting with this field and then moving to another, or one group does this area, another does this area...