Discuss mailing list

[Travis McCrea <me AT travismccrea.com>]

I would hardly call Anonymous the internet's Al Quaeda, I would call the US 
government the Internet's Al Quaeda (I would call them traditional terrorists 
as well, but that's a whole different story). Anonymous is going to do what 
it is going to do… there is no central body and you are correct that as some 
anons do one thing, other anons will attack against the others just for the 
lulz. 

If we want the fast track to becoming the global standard in the future of 
DNS, we will need anonymous… they are the creators of the internet as we know 
it. Our memes, our culture, basically everything BUT the actual physical 
network that makes the internet what it is, has been influenced by anonymous… 
Anonymous influencing the development of the networks is just evolution. 

\
On 2012-02-15, at 11:23 PM, Niels Dettenbach (Syndicat IT&Internet) wrote:

> 
> 
> Amrit Panesar <apanesar AT 4195tech.com> schrieb:
> 
> >I think we should come up with some propaganda that appeals to the mind
> >of Anonymous and advertises the OpenNIC root as being the `only
> >working`
> >DNS root running on that day. If we play our cards right, I believe
> >this
> >could be the beginning of a global reform, moving away from the old and
> >into the new realm of freedom and lack of need from ICANN and Verisign.
> 
> ...but this is the half of the true strory. If OpenNIC will really get an 
> widely spread alternative to the current system it will be a target for the 
> anonymous terrorists too. Anonymous makes irrational terror against 
> anything they can reach and is large enough to be widely public and small 
> enough by technics to get it DDOSed down. The affected users are typically 
> end users or at least not the one they want to "protest against" - thus are 
> not hackers, they are studpid and largemouthy terrorists everytime using 
> the same security hole of the whole internet - which OpenNIC is affected 
> from too btw...
> 
> Shure, Anonymous got's well known in the public by hitchiking on the 
> wikileaks (without there interest!) publissity and damaged even WLs 
> reputation. Shure, OpenNIC may go the same way as Anonymous now by 
> hitchikin on them, but i would not recommend this in any way.
> 
> Yes, it makes sense to have (multiple/many) different DNS root authories 
> like OpenNIC and thus could be communicated even in relation to the 
> Anonymous DNS DDOS, but just as an example why "one is not enough", but not 
> as "the alternative" which is "not affected", this is not true at the end 
> of the days...
> 
> If OpenNIC want to be/get a really reliable, responsible alternative (one 
> of muultiple in the future) it should leave on its own and true facts only, 
> but far enough from the "IT Al Quaeda" of the self employed "politicall 
> corrects" and "good peoples".
> 
> Just my two cents here...
> 
> 
> 
> cheers,
> 
> Niels.
> 
> 
> 
> - --
> Niels Dettenbach
> Syndicat IT&Internet
> http://www.syndicat.com

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail