Discussion in 'France' started by Ann O'Nymous, Jan 24, 2016.
Si quelqu'un le lit, un jour, un avis m'intéresse
Thank You Anne.
Google Translation ..... waddiya gonna do I have corrected a few words. All in all: It's A.O.K.
Gabriella Coleman in the meanders of Anonymous
After long explored the scenes web, anthropologist published a French translation of the sum of her research on Anonymous.
As anthropologists who spend several years in a remote village of civilization to study its inhabitants, anthropologist Gabriella Coleman "inhabited" the scenes of the web to understand and explain the operation of the Anonymous nebula.
Over time, it became THE specialist, providing nearly 300 media interviews to explain this movement is not really one. Director Wolfe Chair in Scientific and Technological Literacy at McGill University, she published these days the French translation of his book, the sum of three years of research and many hours spent at the computer. Press met her.
How did your interest for Anonymous?
In late 2008, I was interested in their action against the Church of Scientology, but I honestly thought it was a hiccup. I thought Scientology was the perfect cause for geeks and hackers who, at the time, seemed small wicked trolls, no more.
I was already interested in political activism so when their actions have turned into a global movement, I was very surprised. I began to give lectures on the subject, and some participants of Anonymous have seen them and have concluded that I knew what I was talking. It opened doors for me and so I had privileged access to what going on there.
Anonymous How would you describe in a few words?
It's a nickname or a name that anyone can use freely. Over the last five years, it has been adopted by many bands with no connection between them, and by individuals who wanted to participate in all kinds of political actions.
Who is Anonymous? One can not speak of members since it is not an organization as such, but that participates in their actions?
It includes people for whom political action is important: activists, students, some academics. There are people who go there again, for a specific action, and others who stay longer and their life is intimately linked to that. Basically, their action can take two forms: helping a cause that needs visibility or help a social cause.In writing this book, I wanted to show that, despite his moving hand, there are also points of stability within Anonymous, people working together and at the same time, a dynamism, an extreme movement. This is a dialectic that interests me.
You explain in your book that Anonymous became militant by accident?
Yes, what happened is something of a historical aberration although with hindsight, I think we can make a coherent story. Take their first real action, a video of Anonymous that mocked the Church of Scientology.
Imagine for a moment that the video did not become viral. Hackers have continued their campaign of harassment and would have gone on. At the same time, I think there is something very powerful about Anonymous and anonymity idea in our time. Let's say if they were presented as the & amp; quot; Hells Rangers & amp; quot ;, the outcome would probably have been different. But they acted anonymously and in the focus groups there was a certain ethic and a commitment that no one takes credit for a signed Action Anonymous. There is something of this spirit remained and continued thereafter.
Anonymous advocates anonymity, but at the same time, do not they also seek some recognition?
Absolutely. There are movements that reject outright the presence or proximity of journalists and academics, so that Anonymous like people from outside as I speak for themselves and make reports. They are also very good to create their own imagery. I would have liked to include in my book, but as everything was in low resolution, my editor did not want! (laughs)
Is there not a danger of being manipulated by someone outside when everyone is anonymous?
This is no different than within a militant movement where people meet in person. I think for example of Mark Kennedy, the British super-well-known activist who turned out to be a police officer. From 2003 to 2010 he infiltrated militant groups, has developed ties, he even had children with some activists. I believe in fact that we can better protect themselves online because we do not maintain relationships outside, so there is less danger of establishing personal relationships.
By cons, it is true that some operations have raised eyebrows of people. The action of Anonymous against the armed group Islamic State she was driven by the US government that would have sent one of their own to influence in a focus group? It's hard to say, indeed.
Was criticized your lack of objectivity because you were close enough to some members of Anonymous. What do you think?
You have to understand the approach of an anthropologist. For us, empirical data is very important. It is not an abstract experience as psychology, we are dedicated entirely to the community that we are studying. But if you spend five years studying a community, it is better that you love.
I think I was very clear about this in my book. I would add that Anonymous was the perfect candidate to be depicted as a cyberterrorist organization. But I wanted my book to show that its members are not there to terrorize people. It was important for me to present them as legitimate activists. Some have concluded that I was biased.
By choosing not to mention illegal activities of Anonymous, your portrait is incomplete, right?
Yes, it's the missing part, I am aware. But I had to protect myself because as an academic, I bénéficiais any special protection. As I did not want them to arrest me, I'm holding far more contentious discussion groups. However, it gave me some transcripts of these focus groups in order that I may have mentioned in the book. I hope to get others one day in order to have a more complete picture.
Nice. IMHO, it would make more sense to put it in an English speaking thread.
Thanks Anne. No, It's cool. Let's leave it here. It is your work, after-all.
Copy-paste isn't much work.
I think the honor should be all yours.
Elle est consistante G. Coleman (c'est bien en pleine ère de l'immédiateté)
Comme je le rappelais il y a peu ; c'est là-dessus qu'il faudra renvoyer les élèves de 1ère, qui ont choisi le thème " Anonymous" pour leurs TPE
On en est à la je ne sais combientième ...
C'est payé combien, l'avis ou le résumé ?
Un bref élan de gratitude pour la durée de la lecture
Ca ne marche plus comme cela désormais ; considérons que nous sommes dans un entre deux.
Un monde qui meurt/est mort et un nouveau qui arrive (mais n'est pas encore là ; notamment en France)
En ce qui me concerne, passer de l'open source (en terme de renseignements ou d'information par exemple) à l'économie collaborative me semble pertinent.
Donc combien pour un résumé, concis (mon avis on s'en fout en fait) ?
(j'accepte les bitcoins )
Bonjour, Frères et sœurs ..
Selon votre opinion. Hacker, mystificateur, Whistleblower, Spy, est très bon?
Quand on lit bien la première de couverture ; hacker, activiste, faussaire,mouchard, lanceur d'alerte
Lanceur d'alerte ce n'est pas trop vilain comme possibilité, c'est mieux que mouchard (ce n'est pas faire la même chose de toutes façons que d'être l'un ou l'autre)
C'est sans doute pour Sabu.
Ma réflexion : JE SUIS LE CHAT
Une bonne illustration de ce qu'est un mouchard, en effet.
(Coincé, fait comme un rat ; car il s'y est pris comme un nain de jardin.
Il balance ses petits camarades pour sauver ses petites miches)
C'est bien une journaliste parle de nous. Et donc ? (une utilité ?)
Vite lu, en diagonale, de travers ...
Elle raconte bien l'histoire du leader ? (=chef)
" Y'en a pas " lui répond je sais pas qui.
(même dans les " services " on leur apprend cela, quand ils sont petits)
Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!