Comments for Becker's Online Journal

Comment on Privacy advocates want the “right to be forgotten” by C Shazad

C Shazad — Sun, 12 Feb 2012 22:47:00 +0000

Cybershazad – the ability to concoct tales of hacking, cyber
warfare and cyber espionage that are so tall, they are actually believed.

Cybershazad originated with the exploits of LulzSec and
their exaggerated stories of hacking that stretched the truth of actual events.
It aligns with the past tales of Sheherazade http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scheherazade
using tall tales (1001 Nights http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Thousand_and_One_Nights
) to deceive the King of his intent, to take the life of Sheherazade.

There are hundreds of pictures available through Internet
searches that demonstrate the beauty of Sheherazade. http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTQ0MO2yVbZkM_BciVv4WgHs52S-zEzseZr_fOlC7jEqXZNmLgl
An attraction much like that of participating in a seemingly anonymous effort
to deface or disrupt websites or become part of a movement far bigger than
oneself. The romantic notions of Sheherazade play directly into the
attractiveness of Anonymous and LulzSec.

Cybershazad is a fundamental element in Anonymous
crowdsourcing lore. The origins are seen in online bragging emanating from
blogs, Twitter, YouTube and other online sources. Cybershazad borders on libel
since the intent in most cases is to defame by use of written or printed words found
on the Internet. Cybershazad tales are known to go viral and become understood
truth. A truth that is held close to the ideology of those who adhere to
collectivism. Although cybershazadists believe their message to align with the
strength of the individual spirit, they really are rooted in censorship through
cyber bullying and the stifling of the spoken and written word. They profess to
be proponents of Ayn Rand when in fact they are the epitomy of one of her
greatest antagonists, Ellsworth M. Toohey (http://www.google.com/url?url=http://www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3Dppgg_vF3Z-0&rct=j&sa=U&ei=HBM1T9__Jor1gAer0KHoBQ&ved=0CHQQtwIwDA&q=ellsworth+toohey&usg=AFQjCNFsY0lnC6hwa096tF0otIL77huuqQ
and http://www.enotes.com/fountainhead/ellsworth-toohey)
using media messaging to drive members to the mediocrity of the masses while
attacking the power and beauty of the individual spirit.

Cybershazadists practice extreme altruism through
crowdsourcing their attacks led by hidden leaders who have a talent for subtly
manipulating converts in order to gain power over them. This power is then used
to concoct tales and execute cyber attacks.

The cybershazad relationship to cyber intelligence and cyber
counterintelligence is rooted in denial and deception based upon information
gather and disclosed as a method to expose and manipulate targets. Coupled with satire and parody much like the
stories of 1001 Nights http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Thousand_and_One_Nights#Persian_prototype:_Haz.C4.81r_Afs.C4.81n,
the messages of Anonymous and LulzSec http://pastebin.com/1znEGmHa
continue to entice the reader into more and more stories, most of which are
based in managing the perception of the reader.

Comment on Apparent hoax photo a hit on Chronicle page on Facebook by Csensecqua

Csensecqua — Wed, 08 Feb 2012 07:31:00 +0000

The bozeman chronicle is a great paper

Comment on Montana senators want answers for degrading rural landline quality by Bogusb

Bogusb — Sat, 04 Feb 2012 03:22:00 +0000

This is absolute bunk. AT&T and the FCC are doing everything in their power to do away with landlines while Senators such a Baucus are in agreement. This is the typical type of BS put out in order to discredit our most reliable phone service, the landlines, in order to pave the way for a supposedly public consensus that landlines are antiquated. The FCC probably ordered this bogus report.

Comment on Why we allow anonymous comments by Tim Faber

Tim Faber — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 00:12:00 +0000

Thank you for your openness, Mr. Becker. You mentioned the need to express oneself without fear of repercussion or punishment. You can’t imagine the reality. I know of at least two online commenters who post their real names and degrade and snipe at readers, calling them most names in books. But it’s not they whom I fear, rather it is their henchmen–those ring-led individuals whom are easily swayed by vitriolous comments; the ones who lurk in barrooms and vent rage aided by alcohol–whom I wish to avoid. And your online discussion reveals not only the true colors out there, but the numbers as well. It gives me an idea of what we’re up against. If only their true identities were exposed, it would reveal a lot of self-incrimination! I remember back in the ’70′s when people commented, “Lazer beam on your window?” in reference to the FBI. Now we have the internet. It exposed Taliban info. The FBI scrutinizing your local discussion? Hmmm.

Comment on Why we allow anonymous comments by pseudonym

pseudonym — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 20:21:00 +0000

So if you don’t like it, post your real name? I don’t see what the issue is.

Comment on Why we allow anonymous comments by Michael Becker

Michael Becker — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 17:45:00 +0000

Welcome to the comments. Thank you for calling me a liar with your first anonymous post.

As I said in my response to the reader above, there are financial reasons for allowing anonymous and pseudonymous comments — you’re right.

However the pennies made from the slight statistical dent our commenters make in our website traffic are secondary to the philosophy I laid out in my email to the reader.

Comment on Why we allow anonymous comments by Professor Obvious

Professor Obvious — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 17:40:00 +0000

Wrong. The internet is nothing but a tabloid and should be treated as such. Anyone can share an opinion, no matter how ignorant or asinine it may be. Anything read online that does not come from a credible source, or at least a traceable source, should be used to supplement your own research or just taken as entertainment value- nothing more. Online blogs and comments are 21st century bathroom graffiti and should be treated accordingly.

Comment on Why we allow anonymous comments by No

No — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 06:34:00 +0000

Mr Becker, I disagree. Readers of the web and readers of the print want the same thing: objective and timely news and information. You allow comments on the web as the vile comments drive repeat visits, and more ad impressions, thus more money to your employer. To say anything else is misleading.
The only difference readers expect between the web and the print version is in timeliness. I read the web version as I can get the news earlier and process the info faster. The print version is simply too hard to get and carry around in my lifestyle. With your company I suffer less news and less content because of my desire to carry around less stuff. But don’t try and tell me the comments and letters to the editors are different because that is what people expect, it is different because if you print it you can be held liable for it, and if it is a blog style comment you can profit from it, simple as that. In the end money is your motivator.