This movie was great. I had little knowledge of any kind of hacking and famous hackers before this movie, so the entire movie was fresh knowledge for me. The movie presented really well too, so it was a pleasure to watch. Learning about the fore fathers of the hackers movement really inspired me to go look more into the whole hacking movement. I wonder whether that was the intention of the film? It must have been. The positive and friendly attitude it had towards hacking really helped me as a student and a viewer get interested in these people and their lives, and give me a look at hacking that the media hasn’t given us ever since the birth of the movement.
It made me wonder what these guys think of modern day hacking groups like lulsec and anonymous. These groups have received large amounts of negative media attention. After watching this film, I wonder what these men who began the movement would have to say about them. Would they agree with the media? Disagree? Or fall somewhere in between? I know I disagree with their tactics. They’re blunt and malicious, compared to these earlier hackers. But then again, that’s the medias portrayal of them. How does one even begin to define these groups? That’s a question I don’t think I’m prepared to answer. At least, not yet.
This movie was incredible. It was entertaining, educational, and eye opening as well. There should be more movies like these in the pubic school system for sure. We’d certainly learn more. The movie was just so well put together too. The most amazing this was how simple the plans were that they put together. Often it was simply a false website and some posts, and they were receiving their own invitations left and right to extremely important events. What also amazed me was the guts these two guys had. Doing the stunts they did could not have been easy on them, and the sheer nerve and determination was inspiring in and of itself.
This movie is a must see for any new media major. It shows a side of what smart people can be capable of doing with the technology we’re learning how to use. All it takes is some brains and a mission, and amazing things can occur. A good lesson, but easily forgotten here on campus, what with all the homework and rules that being a college student entails. It’s easy to forget that sometimes you have to break a few rules to get at what’s important, as long as you do it intelligently. Doing things intelligently means different things to different people, but these guys deserve a standing ovation for their aspirations and courage to go through with their ideas. Wherever you are, Yes Men, I stand applauding.
The downward spiral of commercialism that we live in and deal with everyday has dire consequences most of us aren’t even aware of in the ecosystem. If you stop to think about it, though, you realize that deep down you know something is wrong. Everyone seems to have a sense of this, but there is such a strong desire to ignore those nagging thoughts and put them to rest. The desire to not acknowledge these issues is a very dangerous reality that we’re going to have to deal with if anything is to be done about the current situation.
This is where the real problem resides. The economic and ecological issues are all there, but the biggest issue of them all is the reluctance for us to acknowledge these issues and do something to change them. If this problem could be solved, we could be on our way to finding a solution. Until then, however, we may be stuck here with the wool over our eyes. Wool placed there by our own two hands.
I couldn’t agree more with Gelder. Occupy Wallstreet changes so many things, it’s hard to even know where to begin. It changes how people see their governments and how they live their lives, it has changed how protests are done and run, it heavily increases the awareness of the power of social media to the government, the public, and the media. It changes how we see the future and how we look at the past. It changes how we view our heads of state, depending on their response to this movement. It changes people’s hopes for the future, and their feeling of hopelessness and despair for a world that seems to be tearing itself apart. It changes how protesters communicate and share their ideals and ideas, both with those in the protest and those who want to know more. It changes so many things, and some we haven’t even come across yet. We won’t know till some time down the road how this will change the governments and nations that this movement has touched. We don’t know how this will change future protests, and the responses to them from the media, government and the public. We don’t know how this will change the curriculum in schools and whether it will be praised as a crowning achievement in the history of non-violent protest, or it will be a short sentence in the textbook of world history. Only time can answer these questions, but they are such important questions, I can’t wait to find out the answers.
I found this article very interesting, especially as a kid who has grown up in Maine. In Maine, you are surrounded by the hard working mindset. You work hard, long hours, no matter what the pay, but in the end, you just get it done. There is a real pride in people who lead their lives like this, and I often wonder how this world view would be different in other parts of the country. This view isn’t necessarily encouraging young people to go out and make changes in the world. It encourages them to bow their head and put their nose to the grind stone. It praises those who are willing to suffer so they can live. I don’t agree with this view. I can’t put my finger on it, but something about it I just can’t agree with. Why should we suffer and bleed to just make do? That’s not the way I want to live. I want to make a change, and this reading was very inspiring. I think more people should take a look at this, and more people should get the fuck out of Maine.
I found this reading to be interesting, especially with the focus on many-to-many. This is a trend that our new media program is based upon, and is a concept that is being brought up time and time again in different classrooms. It’s nice to know the source material that this concept comes from. One question that does come up while reading this is the importance of technology to achieve true many to many contact. How much technology is required to be categorized as many to many? Could our fore fathers have been practicing this transportation medium when building the nation that we live in today? If not, could they have made better decisions and created a better country through this transportation vehicle?
I would argue that our fore fathers did not have the required technology. In order to truly be a many to many transportation vehicle, you need to have the ability to have quick feedback from anyone involved in the deliberation. This means that at any time input could be taken from the community, and thus things could change in response to the needs and the desires of the people involved. This method was not around during the times of our fore fathers, and for practically no other nation that exists today. They were all formed under the other more archaic vehicles of transportation, one to one and one to many. Now with the technology we have today, are these systems really the best for our communities? If they were created using old techniques, wouldn’t a new method be called for with the advent of this technology? Movements such as Occupy Wallstreet are showing that people are starting to ask these important questions. The world has not yet answered their questions, but in time, an answer must come, or we must revert back to the one to many transportation vehicle.