

Anonymous gets banned from Google+, creates his own social network - DeusExMachina
http://youranonnews.tumblr.com/post/7693504120/as-some-of-you-know-we-got-banned-from

======
51Cards
They didn't create their own social network. They registered a domain, added a
development forum, wrote an ethereal sounding warning message about the coming
'future', wrapped it in a goth inspired theme, and posted it to the internet.
They are two different things. The "Revision :0.1 Alpha" at the bottom is what
makes me smile the most.

That said I'm not against them coming up with an open anonymous social
network... I think that would be an interesting addition to the online world.
However to say they created their own social network at this point is slightly
over-stated. I look forward to seeing what they produce.

~~~
nvictor
the expect us was their slogan for a while...

------
nostromo
> Didn’t take long to get banned from Google+ our Gmail is also gone...

This is a major concern for me and Google+. Who knows what violates their
community standards -- and loosing my gmail (and google docs, and analytics
and...) because of Google+ is unfathomable.

Google+ really needs to separate out its services so that running afoul of the
Google+ "community standards" dosn't lead to the death of all your Google
services.

~~~
vaksel
the thing to worry about with Google, is that they are notorious for changing
the rules and banning people retroactively for things they did in the past.

happened to me with my adwords account, ran a campaign just fine...paused
it...then 8 months later got my account permanently suspended by a bot for a
campaign that's been paused for 8 months.

contacting adwords was useless since they just repeat that there is nothing
they can do.

~~~
xekul
I had my five-year-old, $30k/year Adwords account suspended recently, through
no fault of my own. I made a few polite phone calls and they were surprisingly
helpful; eventually, in about two weeks, my account was reinstated. Although
the telephone staff can't unsuspend your account, they can escalate the matter
internally so that a human reviews your suspension. It has taken a lot of
time, but Google might finally be starting to understand that customer service
matters.

------
pyre
I think that the terms 'anonymous' and 'social network' are reasonably opposed
to each other. If you have enough connections it's probably reasonable to be
able to figure out who you are, especially if one of the people in your social
network has been identified.

------
michaelchisari
Or they could support existing open source social networking projects, instead
of, once again, reinventing the wheel.

~~~
redthrowaway
If you read their dev forums it doesn't look like they're trying to make an
open facebook, but rather a system with built-in anonymity, encryption, and
filesharing. It'd be cool if they could get it off the ground, but they'd have
to marshal far more dev time than they've been able to in the past.

------
BasDirks
" _The sheep era is over. The interwebz are no longer your prison._ "

Isn't the problem with being a sheep that you're anonymous? I don't get it, to
me Anonymous exemplifies the metaphorical herd perfectly.

~~~
dkarl
It does seem perfectly tribal. Down with the oppressors, join this group with
me to protect yourself against the oppressors. Then the groups fight
incessantly until one of them eclipses the others and invents nationalism. On
the other hand, Anonymous is supposedly structured so that individuals can opt
in or out of campaigns without worrying that their efforts will end up
supporting actions they disagree with. With most organizations, you have to
try to predict whether they will put your time and money to good use before
you actually commit your support, and then your efforts are controlled by the
leadership until you retract your support.

That would make Anonymous an organization that is uniquely driven by the
individual choices of its members, which is a very attractive idea. That's the
potential, anyway.

------
Darkstar
This is fatally flawed by virtue of the fact that it's a .com. The US
government has already claimed it has jurisdiction over the com TLD. Should a
judge agree that means the social network could be shut down just by
appropriating the domain. Also, anonymous is supposed to be decentralized
whereas this is anything but. I like some of what anonymous does, but I don't
trust them at all.

~~~
icebraining
That site isn't the social network, that apparently is only in planning phase.
It's just a forum.

~~~
Groxx
`anonplus.com` is presumably the home of "anon+", not the forum, which is
hosted on ZetaBoards.com (another .com there too).

------
yaix
There is already an anonymous social network, that is where all this Anon
stuff started.

~~~
redthrowaway
It's pretty useless for anything beyond memes, however.

------
pettazz
Isn't the anon social network just 4chan?

------
Groxx
Why the links black, with a black background?

On a more technical front, the link to Anon+ goes to a site[1] which really
only has a link to the Anon+ dev forum[2], this is hosted by ZetaBoards. A
company in Maryland[3]. And the "anonplus.com" URL is: A) a .com domain, which
I believe the US has recently claimed rights over, and B) all the contacts
visible from `whois` are in the US.

Yup. Can't be shut down. Won't be silenced.

[1]: <http://anonplus.com/> [2]: <http://s13.zetaboards.com/anonplus/index/>
[3]: <http://www.zetaboards.com/contact/>

------
Stevenup7002
A social network lead by hacktivists? I'm sure the general public will come
flocking...

~~~
paulnelligan
I don't think it's for the general public, but there are enough 'subversive
individuals' out there to make this work for them, I'm personally extremely
fed up of the increasing lack of anonymity on the services that I use ...

------
chris_engel
Lol a social network where every users name is anonymous. What a great plan ;)

~~~
drbaltar
you mean like 4chan? Can't see that working either

------
cryos
The lesson here is the Google is a corporation with a corporate agenda, with
an allegiance to share holders and not users. I think this is the 3rd such
story I've read in the last week.

The other complaints I have seen are from gaming communities. I can understand
anon getting banned as they probably breached TOS by supporting criminal
activities. But it hasn't been the case for other instances I have read about.

Anyone who thinks Google+ is a social network designed to improve the world is
sorely mistaken. Its purely designed to harvest consumer to increase profit
margins. If your data can't be sold to 3rd parties via Googles ad netowrk then
you aren't welcome.

Whats the saying? "If they aren't selling you something then you're being
sold"? no idea who to attribute that quote to.

------
losvedir
*plans to create

------
dplakon
I'll be surprised if it materializes, but an anonymous (the literal term, not
the group) is pretty neat.

------
yuhong
Personally I prefer people use their real names if possible, but I am not in
favor of sites requiring it.

------
nextparadigms
How long until their domain gets seized?

~~~
masonlee
Namecoin and .bit

------
Zachhack
Nice try NSA..

------
chippy
It is a forum.

------
Kwpolska
The 45334824923049203492th social network. Congratulations!

~~~
contextfree
How many social networks are there "IRL"?

~~~
rheide
One.

------
gorgoroth666
stupid buzz is stupid

------
javadyan
And what are they going to do, reinvent Diaspora?

~~~
icebraining
That's actually what I found confusing; they seem to be planning to build it
all from scratch.

And then there is "The relationship database with permissions is kept on a
central server". So much for decentralization.

