The only named defendant in the Anna’s Archive ‘WorldCat’ hacking lawsuit suggests that the plaintiffs are going after the wrong person.
1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy
2. Don’t request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote
3. Don’t request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs
4. Don’t submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others
💰 Please help cover server costs.
They’re grasping at straws. Viva Anna’s Archive.
Holy shit is their “evidence” that this lady is actually responsible for the site pathetic.
Lady?
Lol. First rule about the undernet: anyone with a female handle is actually a male.
It’s actually a pretty good tactic to throw off investigators.
Your misogyny has been noted.
But the lady being referred to here is Maria Dolores Anasztasia Matienzo of Seattle, WA, who is being falsely accused of running Anna’s Archive because her online handle is “anarchivist”. She is, in fact, a woman.
And I see no evidence to conclude that a man runs Anna’s Archive, but yours seems to be that women can’t do tech. You can fuck right off with that bullshit.
So how is this “hacking” if the information is publicly accessible for all?
I always wondered where the name came from. I always assumed it was a real person, like craigslist.
That it’s short for Anarchist’s archive makes a lot more sense.
The person they have charged in this instance is called “Ana”.
Could be a double meaning and mean both.
Oh don’t get me wrong, I wasn’t suggesting your theory was incorrect. It could absolutely be both, or one or neither. It’s just an interesting coincedence.
They really wanna pull an Aaron Swartz again didn’t they?
This is the GutHub project by the way:
https://github.com/anarchivist/worldcat
Clearly, a project whose last commit was 12 years ago should be more than enough evidence that she hacked WorldCat.