Yet we know almost nothing about them, one reason being that they do not advertise themselves, do not have a PR office or strive for public recognition. They have their own culture, recognition and support groups and live in electronic chat rooms on private, ultra-secure web sites. But does 'Anonymous' have clear goals, and if not, is that dangerous? Is their concept of right and wrong based on one person's understanding or a collective approach? Gregg Housh, one of Anonymous’s first members, and one of the few people associated with the group to speak publicly using his real identity, speaks out about this and other important issues.
If Anonymous can be seen as a form of internet policing for the public good, does their success means that forms of governance that go beyond nationality and sovereignty can be expected? Perhaps, as Housh suggests, this is the only way that gnawing problems such as hunger and poverty, which just won't go away can be solved?
