Anarchist/lulz-mongering hacktivist group LulzSec issued a position statement to help the public understand the point of its pointless attacks and agenda behind its complete lack of agenda.
Most of the statement is self-justification and defense against charges made by those whose accounts it has hacked and those who comment on the hacks that egregiously obvious attacks like those LulzSec has pursued will push government agencies to add tighter regulation to the Internet more quickly than it would have otherwise.
"But what if we just hadn't released anything? What if we were silent? That would mean we would be secretly inside FBI affiliates right now, inside PBS, inside Sony... watching... abusing..."
Far more sites are compromised than either hackers or owners of the sites will admit, meaning Facebook accounts, emails, game personas and any other online service that registers users could already be compromised by hackers stealing information quietly, not making noise about it as LulzSec has.
"This is what you should be fearful of, not us releasing things publicly, but the fact that someone hasn't released something publicly. We're sitting on 200,000 Brink users right now that we never gave out. It might make you feel safe knowing we told you, so that Brink users may change their passwords. What if we hadn't told you? No one would be aware of this theft, and we'd have a fresh 200,000 peons to abuse, completely unaware of a breach."
["Peon" is LulzSec designation for "someone hackers have the right to abuse because the peons didn't hack LulzSec first."]
Is releasing private data evil in itself? No, according to LulzSec, because getting a Peon's login lets you order the sex toys with their own money and be amused at their reaction.
Posting the data gives it to "equally evil people" can use it for more abuse and "entertain us with what they do with it."
If they had the guts and skills, LulzSec argues, everyone else would be doing the same thing because anonymously wrecking someone else's finances or online relationships is appealing and fulfilling to the wrecker, whose short attention spans require constant replacements for the lulz it tires of so quickly.
All of which is complete, transparently empty BS with no more credibility or justification than a rapist blaming his crime on the length of a victim's skirt.
"We'll continue creating things that are exciting and new until we're brought to justice, which we might well be. But you know, we just don't give a living fuck at this point - you'll forget about us in 3 months' time when there's a new scandal to gawk at, or a new shiny thing to click on via your 2D light-filled rectangle."
That, unfortunately, is probably true enough.
"This is the Internet, where we screw each other over for a jolt of satisfaction. There are peons and lulz lizards; trolls and victims."
That's true only to a certain degree.
People make fun of each other, slam those they know can't reach them, and generally act like idiots online because they believe no one can see them and they can get away with ignoring normal rules of etiquette.
There's a big difference between taunting people or enjoying a pointless flame war and doing things that actually injure the finances or reputations of those you abuse.
It's the point at which your freedom to swing your fist is overwhelmed by my right not to be punched in the nose.
There are plenty of lulz out there and plenty of irresponsible companies abusing the trust of their customers, if you're looking for someone to abuse.
Letting all the s*** trickle down to people who can't defend themselves and shouldn't have to isn't funny any more than the Three Stooges would be if Moe died of blunt-force trauma after Larry whanged him with a pipe wrench.
To identify the difference you have to be able to tell the difference between a clanky audio effect and the sound of a skull cracking, brain-liquefying act of murder.