There's a lot of general life getting in the way out there, how many people agree with a topic compared to how many will work their ass of to stop it?
Thanks for pointing that out, though. Perhaps if we're lucky (?) tools to monitor and control mobs will evolve faster than tools to communicate and collaborate securely.
Anonymous is working at the basest level of security -- just drop by and jump in. I imagine what we'll see soon, what we see already in organized crime, is a combination of better ways of vetting while still integrating to the wider net in order to attract new recruits. As they say in the movies, the night is still young. If we get something with the moral foundation of wikileaks, the activitst appeal of Anonymous, the secure communication system of Tor, and the virality of Facebook? We're going to have problems (once again, I'm overstating for effect)
Having said all of that, even if it's only 100 people, and even if it's always 100 people are less, that's a problem. Smaller groups that fly under the radar are more problematic than large noisy ones. How many people did it take to dump all the secure embassy traffic of the United States government?
For the record, I don't see a problem with any of those things, and I doubt I'm the only one.
What's wrong with that? That would be terrific.
We are not going to have problems. Governments and corporations who want to take away our rights are going to have problems.