6 ms·

Well, a simple search turns this out: http://tinyurl.com/yljrtuc http://tinyurl.com/yljrtuc So it's fair to say the signature may be correct.

vijaydev 17y ago
how did you get hold of that?
- jacquesm 17y ago
  Check signature, do a whois, do a search on the persons name, take image of matching name from Facebook. Not that hard but pretty tasteless to post it. On HN you might as well wear your identity out front, most people here have graduated in the 'basic internet tool use', unless you make a real effort at staying incognito it is very hard to not drop little bits of information, the best way to stay anonymous is to be very quiet.
  - gridspy 17y ago
    Exactly. It is much better to just write things that you are proud of and then sign them with your real name.
rewind 17y ago
Yeah, that was WAY more appropriate. I'm sure all the women around here (and hopefully most of the men) are just shaking their heads right now. Unbelievable.
jacquesm 17y ago
There are reasons plenty of women on HN keep their gender 'to themselves', one of them is that it is all to easy to get stalkers giving you a 'certain kind of attention' as one phrased it. If someone does not go out of their way to post their picture, why would you ? Private stuff should be revealed by the person themselves, unless they're scamming or something like that, then I have absolutely no problem with it. But even then, a picture ?
- onetimetoken 17y ago
  I fully agree with the sentiment that inspires your statement. However, this thread highlights a fundamental property of a networked life: privacy is dead, there is only identity management. You only need whois and google/facebook to find the data in this case. Both are instances of seemingly disconnected and "local" data points (as in nobody without a real interest would ever look for these things), which, chained, intersected, etc. can reveal a ton of information about a person, all of which was volunteered by the person in question. The NYT had a piece on "human-flesh search" recently, and 4chan raids have been well-known for a while. The point being, that once you release something in the wild, it's there, and accessible. Ethically, is it fair game to mine it (like people search engines, for example, do)? It should give us collective pause to think - why do we get all those web services like facebook, gmail, twitter, etc. for free? Without even noticing it we are whoring out our privacy and intimate patterns. Google has two customer groups: users and advertisers - and advertisers bring in the money, users are there to maximize advertiser and google ROI - e.g. Google allows pure-ad parked pages, they give tips on "blending" ads to increase CTRs etc. If harnessed properly, these things can be useful, but it requires a mindset and workflow not entirely dissimilar to those of spies or high-end criminals - controlling information by selective disclosure, identity segmentation, disinformation, anonymization, etc. - not for sinister purposes, mind you, but simply to guard what we traditionally call privacy. written with a one time account
  - jacquesm 17y ago
    > written with a one time account Smart move, but I'll bet you I can still identify you. One really big eye opener for me how subtle this problem really is was this article, I've just posted it as a separate submission: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1197072 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1197072
    - onetimetoken 17y ago
      I was just trying to empasize my point. Just out of curiosity, how would you go about identifying me? Thanks for the linked article. Interesting indeed.

vijaydev 17y ago

how did you get hold of that?

jacquesm 17y ago
Check signature, do a whois, do a search on the persons name, take image of matching name from Facebook. Not that hard but pretty tasteless to post it. On HN you might as well wear your identity out front, most people here have graduated in the 'basic internet tool use', unless you make a real effort at staying incognito it is very hard to not drop little bits of information, the best way to stay anonymous is to be very quiet.
- gridspy 17y ago
  Exactly. It is much better to just write things that you are proud of and then sign them with your real name.

rewind 17y ago

Yeah, that was WAY more appropriate. I'm sure all the women around here (and hopefully most of the men) are just shaking their heads right now. Unbelievable.

jacquesm 17y ago

There are reasons plenty of women on HN keep their gender 'to themselves', one of them is that it is all to easy to get stalkers giving you a 'certain kind of attention' as one phrased it. If someone does not go out of their way to post their picture, why would you ? Private stuff should be revealed by the person themselves, unless they're scamming or something like that, then I have absolutely no problem with it. But even then, a picture ?

onetimetoken 17y ago
I fully agree with the sentiment that inspires your statement. However, this thread highlights a fundamental property of a networked life: privacy is dead, there is only identity management. You only need whois and google/facebook to find the data in this case. Both are instances of seemingly disconnected and "local" data points (as in nobody without a real interest would ever look for these things), which, chained, intersected, etc. can reveal a ton of information about a person, all of which was volunteered by the person in question. The NYT had a piece on "human-flesh search" recently, and 4chan raids have been well-known for a while. The point being, that once you release something in the wild, it's there, and accessible. Ethically, is it fair game to mine it (like people search engines, for example, do)? It should give us collective pause to think - why do we get all those web services like facebook, gmail, twitter, etc. for free? Without even noticing it we are whoring out our privacy and intimate patterns. Google has two customer groups: users and advertisers - and advertisers bring in the money, users are there to maximize advertiser and google ROI - e.g. Google allows pure-ad parked pages, they give tips on "blending" ads to increase CTRs etc. If harnessed properly, these things can be useful, but it requires a mindset and workflow not entirely dissimilar to those of spies or high-end criminals - controlling information by selective disclosure, identity segmentation, disinformation, anonymization, etc. - not for sinister purposes, mind you, but simply to guard what we traditionally call privacy. written with a one time account
- jacquesm 17y ago
  > written with a one time account Smart move, but I'll bet you I can still identify you. One really big eye opener for me how subtle this problem really is was this article, I've just posted it as a separate submission: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1197072 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1197072
  - onetimetoken 17y ago
    I was just trying to empasize my point. Just out of curiosity, how would you go about identifying me? Thanks for the linked article. Interesting indeed.