5 ms·

Ask HN: Why so many throwaway accounts here

4 points by DrNuke 9y ago

It seems awkward to me so many opinions must be shielded by a throwaway mask here on HN. I understand there are interests at stake but what kind of message are you thinking to promote when half comments on every slightly controversial topic are made by throwaway accounts? It's detrimental to this site reputation imho, other than the people in need to speak covered by a mask.

smt88 9y ago
I think it's fine. If they were hurting discussion quality, would we all keep coming back here? Plus, throwaway accounts are necessary for some of the best comments, which are insider information about a story. Being able to use your real name on social media, while still getting value out of using social media, is a privilege most people don't have. Most of us are googled by prospective employers or could be fired for what we post.
ColinWright 9y ago
On-line comments can have devastating real-world implications. Consider the very recent case of the unremarkable person who happened to stop the WannaCry attack. https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2017/05/15/media-hounds-wannacry-ransomware-hero/#694850305091 https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2017/05/15/media... https://theoutline.com/post/1536/uk-tabloids-doxxed-the-hero-hacker-who-stopped-a-global-cyberattack https://theoutline.com/post/1536/uk-tabloids-doxxed-the-hero... http://www.networkworld.com/article/3196812/security/reporters-doxed-wannacry-ransomware-kill-switch-guy-no-good-deed-goes-unpunished.html http://www.networkworld.com/article/3196812/security/reporte... https://thenextweb.com/insider/2017/05/15/doxing-hero-stopped-wannacry-irresponsible-dumb/#.tnw_qOS3wwqM https://thenextweb.com/insider/2017/05/15/doxing-hero-stoppe... The risk is minuscule, but the consequences are devastating. I have house insurance, life insurance, /etc.,/ because while the risks are small, the consequences are life-destroying. A simple comment on-line can destroy your life if the crazies get hold of it, even if it's right, even if it's innocent, and even if it was a genuine mistake. Ask Justine Sacco: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/15/magazine/how-one-stupid-tweet-ruined-justine-saccos-life.html https://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/15/magazine/how-one-stupid-t...
- FroshKiller 9y ago
  I'm not picking on you specifically for this, because many people do it, but you're actually contributing to the problem you're describing. When you make a distinction between "on-line" and "real-world," you reinforce the notion that these things are separate. They aren't. The notion that anything goes online because it's "not real" or somehow separate from "real" encourages all kinds of reckless behavior. I'm not saying we should all use our real names or anything, just that nothing about the consequences of speech changes by nature of having been transmitted to the Internet. "Comments can have devastating implications." That's the nut of it. Don't fall for the mirage of the Internet as a separate space, because it isn't. Can you be anonymous? Sure, to varying degrees of success. But the anonymity you might presume isn't guaranteed, just like putting on a mask doesn't make you immune to handcuffs. When you're found, you're found.
  - ColinWright 9y ago
    I feel like you're actually just supporting everything I've said. I'm not claiming that the "real world" and the "on-line world" are separate. I'm saying that things you say on-line can be spread far and wide, much further and wider than pre-internet, and hence become known to a wider audience. That audience is therefore more likely to have people in it who are unbalanced. I never claimed that the internet is a separate place, but it is certainly true that you can reduce the likelihood that things you say in one place are connected with you personally. It's not 100% secure, but I never said that. In short, you seem to be in agreement with me.
    - FroshKiller 9y ago
      Yeah, I do agree with you, but I was taking issue with how you framed your point. I get that you probably set up the online vs. real frame to underscore your point, but I think it actually undermines it.

4 points by DrNuke 9y ago

smt88 9y ago

I think it's fine. If they were hurting discussion quality, would we all keep coming back here? Plus, throwaway accounts are necessary for some of the best comments, which are insider information about a story. Being able to use your real name on social media, while still getting value out of using social media, is a privilege most people don't have. Most of us are googled by prospective employers or could be fired for what we post.

ColinWright 9y ago

On-line comments can have devastating real-world implications. Consider the very recent case of the unremarkable person who happened to stop the WannaCry attack. https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2017/05/15/media-hounds-wannacry-ransomware-hero/#694850305091 https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2017/05/15/media... https://theoutline.com/post/1536/uk-tabloids-doxxed-the-hero-hacker-who-stopped-a-global-cyberattack https://theoutline.com/post/1536/uk-tabloids-doxxed-the-hero... http://www.networkworld.com/article/3196812/security/reporters-doxed-wannacry-ransomware-kill-switch-guy-no-good-deed-goes-unpunished.html http://www.networkworld.com/article/3196812/security/reporte... https://thenextweb.com/insider/2017/05/15/doxing-hero-stopped-wannacry-irresponsible-dumb/#.tnw_qOS3wwqM https://thenextweb.com/insider/2017/05/15/doxing-hero-stoppe... The risk is minuscule, but the consequences are devastating. I have house insurance, life insurance, /etc.,/ because while the risks are small, the consequences are life-destroying. A simple comment on-line can destroy your life if the crazies get hold of it, even if it's right, even if it's innocent, and even if it was a genuine mistake. Ask Justine Sacco: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/15/magazine/how-one-stupid-tweet-ruined-justine-saccos-life.html https://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/15/magazine/how-one-stupid-t...

FroshKiller 9y ago
I'm not picking on you specifically for this, because many people do it, but you're actually contributing to the problem you're describing. When you make a distinction between "on-line" and "real-world," you reinforce the notion that these things are separate. They aren't. The notion that anything goes online because it's "not real" or somehow separate from "real" encourages all kinds of reckless behavior. I'm not saying we should all use our real names or anything, just that nothing about the consequences of speech changes by nature of having been transmitted to the Internet. "Comments can have devastating implications." That's the nut of it. Don't fall for the mirage of the Internet as a separate space, because it isn't. Can you be anonymous? Sure, to varying degrees of success. But the anonymity you might presume isn't guaranteed, just like putting on a mask doesn't make you immune to handcuffs. When you're found, you're found.
- ColinWright 9y ago
  I feel like you're actually just supporting everything I've said. I'm not claiming that the "real world" and the "on-line world" are separate. I'm saying that things you say on-line can be spread far and wide, much further and wider than pre-internet, and hence become known to a wider audience. That audience is therefore more likely to have people in it who are unbalanced. I never claimed that the internet is a separate place, but it is certainly true that you can reduce the likelihood that things you say in one place are connected with you personally. It's not 100% secure, but I never said that. In short, you seem to be in agreement with me.
  - FroshKiller 9y ago
    Yeah, I do agree with you, but I was taking issue with how you framed your point. I get that you probably set up the online vs. real frame to underscore your point, but I think it actually undermines it.