4 ms·

It's not that bad I believe. With the way PR companies and political parties are using astroturfing/bots to influence public opinion, asking for identification

It's not that bad I believe. With the way PR companies and political parties are using astroturfing/bots to influence public opinion, asking for identification is one way of making sure the person participating in an online discussion is real. It also safeguards against online foreign influence. Additionally, I think anonymity tends to bring the worst in us. Perhaps it is because we feel less pressured by social norms of behavior since we are not held personally responsible for our speech as much as it would've been the case irl. While no one is truly anonymous to the state, asking people to identify themselves makes them conscious about it and I believe less likely to start using a given service under the assumption of anonymity.

jokoon 9y ago
I agree with you, although people should have the choice to be anonymous or not. Users should also be able to make the difference, and have less trust towards anonymous individuals. I agree that there should be places where anonymity should not be authorized, but it should not be mandatory. Even if the state need people's identity it doesn't share that data with private companies (in general). > Additionally, I think anonymity tends to bring the worst in us. Perhaps it is because we feel less pressured by social norms of behavior since we are not held personally responsible for our speech as much as it would've been the case irl. You're right, but what you are describing is the pressure of the politically correct, which can be toxic. Anonymity let people express their opinion without fear of retaliation. It's a double edge sword. The best solution is to educate people so that they can make the difference, and let people use platforms with strong identification where it's better.
yorwba 9y ago
I'm pretty sure the Chinese government will give its astroturfers a free pass on the identity requirements. And the social norms that pressure people when they are not anonymous include not making the government look bad. While anonymity-enforcing environments can be useful when users have the freedom to choose, as soon as they become mandatory under an authoritarian regime, they turn into a strong silencer against all dissent.
avaika 9y ago
From the other side once you share your data, you lose control over it. Your identity might be stolen / sold / used for something illegal by whoever has the access to it. Nobody is gonna solve this problem. Moreover in a lot of countries nobody will protect you once prosecutor has enough "clues" to put you in jail for something you didn't commit. Just look at the prosecution process of mr Bogatov for hosting Tor exit node [1]. It's already happening. Or imagine the possibilities for government to track down the opposition. Well in some countries government already puts in jail opposition based on internet activities. So even in case anonymity might make people to be a bit overly aggressive online, that's the price I'm happy to pay for my own safety and freedom. Otherwise I would prefer to stay passive network participant or even be offline. [1]: https://blog.torproject.org/blog/statement-regarding-dmitry-bogatov https://blog.torproject.org/blog/statement-regarding-dmitry-...

jokoon 9y ago

I agree with you, although people should have the choice to be anonymous or not. Users should also be able to make the difference, and have less trust towards anonymous individuals. I agree that there should be places where anonymity should not be authorized, but it should not be mandatory. Even if the state need people's identity it doesn't share that data with private companies (in general). > Additionally, I think anonymity tends to bring the worst in us. Perhaps it is because we feel less pressured by social norms of behavior since we are not held personally responsible for our speech as much as it would've been the case irl. You're right, but what you are describing is the pressure of the politically correct, which can be toxic. Anonymity let people express their opinion without fear of retaliation. It's a double edge sword. The best solution is to educate people so that they can make the difference, and let people use platforms with strong identification where it's better.

yorwba 9y ago

I'm pretty sure the Chinese government will give its astroturfers a free pass on the identity requirements. And the social norms that pressure people when they are not anonymous include not making the government look bad. While anonymity-enforcing environments can be useful when users have the freedom to choose, as soon as they become mandatory under an authoritarian regime, they turn into a strong silencer against all dissent.

avaika 9y ago

From the other side once you share your data, you lose control over it. Your identity might be stolen / sold / used for something illegal by whoever has the access to it. Nobody is gonna solve this problem. Moreover in a lot of countries nobody will protect you once prosecutor has enough "clues" to put you in jail for something you didn't commit. Just look at the prosecution process of mr Bogatov for hosting Tor exit node [1]. It's already happening. Or imagine the possibilities for government to track down the opposition. Well in some countries government already puts in jail opposition based on internet activities. So even in case anonymity might make people to be a bit overly aggressive online, that's the price I'm happy to pay for my own safety and freedom. Otherwise I would prefer to stay passive network participant or even be offline. [1]: https://blog.torproject.org/blog/statement-regarding-dmitry-bogatov https://blog.torproject.org/blog/statement-regarding-dmitry-...