7 ms·

The use cases for anonymity will drive the tech. I'd argue there isn't a middle class use case for strong anonymity. There are tons of use cases for identity a

The use cases for anonymity will drive the tech. I'd argue there isn't a middle class use case for strong anonymity. There are tons of use cases for identity and privacy, but anonymity presumes you are being preyed upon somehow. You need antagonists, and most of those are government/institution related, but by defining yourself in opposition to them, you in-effect leave the middle class. E.g. cease to identify as someone those institutions ostensibly serve, and identify instead as one of those they target. To value strong anonymity, you need to be part of either an underclass group, or have enough wealth that it needs protection internationally, with a big gap for use cases in between. There are tons of criminal use cases for anonymity that facilitate the needs and desperation of people afflicted by poverty, but those are illegal precisely because the line between relieving and exploiting poverty is so grey. Lotteries are a great example, as are cash jobs, narco logistics, vice and sex trade, short term loans, gambling, escrow payments for irregular immigration. These are all things people do for either survival or relief where to facilitate them is exploitative. Arguable, but that's the mainstream view. On the upper end, moving collateral around to protect the "beneficial owner," of an asset like art or property just reduces to variations on tax and regulatory avoidance, or sometimes evasion. It's almost uniquely both high risk and boring. I don't see this fund producing anything interesting.

dolomite 7y ago
<<I don't see this fund producing anything interesting.>> It produced this announcement, which is interesting by evidence of people, including yourself, engaging with it.
hghhbvv 7y ago
well, they produced this announcement which you obviously found interesting enough to write a lengthy take down.
neetdeth 7y ago
"You need antagonists, and most of those are government/institution related, but by defining yourself in opposition to them, you in-effect leave the middle class. E.g. cease to identify as someone those institutions ostensibly serve, and identify instead as one of those they target." This describes quite well the process of becoming a political dissident. The value of anonymity is that it allows you to exist in both states at once, both of the middle class and apart from it. By "doxing" dissidents, some hope to eject those people from the middle class, or otherwise make their political activities so costly as to dissuade them entirely. Anonymity has had a role in Western politics, of saying things which cannot be said, that dates back to at least the 18th century if not earlier. No doubt there are many on this website who will argue that speech without fear of personal reprisal is categorically a bad thing - but uninteresting? I don't think so. I agree that this fund produce wont produce anything, but only because I believe it's entirely fake.
_jal 7y ago
The classic one is sex. There are many "middle class" folks with proclivities outside of the socially dominant envelope of wherever they are. If those proclivities became publicly known, they would have negative repercussions ranging from social stigma through death. This is highly context dependent, of course - swinger-couples in one church towns may end up wanting to move; a gay man in many places may end up not being able to. Both have strong interests in securely discussing things without attaching their names to the communications. The first large experiment with anonymous remailers was anon.penet.fi[1], and I think it demonstrated how much demand for anonymous communication there is - it had over half a million users in the mid-90s, when a vastly smaller percentage of the population was online. [1] Not strongly anonymous, and people suffered because of that. The Mixmaster remailer network was significantly stronger, but was harder and less forgiving to use, distributed and frequently changing, and somewhat politicized.
m463 7y ago
> I'd argue there isn't a middle class use case for strong anonymity. I can think of 1000 use cases for strong anonymity. Thinking of switching a job, thinking of getting a divorce, becoming a whistleblower, investigating symptoms of a disease you may have, forming or joining a union. Or even just showing your irrational spending habits. These are middle-class, non-criminal things. Folks will be oppressed on an unprecedented scale, and very cheaply. Additionally, if we continue without taking action, society will be affected on an unprecedented scale by dataminers from the future. Data collected now or a decade ago may be mined by sophisticated algorithms created a decade from now.
- drngdds 7y ago
  >Thinking of switching a job, thinking of getting a divorce, becoming a whistleblower, investigating symptoms of a disease you may have, forming or joining a union. Or even just showing your irrational spending habits. Almost everything you've listed there is solved by using private browsing and pseudonyms. That's not strong anonymity. You don't need Tor to unionize.
  - heavyset_go 7y ago
    > You don't need Tor to unionize. Labor history is rife with eavesdropping, spying, honey pots and sabotage against workers at the hands of employers. Computers make all of those things easier and cheaper than they were in the past. Nowadays, firms offering those services go by the names of 'union-avoidance consultancies'[1] among many others. You can Google that term or 'fighting union' for dozens of companies you can hire towards that end. Also, the Pinkertons[2] are still in business doing what they did 150 years ago. [1] https://www.epi.org/blog/union-busters-are-more-prevalent-than-they-seem-and-may-soon-even-be-at-the-nlrb/ https://www.epi.org/blog/union-busters-are-more-prevalent-th... [2] https://www.pinkerton.com https://www.pinkerton.com
  - raxxorrax 7y ago
    Pseudonymity and anonymity are synonymous in many use cases. And unions did have a lot of secrets at their time.
  - 7y ago
heavyset_go 7y ago
> I'd argue there isn't a middle class use case for strong anonymity. There are tons of use cases for identity and privacy, but anonymity presumes you are being preyed upon somehow. You need antagonists, and most of those are government/institution related, but by defining yourself in opposition to them, you in-effect leave the middle class. E.g. cease to identify as someone those institutions ostensibly serve, and identify instead as one of those they target. The middle class still needs to work to eat, and I'm sure there are plenty of online activities that middle class people engage in that they don't need their employer or professional sphere knowing about.
codedokode 7y ago
> I'd argue there isn't a middle class use case for strong anonymity. So you don't mind that banks can sell information about where you were, who you are and what you buy, mobile carriers sell information about who you are and where you live and whom do you call? Treating you as a "consumer" without any rights. The only way to opt from being sold is not to provide information about yourself. Which is called anonimity. Use anonymous cash, anonymous bank account, anonymous messengers, anonymous SIM card. Sadly, most governments don't allow this because they don't want to trust you and they are not at your side but at the side of bigdata traders. So today you can buy drugs anonymously using Telegram, but cannot buy something anonymously on Ebay using Paypal without filling out a long form with passport data as if you were applying for US visa.
CM30 7y ago
Social media controversies are one use case. We've all heard about the effects of 'cancel culture' and deplatforming, and people going after your livelihood because you said something seen as 'offensive' or politically controversial online. If you're a very proponent/opponent of something like Brexit, agree with James Damore, think identity politics is bullshit, vocally support the Trump administration/are republican or are involved in some sort of internet controversy, there's definitely a strong middle class use case for anonymity. Makes it so your opponents can't go after your employmeny, friends, relationships, etc.
raxxorrax 7y ago
What about voting? Not anonymous but often secret. But wouldn't the same arguments apply? Or to any privacy in general? > anonymity presumes you are being preyed upon somehow. No. You could argue that anonymous alcoholics are preyed upon by society looking down on them, but the argument in general is pretty far out. Are there no alcoholics in the middle class? Do they automatically move in an underclass in this case? If so, the definition of middle class can indeed be trivial reduced to "people not in need of anonymity". I don't think it has no use cases. Especially if you include topics like religion, sex and politics, the use cases become quite obvious really. An age old constant.

dolomite 7y ago

<<I don't see this fund producing anything interesting.>> It produced this announcement, which is interesting by evidence of people, including yourself, engaging with it.

hghhbvv 7y ago

well, they produced this announcement which you obviously found interesting enough to write a lengthy take down.

neetdeth 7y ago

"You need antagonists, and most of those are government/institution related, but by defining yourself in opposition to them, you in-effect leave the middle class. E.g. cease to identify as someone those institutions ostensibly serve, and identify instead as one of those they target." This describes quite well the process of becoming a political dissident. The value of anonymity is that it allows you to exist in both states at once, both of the middle class and apart from it. By "doxing" dissidents, some hope to eject those people from the middle class, or otherwise make their political activities so costly as to dissuade them entirely. Anonymity has had a role in Western politics, of saying things which cannot be said, that dates back to at least the 18th century if not earlier. No doubt there are many on this website who will argue that speech without fear of personal reprisal is categorically a bad thing - but uninteresting? I don't think so. I agree that this fund produce wont produce anything, but only because I believe it's entirely fake.

_jal 7y ago

The classic one is sex. There are many "middle class" folks with proclivities outside of the socially dominant envelope of wherever they are. If those proclivities became publicly known, they would have negative repercussions ranging from social stigma through death. This is highly context dependent, of course - swinger-couples in one church towns may end up wanting to move; a gay man in many places may end up not being able to. Both have strong interests in securely discussing things without attaching their names to the communications. The first large experiment with anonymous remailers was anon.penet.fi[1], and I think it demonstrated how much demand for anonymous communication there is - it had over half a million users in the mid-90s, when a vastly smaller percentage of the population was online. [1] Not strongly anonymous, and people suffered because of that. The Mixmaster remailer network was significantly stronger, but was harder and less forgiving to use, distributed and frequently changing, and somewhat politicized.

m463 7y ago

> I'd argue there isn't a middle class use case for strong anonymity. I can think of 1000 use cases for strong anonymity. Thinking of switching a job, thinking of getting a divorce, becoming a whistleblower, investigating symptoms of a disease you may have, forming or joining a union. Or even just showing your irrational spending habits. These are middle-class, non-criminal things. Folks will be oppressed on an unprecedented scale, and very cheaply. Additionally, if we continue without taking action, society will be affected on an unprecedented scale by dataminers from the future. Data collected now or a decade ago may be mined by sophisticated algorithms created a decade from now.

drngdds 7y ago
>Thinking of switching a job, thinking of getting a divorce, becoming a whistleblower, investigating symptoms of a disease you may have, forming or joining a union. Or even just showing your irrational spending habits. Almost everything you've listed there is solved by using private browsing and pseudonyms. That's not strong anonymity. You don't need Tor to unionize.
- heavyset_go 7y ago
  > You don't need Tor to unionize. Labor history is rife with eavesdropping, spying, honey pots and sabotage against workers at the hands of employers. Computers make all of those things easier and cheaper than they were in the past. Nowadays, firms offering those services go by the names of 'union-avoidance consultancies'[1] among many others. You can Google that term or 'fighting union' for dozens of companies you can hire towards that end. Also, the Pinkertons[2] are still in business doing what they did 150 years ago. [1] https://www.epi.org/blog/union-busters-are-more-prevalent-than-they-seem-and-may-soon-even-be-at-the-nlrb/ https://www.epi.org/blog/union-busters-are-more-prevalent-th... [2] https://www.pinkerton.com https://www.pinkerton.com
- raxxorrax 7y ago
  Pseudonymity and anonymity are synonymous in many use cases. And unions did have a lot of secrets at their time.
- 7y ago

heavyset_go 7y ago

> I'd argue there isn't a middle class use case for strong anonymity. There are tons of use cases for identity and privacy, but anonymity presumes you are being preyed upon somehow. You need antagonists, and most of those are government/institution related, but by defining yourself in opposition to them, you in-effect leave the middle class. E.g. cease to identify as someone those institutions ostensibly serve, and identify instead as one of those they target. The middle class still needs to work to eat, and I'm sure there are plenty of online activities that middle class people engage in that they don't need their employer or professional sphere knowing about.

codedokode 7y ago

> I'd argue there isn't a middle class use case for strong anonymity. So you don't mind that banks can sell information about where you were, who you are and what you buy, mobile carriers sell information about who you are and where you live and whom do you call? Treating you as a "consumer" without any rights. The only way to opt from being sold is not to provide information about yourself. Which is called anonimity. Use anonymous cash, anonymous bank account, anonymous messengers, anonymous SIM card. Sadly, most governments don't allow this because they don't want to trust you and they are not at your side but at the side of bigdata traders. So today you can buy drugs anonymously using Telegram, but cannot buy something anonymously on Ebay using Paypal without filling out a long form with passport data as if you were applying for US visa.

CM30 7y ago

Social media controversies are one use case. We've all heard about the effects of 'cancel culture' and deplatforming, and people going after your livelihood because you said something seen as 'offensive' or politically controversial online. If you're a very proponent/opponent of something like Brexit, agree with James Damore, think identity politics is bullshit, vocally support the Trump administration/are republican or are involved in some sort of internet controversy, there's definitely a strong middle class use case for anonymity. Makes it so your opponents can't go after your employmeny, friends, relationships, etc.

raxxorrax 7y ago

What about voting? Not anonymous but often secret. But wouldn't the same arguments apply? Or to any privacy in general? > anonymity presumes you are being preyed upon somehow. No. You could argue that anonymous alcoholics are preyed upon by society looking down on them, but the argument in general is pretty far out. Are there no alcoholics in the middle class? Do they automatically move in an underclass in this case? If so, the definition of middle class can indeed be trivial reduced to "people not in need of anonymity". I don't think it has no use cases. Especially if you include topics like religion, sex and politics, the use cases become quite obvious really. An age old constant.