3 ms·
Your logic assumes the remote party in a transaction has no privacy considerations only because you yourself have anonymity. In a very practical sense it means
by austincheney 5y ago
Your logic assumes the remote party in a transaction has no privacy considerations only because you yourself have anonymity. In a very practical sense it means they are not likely to disclose things to you.
Even still would you really be willing to give out all your financial and sexual preferences to a stranger even if you are anonymous? I suspect most people would continue to harbor reservations.
- funklute 5y agoI see it more as a soft trade-off, than something that has hard limits. The more I trust my own anonymity, the less I worry and care about the privacy at the other end. And the more willing I would be to give out details that could come back and bite me if my anonymity was blown.
- austincheney 5y agoI see it more as Stockholm Syndrome to the web’s client server model. People are willing to abandon privacy to a web server out of convenience but that doesn’t sound emotionally appealing so they give up and pretend what they have is good enough.