4 ms·

While not a popular opinion, personally feel that people should have the legal right to remain anonymous, even if they have a public persona.

Cyberdog 4y ago
So then what happens if someone's anonymity is stripped away? Do they sue the de-anonymizer, or does the de-anonymizer face criminal penalties? Or both? How does one determine an appropriate penalty for this sort of thing? Does it matter if the victim made themselves stupidly easy to dox? "It oughtta be illegal" is easy to say but not so easy to actually make happen.
- O__________O 4y ago
  Like I said, it’s not a popular opinion, but assuming it was a popular opinion, what would stop it from being a reality? (To be clear, I have no reason to believe it will ever be a popular opinion, nor do I see the point in even trying to make it one; that said, not aware of any fundamental reasoning of why it’s impossible.)
  - nickelpro 4y ago
    What stops it from being a reality is the lack of concrete answers to the questions raised by the comment you're replying to. Which you too have elected not to answer.
    - O__________O 4y ago
      Nothing in that comment was specific enough to respond to, but sure, my here are my responses which are unnecessarily verbose due to the generality of the questions, assuming it was popular and supported belief; again, all the responses you referred to were “generally speaking, how would xyz be done” — not specific statements saying “x is not possible because of y”, which would actually result in a narrow well defined exchange: >> So then what happens if someone's anonymity is stripped away? It would be impossible in any significant way, since it would be impossible to digitally identify any entity without having there prior consent; something that’s easily possible with existing technology. If person revoked that permission, retaining data would be illegal, even for the government. If government needed to identify someone, it would be done systematically and anonymously; for example, if a person needed to pay taxes, access a controlled area, etc - it would all be done anonymously with persons consent, if they decline to provide the required anonymous digital tokens, response would be predefined, and would include being deported to an exiled region. >> Do they sue the de-anonymizer, or does the de-anonymizer face criminal penalties? Or both? Both. >> How does one determine an appropriate penalty for this sort of thing? Person loses access to modern technology, is deported, would be unable to reach anyone once deported, and would never be allowed to return. >> Does it matter if the victim made themselves stupidly easy to dox? No, blaming victim is obviously irrational. _____ Again, if there specific issues other than it not being a popular opinion, please let me know. Otherwise, like I said, an individual being able to control their identity is limited only by popular opinion.
      - Cyberdog 4y ago
        > Person loses access to modern technology, is deported, would be unable to reach anyone once deported, and would never be allowed to return. So this person should get a penalty which in some ways is more severe than what murderers get? > No, blaming victim is obviously irrational. Okay, but I mean, if I publish my own name and address in a public space, and then someone else who doesn't like me takes that information and republishes it in a manner I disapprove of, is that person still a doxer? That's an extreme example but doxing almost never involves information which is not already publicly accessible to someone stubborn enough. It just involves following threads, correlating information, using public databases, etc.
        O__________O 4y ago
        >> So this person should get a penalty which in some ways is more severe than what murderers get? Being deported is way more humane than imprisonments. Personally, to me, being controlled than governments, corporations, etc logging my identity and any other information as they want is from of control I neither agreed to, nor would and would happily deport myself to a country than did not. >> if I publish my own name and address in a public space, and then someone else who doesn't like me takes that information and republishes it in a manner I disapprove of That would not be possible, at least in a significant way; any directly or indirectly identifiable information digitally published would require approval and would be revocable. ___ Again, might point is two parts: (1) people would never agree to this; (2) but if they did, there is nothing I am aware of the would make it impossible.
- manicdee 4y ago
  Absolutely it should be a criminal offence to doxx people. If someone isn’t committing a crime and prefers to use a pseudonym, more power to them. If you deliberately publish their identity without permission, to the deepest layer of Hell for you. In the middle are various levels of negligence and poor handling of PII which should attract severe punishment to provide economic incentive to protect PII or simply not collect it in the first place.
  - jbverschoor 4y ago
    There’s a proposal to make it a criminal offense here in NL. The whole goal of doxing is intimidation.
vlunkr 4y ago
That doesn't apply here. There's no remaining anonymous for someone who didn't attempt to hide their identity.
- O__________O 4y ago
  Are you saying it is _Why’s fault he was doxed? If so, I disagree.
  - pen2l 4y ago
    He wasn't really "doxed", I mean, he used to give presentations at Rails conferences: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNsQxI2PdAI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNsQxI2PdAI He was a wonderful and quirky man. A true artist. And artists, unfortunately, seem to have a sort of tortured relationship with the world sometimes. I hope he's found his peace wherever he is. I'm sure he understands how much he touched and inspired so many of us. Shine on, _why, wherever you are.
    - culi 4y ago
      He literally deleted all of this because someone posted his legal name and personal info online. Edit: they had pics of his wife and a screenshot of his home on Google Maps... That's doxxing
      - smcl 4y ago
        That's horrifying, I cannot think why on earth someone would do that to him
        O__________O 4y ago
        Not only horrifying, but more often than not, being doxed is followed by progressively worse experiences like: malicious lawsuits, false accusations, stalking, unwanted potential harmful mail, random visitors, death threats, swattings, physical harm, etc — not only against the person doxed, but others who are of significance to them.
aliqot 4y ago
Absolutely. Sometimes people get known, against their will, for events beyond their control. There is an example that comes to mind of a crime being interrupted by a member of the community. The criminal was not named but the person who thwarted the crime was. They perceive this as having had a negative influence on their career search, as the first thing that appears when searching their name on mainstream search engines is "Person from X city, apprehended during Y crime". Is this okay? Should this person have a right to "be forgotten"? Even if we assume this person could somehow articulate a manner, method and value of negative impact this association has caused, is there a correct avenue to address this? - The news outlets are not doing anything wrong, they largely have reported only facts. They're precluded from mentioning the perpetrator by name, and the good Samaritan is reported by name as having intervened in the crime and preventing it from escalating; these are indisputable facts. - Is the person reviewing job applicants to blame for possibly not going past the title of an article when searching a prospect's name and city? Unfortunately as reality here has shown, there is no correct way forward. Legislatively, the USA does not hold the rights of the good Samaritan above the Constitutional rights of the press and witnesses. Imagine the feelings that develop in the good Samaritan in realizing they're powerless against the public record while having done nothing wrong and being accused of no crime.

Cyberdog 4y ago

So then what happens if someone's anonymity is stripped away? Do they sue the de-anonymizer, or does the de-anonymizer face criminal penalties? Or both? How does one determine an appropriate penalty for this sort of thing? Does it matter if the victim made themselves stupidly easy to dox? "It oughtta be illegal" is easy to say but not so easy to actually make happen.

O__________O 4y ago
Like I said, it’s not a popular opinion, but assuming it was a popular opinion, what would stop it from being a reality? (To be clear, I have no reason to believe it will ever be a popular opinion, nor do I see the point in even trying to make it one; that said, not aware of any fundamental reasoning of why it’s impossible.)
- nickelpro 4y ago
  What stops it from being a reality is the lack of concrete answers to the questions raised by the comment you're replying to. Which you too have elected not to answer.
  - O__________O 4y ago
    Nothing in that comment was specific enough to respond to, but sure, my here are my responses which are unnecessarily verbose due to the generality of the questions, assuming it was popular and supported belief; again, all the responses you referred to were “generally speaking, how would xyz be done” — not specific statements saying “x is not possible because of y”, which would actually result in a narrow well defined exchange: >> So then what happens if someone's anonymity is stripped away? It would be impossible in any significant way, since it would be impossible to digitally identify any entity without having there prior consent; something that’s easily possible with existing technology. If person revoked that permission, retaining data would be illegal, even for the government. If government needed to identify someone, it would be done systematically and anonymously; for example, if a person needed to pay taxes, access a controlled area, etc - it would all be done anonymously with persons consent, if they decline to provide the required anonymous digital tokens, response would be predefined, and would include being deported to an exiled region. >> Do they sue the de-anonymizer, or does the de-anonymizer face criminal penalties? Or both? Both. >> How does one determine an appropriate penalty for this sort of thing? Person loses access to modern technology, is deported, would be unable to reach anyone once deported, and would never be allowed to return. >> Does it matter if the victim made themselves stupidly easy to dox? No, blaming victim is obviously irrational. _____ Again, if there specific issues other than it not being a popular opinion, please let me know. Otherwise, like I said, an individual being able to control their identity is limited only by popular opinion.
    - Cyberdog 4y ago
      > Person loses access to modern technology, is deported, would be unable to reach anyone once deported, and would never be allowed to return. So this person should get a penalty which in some ways is more severe than what murderers get? > No, blaming victim is obviously irrational. Okay, but I mean, if I publish my own name and address in a public space, and then someone else who doesn't like me takes that information and republishes it in a manner I disapprove of, is that person still a doxer? That's an extreme example but doxing almost never involves information which is not already publicly accessible to someone stubborn enough. It just involves following threads, correlating information, using public databases, etc.
      - O__________O 4y ago
        >> So this person should get a penalty which in some ways is more severe than what murderers get? Being deported is way more humane than imprisonments. Personally, to me, being controlled than governments, corporations, etc logging my identity and any other information as they want is from of control I neither agreed to, nor would and would happily deport myself to a country than did not. >> if I publish my own name and address in a public space, and then someone else who doesn't like me takes that information and republishes it in a manner I disapprove of That would not be possible, at least in a significant way; any directly or indirectly identifiable information digitally published would require approval and would be revocable. ___ Again, might point is two parts: (1) people would never agree to this; (2) but if they did, there is nothing I am aware of the would make it impossible.
manicdee 4y ago
Absolutely it should be a criminal offence to doxx people. If someone isn’t committing a crime and prefers to use a pseudonym, more power to them. If you deliberately publish their identity without permission, to the deepest layer of Hell for you. In the middle are various levels of negligence and poor handling of PII which should attract severe punishment to provide economic incentive to protect PII or simply not collect it in the first place.
- jbverschoor 4y ago
  There’s a proposal to make it a criminal offense here in NL. The whole goal of doxing is intimidation.

vlunkr 4y ago

That doesn't apply here. There's no remaining anonymous for someone who didn't attempt to hide their identity.

O__________O 4y ago
Are you saying it is _Why’s fault he was doxed? If so, I disagree.
- pen2l 4y ago
  He wasn't really "doxed", I mean, he used to give presentations at Rails conferences: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNsQxI2PdAI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNsQxI2PdAI He was a wonderful and quirky man. A true artist. And artists, unfortunately, seem to have a sort of tortured relationship with the world sometimes. I hope he's found his peace wherever he is. I'm sure he understands how much he touched and inspired so many of us. Shine on, _why, wherever you are.
  - culi 4y ago
    He literally deleted all of this because someone posted his legal name and personal info online. Edit: they had pics of his wife and a screenshot of his home on Google Maps... That's doxxing
    - smcl 4y ago
      That's horrifying, I cannot think why on earth someone would do that to him
      - O__________O 4y ago
        Not only horrifying, but more often than not, being doxed is followed by progressively worse experiences like: malicious lawsuits, false accusations, stalking, unwanted potential harmful mail, random visitors, death threats, swattings, physical harm, etc — not only against the person doxed, but others who are of significance to them.

aliqot 4y ago

Absolutely. Sometimes people get known, against their will, for events beyond their control. There is an example that comes to mind of a crime being interrupted by a member of the community. The criminal was not named but the person who thwarted the crime was. They perceive this as having had a negative influence on their career search, as the first thing that appears when searching their name on mainstream search engines is "Person from X city, apprehended during Y crime". Is this okay? Should this person have a right to "be forgotten"? Even if we assume this person could somehow articulate a manner, method and value of negative impact this association has caused, is there a correct avenue to address this? - The news outlets are not doing anything wrong, they largely have reported only facts. They're precluded from mentioning the perpetrator by name, and the good Samaritan is reported by name as having intervened in the crime and preventing it from escalating; these are indisputable facts. - Is the person reviewing job applicants to blame for possibly not going past the title of an article when searching a prospect's name and city? Unfortunately as reality here has shown, there is no correct way forward. Legislatively, the USA does not hold the rights of the good Samaritan above the Constitutional rights of the press and witnesses. Imagine the feelings that develop in the good Samaritan in realizing they're powerless against the public record while having done nothing wrong and being accused of no crime.