3 ms·
>but we should not make that choice for others. Much of the HN crowd has their finances intertwined with forcing these kinds of choices on consumers. Sometimes
by water-your-self 4y ago
>but we should not make that choice for others.
Much of the HN crowd has their finances intertwined with forcing these kinds of choices on consumers. Sometimes I dream of an awful de-anonymized internet where your financial holdings are bound to every post that you make online. I think binding that incentive might change how we ingest opinions.
- lrvick 4y agoAlready on the internet we can choose to use our real name when we are comfortable having our reputation tied to our words giving them more weight, and we can also be anonymous other times when we are okay with our words holding very little weight, but also very little risk to us. I think many people, if they find a comment really impactful, will take a look and see if this was said by someone using their real name and if there are obviously relevant major corporate biases they didn't disclose. Or maybe I am weird and am just trying to justify that I personally do this often. Regardless, both anonymous and identified communication are very valuable depending on the particular goal, and it should always be a switch everyone is empowered to be able flip at any time. Sometimes when I am testing out ideas to decide how I even feel about something myself, I may choose to be anonymous. Most of the time, I am fine with most of my posts on HN being under my real name and tied to my reputation and that of the security and privacy consulting company I run. I still reserve the right to change my mind and be wrong sometimes and trust most of my target customers to give me some room for that :)