3 ms·

OP hit the nail on the head. Privacy and anonymity are not the same thing. You can absolutely provide privacy without requiring anonymity. I can have privacy i

OP hit the nail on the head. Privacy and anonymity are not the same thing. You can absolutely provide privacy without requiring anonymity. I can have privacy in a conversation in my house without anonymity. I can have privacy in the woods. I don't have anonymity while walking down the street, but have pseudo-privacy. If I begin preaching on a street corner should I expect anonymity? If I join a members only fraternal hall that meets monthly, do I have anonymity? Do I have privacy? To what degree? Those are the scenarios we should be focusing on achieving. As OP said [we should not]... > >elevate internet anonymity to a new fundamental principle for organizing society This is probably the most important comment on this topic. You can't build a society on top of anonymity. The problem people should be out here solving is how to provide privacy without requiring anonymity. And when you have the itch to respond with a quick thought of "it's impossible," pause and think about how we accomplish it in the "real world" and then revisit.

mptest 2y ago
I'm not saying they're the same thing, I said explicitly anonymity is a downstream byproduct of privacy. I have yet to see a system or proposition that can maintain privacy AND kill anonymity. Every corporation could implement zero knowledge proof schemes for everything I guess. That's what some schemes like crypto identification programs aim for. >The problem people should be out here solving is how to provide privacy without requiring anonymity >How we accomplish this in the real world and revisit Maybe I'm simply ignorant. How do we achieve digitally the idea of privacy without the ability to mask your identity?
- BoiledCabbage 2y ago
  > I said explicitly anonymity is a downstream byproduct of privacy. Yes I agree that this is your assertion, and what I'm saying that that I fundamentally believe that this is wrong. Who knows, I may be wrong - but I listed a number of instances IRL where people have privacy without anonymity. The fact that people only think of privacy as downstream consequence of anonymity is the false conclusion. And to fix the internet we need to all realize that it's false. It's what we're used to, and is the only way privacy has been provided in the digital world (which is why so many including me have thought that way), but it is wrong. We first need to realize and acknowledge that it is wrong and then pursue a path the matches - just like we do in the real world.

mptest 2y ago

I'm not saying they're the same thing, I said explicitly anonymity is a downstream byproduct of privacy. I have yet to see a system or proposition that can maintain privacy AND kill anonymity. Every corporation could implement zero knowledge proof schemes for everything I guess. That's what some schemes like crypto identification programs aim for. >The problem people should be out here solving is how to provide privacy without requiring anonymity >How we accomplish this in the real world and revisit Maybe I'm simply ignorant. How do we achieve digitally the idea of privacy without the ability to mask your identity?

BoiledCabbage 2y ago
> I said explicitly anonymity is a downstream byproduct of privacy. Yes I agree that this is your assertion, and what I'm saying that that I fundamentally believe that this is wrong. Who knows, I may be wrong - but I listed a number of instances IRL where people have privacy without anonymity. The fact that people only think of privacy as downstream consequence of anonymity is the false conclusion. And to fix the internet we need to all realize that it's false. It's what we're used to, and is the only way privacy has been provided in the digital world (which is why so many including me have thought that way), but it is wrong. We first need to realize and acknowledge that it is wrong and then pursue a path the matches - just like we do in the real world.