> If we had not allowed the use of [anonymity] we would not have the works of John Locke, Marx or Kierkegaard... > Today we carry our cell phones with us, whic

> If we had not allowed the use of [anonymity] we would not have the works of John Locke, Marx or Kierkegaard... > Today we carry our cell phones with us, which identifies us, and that sometimes means that people do not show up when they need to. I defend a system that protects us, as long as we do not commit a crime. So wait; they start by saying that anonymity protects dissidents from criticism. Fair enough; then she applies that logic to smartphones, and says that she agrees with digital anonymity unless you're considered a dissident by the state. How would John Locke, Marx or Kierkegaard protect themselves from an absolutist state if they were all publishing their ideas under a government-documented pseudonym?