|
| ▲ | cgriswald 3 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| I agree with your last paragraph but “real names” isn’t a solution. Instagram comments are filled with people saying awful, stupid things using their real names, faces, and enough information to find their locations. Additionally I’d say this to your face. Pseudonymity isn’t about disowning word and actions. |
|
| ▲ | armchairhacker 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| But how would they be held accountable? Who gets to decide right vs wrong? How do you ensure the accountability mechanism isn’t used against you? Today, people online are “held accountable” via harassment, threats, SWATting, and such directed towards their friends/family/employer, by internet lunatics who exist across the political spectrum. If you’re popular enough, it doesn’t matter if you’re a leftist, rightist, or literally Mr. Rogers; you’ll get haters who go out of their way to hurt you using whatever PII and vulnerability you expose. Or if you’re not popular, but unlucky and post something mildly controversial from either the mainstream left or right; or if you’re very unlucky. Or if you’re publicly a woman, you’ll face sexual harassment and potentially stalking. And some of these haters and sex pests have nothing to lose, so holding them accountable doesn’t solve the issue. I do think a solution involves holding people accountable, but carefully. Perhaps to start, people form overlapping social groups, so a system where a group can only punish people within that group (e.g. banning them from posting), but can’t outside (e.g. harassing them or people close to them, especially in-person, or threatening their job). |
|
| ▲ | yifanl 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| This just makes the internet a place only for the overtly shameless, which is certainly different, but you'd need to convince me it'd be better. |
|
| ▲ | kevin061 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Unfortunately that does not really work for people who live in countries governed by oppressive regimes, or people who are in any way different (immigrant, LGBT, etc), and in fact, even posting with the best of intentions will have people wanting you dead. Ask me how I know. |
|
| ▲ | derangedHorse 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Pseudonymity allows people to freely express ideas with others without fear of it seeping into all aspects of their lives. How else would individuals share and get feedback on things like health issues, relationships, employment, etc. without the threat of repercussion? The internet is so powerful as a tool for connection because of this layer of pseudonymity and striving for a 'nicer' internet is being content with a shallow version of the interconnected human experience. |
|
| ▲ | tehjoker 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| this was the idea being sold in like 2011 or wherever the real names policy was implemented in social media. we can now confidently say it doesn’t work and also deprives people of privacy unfortunately |
| |
| ▲ | Telaneo 3 days ago | parent [-] | | It works fine for people with some level of common sense, decency and desire to not be seen as stupid/extremists/whatever other negative adjective. Unfortunately, these are not universal human traits and desires. | | |
| ▲ | 01HNNWZ0MV43FF 3 days ago | parent | next [-] | | No, it just favors the majority. People say racist stuff under their real names online all the time, but it's not safe to use your real name as a trans person because of groups like Kiwi Farms. Have you heard of Kiwi Farms? They are bullies who would immediately benefit from real-name policies. | |
| ▲ | esseph 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | A person of character is normally inflexible enough to inevitably make enemies. | | |
| ▲ | Telaneo 3 days ago | parent [-] | | Very fair. In that case, I guess the problem is that the internet is just so large that anyone of any not-completely-milquetoast opinion inevitably makes some enemies, and those enemies aren't easily avoidable, nor necessarily small in number. |
| |
| ▲ | cgriswald 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | No one in my real life would consider me anything other than kind, giving, and rational. I share things with them I wouldn’t say online. Even Kyburz admits to self censoring. That doesn’t mean I’m an extremist or even wrong. To some I’m a nazi, which is absurd. To others I’m a filthy pinko commie, which is equally absurd. | | |
| ▲ | Telaneo 3 days ago | parent [-] | | I don't feel the same way. I avoid a few topics that people probably would call me an extremist for opinions about, but they're rarely topics of conversation anyway. The internet is full of people from all ends of all spectra, so inevitably everyone will be called either a literal Hitler or a literal Stalin given enough time on the web. That doesn't make either of those extremes correct, nor even worth considering. They're both absurd, as you say, but that doesn't reflect poorly on you, but rather on the people making the claim. | | |
| ▲ | cgriswald 3 days ago | parent [-] | | Doesn’t that argue against the third part of your claim? | | |
| ▲ | Telaneo 3 days ago | parent [-] | | What part are you referring to? | | |
| ▲ | cgriswald 3 days ago | parent [-] | | > It works fine for people with some level of common sense, decency and desire to not be seen as stupid/extremists/whatever other negative adjective. Emphasis indicating the part of the claim I’m addressing. (To be clear, I agree that those who hold such views should be dicarded.) | | |
| ▲ | Telaneo 3 days ago | parent [-] | | I'm not sure what part of my comment argued against that? People who don't care about being stupid or extremists or whatever else aren't going to be stopped by using their real name, since they by definition don't care. If they did care, then them using their real name would have prevented them from posting inane opinions online. I'm of the opinion that you shouldn't let those opinions prevent you from posting your own freely. Discard them, ignore them, block them, whatever, and then go about with your life as if you never saw them. | | |
| ▲ | cgriswald 3 days ago | parent [-] | | I think I’ve misunderstood you then? If you desire to not be seen as an extremist… isn’t being seen as an extremist…
not desirable, regardless of who see you that way? | | |
| ▲ | Telaneo 3 days ago | parent [-] | | No, I think you've understood me just fine, but rather found at least part of the core problem. For most of my opnions, I don't consider myself to be an extremist, and anyone claiming that I have an extremist in those areas can have their opinion dismissed on the same grounds anyone calling me a literal Hitler or Stalin. A good example I recently saw someone calling people who use adblockers terrorists. The absurdity is obvious and there's no point in considering their opinion on the matter. I don't care about those people calling me an extremist, just as I don't care about them calling me a literal Hitler or a literal Stalin. There are a select few areas where I probably would be validly called an extremist. I myself don't consider myself that, but I can understand why people would think that. And this is probably a big part of the problem. Most extremists probably don't consider themselves that, at least not without a decent amount of introspection, so the number of people who have at least one asinine opinion, on the same level as some of my own, is probably fairly large. So both I and some random on the internet, even if both of us are out there with our full names, can post asinine opnions and get in arguments, and see each other as the idiot who isn't prevented by their full name being out there from posting stupid shit on the internet, and we'll thus see each other as the extremist, but ourselves as the sane party of any discussion. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | exe34 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | nowadays wanting public healthcare and advocating for the rule of law can get you branded a terrorist in certain third world countries. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | phkahler 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| >> I think the internet would be a lot nicer place if people were held accountable for the things they say and do. I agree. I've often advocated for zero anonymity by default. Everyone traceable by anyone. The thinking is that bad behavior (threats and such) could be reported. There was enough pushback to make me rethink that. People will still make threats when you know who they are - less often but they will. Offline (real world) harassment is still possible too without being identified, though thats getting harder every day. Verified identity online is not the same thing as being held accountable. |
| |
| ▲ | SXX 3 days ago | parent | next [-] | | The problem with no anonimity is that not all people are rational even if they're dont have shizophrenia or something worse. You can be a small guy doing your small thing and sharing it online. Unfortunately you never know when and why you gonna become a supervillain in eyes of craze. | |
| ▲ | lesuorac 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Traceability and Anonymity aren't antonyms. This fact comes up with Bitcoin a lot. I and everybody else doesn't know who a random hash is but all the activity involving that address is highly traceable. So all you need is an oracle (like a cryptoexchange) that can convert a hash into a person to enforce any penalties against a person. Same could be true of the internet. You notice illegal activity from a specific IP; that source is responsible for that activity (they did it!). In general that IP is going to be some intermediary (like an ISP) who was relying a packet from a different IP so it'll be on them to provide the next person who is accountable and do you do this chain until you get to an end subscriber. Everybody is anonymous by default but can be traced back to an actual person. | |
| ▲ | exe34 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | the problem often in conflict is that the incentives aren't symmetrical. if you and somebody exactly like you are put in a ring with a knife each, you'd both have the same things to lose. but often times in real life, and much more so online, one of you has a lot less to lose. in a conflict in the street, if he gives you a brain injury, you might lose your job, mortgage, family, etc. it's just his next stay in prison, he has nothing more than his freedom to lose for the 5th time. if you give him a brain injury, you might lose your job, your mortgage, family, etc. he'll spend some time in hospital and then he'll be back on the street doing the same thing in a year. online, it's worse, because now you can be matched with the bum with the least to lose within a 50 miles radius. | |
| ▲ | lII1lIlI11ll 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | > I agree. I've often advocated for zero anonymity by default. Everyone traceable by anyone. The thinking is that bad behavior (threats and such) could be reported. There was enough pushback to make me rethink that. People will still make threats when you know who they are - less often but they will. Offline (real world) harassment is still possible too without being identified, though thats getting harder every day. Nowadays people can just SWAT you anonymously and cheaply. Or pressure your employer to fire you without identifying themselves to you. |
|
|
| ▲ | squigz 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > I think the internet would be a lot nicer place if people were held accountable for the things they say and do. What does this mean? What sort of accountability do you have in mind? |
|
| ▲ | michaelhoney 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Same: I decided c. 2000 that it was better to be the real me everywhere and to live with the benefits but also the restrictions. I am probably a kinder, more constructive person for it. |
|
| ▲ | anal_reactor 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > I think the internet would be a lot nicer place if people were held accountable for the things they say and do. Agreed. Equal rights for all people regardless of race wouldn't have happened if individuals starting the first discussions were held accountable for their words. |
|
| ▲ | AndrewKemendo 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| This I stand behind my words and that’s part of my social identity and there’s an imperfect record. It’s social ledger that has an incredible memory tied to my mortal label. Good bad ugly and just plain wrong. |
|
| ▲ | BobbyTables2 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Probably also doing an undeserved benefit to all the others with the moniker. |
|
| ▲ | 01HNNWZ0MV43FF 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| There wouldn't be any furry porn, though |
|
| ▲ | jay_kyburz 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Wish my spelling was better :< |
|
| ▲ | nospice 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| > I think the internet would be a lot nicer place if people were held accountable for the things they say and do. Then I think you've been very fortunate (or sheltered). It's really not about accountability in any rational sense: it's not that I want to be a secret Nazi. It's that when you interact with enough people on the internet, you will probably encounter at least one person who isn't nice. Someone who gets upset not because of what you say, but maybe simply because you're "not worthy" of the attention of others. Who feels humiliated because you politely corrected them about some minor detail. Or maybe who just flat out misinterprets what you're trying to say. Again, in a circle of real-life friends, this is rare. But in a sampling of 10,000 random strangers, even the nicest person will probably have one sworn enemy. And yeah, I get it: anonymity shields the bad guys too. But on balance, I think there's a lot more good than bad when you look at pseudonymous content on the internet. |
| |