> An information leak 30 years ago was bad, but it had a fairly limited impact radius. Today it can lose you your house, your savings, your relationships, and even your life ("swatting" comes to mind).

So you are afraid of minor information leaks getting you killed, but you’re also trying to tell us that online anonymity is a bad thing?

Come on. This argument isn’t even coherent from paragraph to paragraph.

> I don't think it's reasonable to keep dreaming of the 90s or 00s when the internet was a comparatively innocent place

This is such a strange argument as the internet was most definitely NOT an innocent place, even relatively speaking, in that period.

I think there is a lot of nostalgic history rewriting in these claims. Much like political movements that claim that the past was a better time, it’s easy to only remember the good parts of how things were in the past.

▲

simonask 14 hours ago | parent [-]

[flagged]

▲

Aurornis 13 hours ago | parent [-]

> I neither believe nor did express any of the opinions you accuse me of.

I directly quoted your beliefs that minor information leaks on the internet can lose your house and get you killed, as well as your claim that the internet was significantly more innocent in the past.

These were the points you were putting forward along with your insistence that we have to “be real” about the problems of anonymity on the internet.

Its hard for me to believe that you don’t recognize the dissonance between the two points you were putting forward.

Your silly “Are you an American” attempt at an insult or rebuttal reveals the level of conversation you’re having, though.

	▲	simonask 5 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		You said: > So you are afraid of minor information leaks getting you killed, but you’re also trying to tell us that online anonymity is a bad thing? Which is a really severe misrepresentation of my argument. My argument is that anonymity has drawbacks, and that it's bad to just ignore those drawbacks. > Its hard for me to believe that you don’t recognize the dissonance between the two points you were putting forward. But there absolutely is a dissonance? This is what's called a dilemma: Online anonymity protects some people, and puts other people at risk. If competent people ignore the latter, incompetent people will be trying to solve it instead, so we get these laws. > Your silly “Are you an American” attempt at an insult or rebuttal reveals the level of conversation you’re having, though. Sorry about the accusation, it was somewhat flippant. It just seems you and others read an opinion that goes slightly against your own, and immediately you assume that I actually hold the polar opposite opinion, which I don't.
	▲	RajT88 12 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		He was definitely trying to make a point, and then immediately undercut it. It is not just you.