Slashdot Log In
Anonymous Online Publication - Fad or Trend?
Posted by
Cliff
on Sat Jul 01, 2006 07:50 PM
from the freely-speak-your-mind dept.
from the freely-speak-your-mind dept.
An anonymous reader asks: "Across the web, stories abound regarding censorship and persecution of those who publish content online that may be offensive or conflicting toward certain governments or ideals. It almost seems that you can't attach your name to anything without being heavily scrutinized for the opinions you express. Lately though, I've begun to see several communities that promote an atmosphere of anonymity to protect their users and facilitate open communication on tough subjects. PostSecret is one of the most popular of these sites, allowing a one-way publication medium for visitors to vent their frustrations, similar to Group Hug. However, both of these sites are one-way mediums, and do not provide for anonymous interaction of users. Is anonymous blogging and publication a brief fad, or a serious, growing trend?"
"One rare example I've found that allows a truly open anonymous mode of communication (dissimilar to Slashdot's own automatic demotion of 'Anonymous Cowards'), is the Teen Angst Central, or Tangst. Operated by a group of high schoolers and hosted by Google's Blogger service, its editors publish posts made anonymously by visitors, with comments and discussion made to the site sprouting from a community bonded by anonymity. I think this concept can easily be applied to other aspects of online society, though I have yet to see many examples beyond the simple angst-driven outpouring of feelings."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Pseudonymous (Score:4, Insightful)
In the past I've been spanked over "controversial" things I've published online, so I use a pseudonym for that sort of thing.
Re:Pseudonymous (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Nobody knows... (Score:5, Funny)
* What kind of cats you chase
* Where you like to sniff butts
* What kind of dog food you like
* etc...
Parent
Secure and Historied (Score:3, Interesting)
This is a no-brainer; governments rarely become less restrictive with the passage of time, since governments are expected to, you know, "do things" and "solve problems." Regardless what political philosophy they adhere to, governments just aren't prone to seeing their duty as one of removing interference from citizens' lives. So all else being equal, a nation's code of justice will tend to be
Re:Secure and Historied (Score:2)
As somebody wise once observed about w
Re:Pseudonymous (Score:2)
Um, I don't know about you... (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Erm ok? (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes you can submit it as 'anonymous' but oops, cant do anything about server logs.
Re:Erm ok? (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Erm ok? (Score:2)
backbone sniffers make logs pointless (Score:2)
With AT&T (and most likely many other telcos) giving the NSA access to backbones for an all-you-can-eat snoopfest, server logs are irrelevant- and ultimately less useful; they can't be used by "law enforcement" as fast as a keyword hit on a sniffer on a major backbone.
I laughed when Freenet came around- I played with it, found it uselessly slow and difficult to navigate. I hope it has improved, because it may be the o
Re:backbone sniffers make logs pointless (Score:5, Funny)
Dude, you should read the Betty Crocker Anarchist's Cookbook. The exploding cupcakes on page 42 are to die for!!
Parent
A brief fad... (Score:3, Funny)
How anonymous is it (Score:4, Informative)
Re:How anonymous is it (Score:2)
Depends what you mean attack? I mean, I heard of people being denied jobs after their prospective employer googled their name and found things they posted that were objectionable (political or otherwise) online -
Re:How anonymous is it (Score:2)
But if you want to get technical, if you threaten the president here or make a bomb threat in the US, you will be arrested just as well for just "exercising" your freedom of speech.
Re:How anonymous is it (Score:2)
Except for conspiracy to crime etc.. And that is one of the main issues that makes truly anonymous speech so difficult.
It's not a fad ..... (Score:2)
Re:It's not a fad ..... (Score:2)
Re:It's not a fad ..... (Score:2)
Anonimity also for S/W Development (Score:2, Interesting)
Anonymity cf. OSS (Score:2)
As I said previously above, civic rights will tend to erode, and the DMCA is a prime example of this erosion. This raises a bevy of ethical issues, but if attempts to keep speech free fail at the civic & political levels, the OSS community could conceivably be the one to lead a charge towards securing them at the technological level in spite of laws to the con
Who needs to be anonymous? (Score:5, Funny)
anonymity (Score:2, Insightful)
Anyway, that's how I feel.
If you think you are right then say so. And if someone disagrees then you can find out why.
John Fenley
Re:anonymity (Score:5, Insightful)
Even if it will cost you your job? your freedom? or your life?
Parent
Re:anonymity (Score:4, Insightful)
So you don't have anything to say that could cost you your employment, freedom, or life ...
... and/or if you do, you haven't actually tried saying such ...
Uh-huh. They sure will. Especially if the entity prosecuting or suing you has sufficient legal/political clout or just plain old cash. Of course, you should realize that it might be cheaper or more politically expedient for them to just kill you or imprison you - of course, by the above, you probably believe that sort of thing doesn't happen in the good ole U.S. of A, right? I suggest you test that theory at your first opportunity - that way you can claim credit for what you've said with greater credibility, eh?
Okay, I will not only take your word for it, I will [continue to] defend your right to do just that, if that's your choice - just as I will continue to defend my own right to Speech - including my Right to use names other than the one on my Social Security card. IANAL, but it is my understanding that use of an "alias" is not [yet] illegal in most states in the US. I would like to think that you (having made the claim of being a supporter of the Right to Speech) for your own part you would defend the Rights of others to their own choice not to put their "real names" on things they have to say. Not all of us are particularly interested in laying claim to the information we propagate, or counting coup by saying "I told you so", y'know? If you think that makes what we say "not worth saying", I strongly encourage you to not listen...
I realize that you stopped short of saying that anonymous speech should be prohibitted under the Law, but you should realize that such is the underlying issue here. There have been, and no doubt will continue to be, efforts to make anonymous speech - particularly anonymous speech via the Internet - illegal in the US. I think that would be a shame, but there are many who do not agree.
Finally, I commend to you the Revolutionary War period writings published under the nom de plume "E Publius" - perhaps you could have convinced the newspapermen of that era that anonymity for the likes of Patrick Henry was un-necesary and in fact rendered the words "not worth saying", but for my part, I'm gratified to follow in the footsteps of such writers - some of whose names we still don't know - and have no particular problem accepting the ideas presented without tying them to some name registered in the county birth records of the era.
"You have the Right / to Free Speech / ... unless you are actually stupid enough to actually try it" —The Clash, Know Your Rights
Parent
Re:anonymity (Score:2)
John Fenley
And yet it moves.- Galileo or some guy who said he was anyway...
Federalist Papers? (Score:4, Insightful)
And loser pays for court costs (which is the way it is here in Canada) to level the playing field by reducing extortive suit filing.
There's lots of ways to go about finding subscribers to your views but I believe most of them aren't needed yet in the United States. Places like Saudi Arabia and Iran should be the backdrop to serious discussion of why anonymity matters.
Xenu (Score:2)
Freenet is really made for this... (Score:5, Informative)
Freenet's currently got four "summer of code" [freenetproject.org] projects under way, plus their full-time coder. I'm not sure I like the network changes in 0.7 but I'm trusting that the developers know the critical points better than I do.
The stuff you find on Freenet ranges from the obligatory porn and anarchy junk, to weird conspiracy theory stuff, fairly sane political expression, DeCSS and similar technical content, and lots of "flogs", the name of which is yours to absorb.
Frost [sf.net] is a Usenet-like messaging system that uses Freenet as its back-end message store. It also takes a while to get going; after starting your Frost instance you might want to come back in 20 minutes to get the updated boards list, add a bunch of new boards, and give it another 20 minutes to pull messages in those boards. Once your Frost is up and running, you'll start to appreciate what Freenet's really capable of. Search the available files, or participate in a few discussions. Realize that the message transport latency might be anywhere from a few minutes to many hours, so correspondence will be reminiscent of Fidonet speeds.
Seriously, you owe it to yourself to check this stuff out. Don't claim to know internet anonymity without giving Freenet a few days' effort.
Blogging Anonymously (Score:5, Insightful)
Having blogged for several years, I've come to wish I'd started out and remained anonymous. While I might be willing to expose my own mistakes and foibles, the things I say can unintentionally hurt those I love. As someone who is active in my church, there are certain topics I dare not go near, and other topics I wonder if I'm just asking for trouble. The "Deb Series [unspace.net]," while possibly some of my best writing, also caused problems.
I've watched bloggers get serious grief from families, co-workers and other communities they belong to because of what they write. The lessons are painful to watch.
In my own case, in the real world, I've trashed my career multiple times for things like accademic integrity and standing up for a co-worker who's being sexually harassed. I've lost friends for saying the truth, and God help me, it's made me a bit of a coward. I've been burned; I don't like it. I'm willing to be burned again, but it's going to have to be a serious fight. On some issues, I've backed down.
I hate that, but if I don't protect myself, I won't do anyone any good.
There's a book out right now, "Orbit [amazon.com] by John J. Nance that speaks of a man alone on a doomed and communicationless 3 hour orbital tour. The man is free to write the truth because he believes he is going to die and the laptop will not be recovered for decades. He doesn't have to worry about what people will think. He also doesn't know there's a one-way connection to Earth, and billions of people are reading his every word.
I wish I could blog like that. I'm not sure why I haven't just scrapped my current blog and started anew, except that I doubt it would stay anonymous very long.
Anonymity provides a freedom that is both precious and necessary for freedom to flourish. Perhaps anonymity will be crushed beneath an over-reaching government. The loss may not be apparent initially, but in the long term, it will be devastating.
Freedom of speech often needs the freedom to be anonymous.
Anonymous speech thriving (Score:5, Interesting)
However, there are plenty of countries in the West - including America - where unpopular minorities require anonymous speech to avoid government retribution.
A friend of mine in Indiana called a conservative radio host (Rick Roberts) in California in April 2005, in order to give a contradicting opinion - and the next day state agents showed up at his house and took away his 2 year old son, causing his son a great deal of anxiety and eventually destroying my friend's marriage. He's still going through the system, trying to recover his son, over a year later.
There are also the death threats, of which I've received a few myself - from so-called Christians, Hippies, and everything in between. Damn straight it's nice to have some anonymity!
And we will continue to need that anonymity as long as a corrupt media continues to perpetuate the lie that anyone who is attracted to children must be a predator, despite an abundance of evidence to the contrary.
In any case, in our community proxies and/or TOR are the norm. We know for a fact that our government IS spying on us and seeking to do us harm.
Re:Anonymous speech thriving (Score:2)
I'm assuming you're referring to TOR [eff.org], not TOR [lethargiclad.com] (though he's pretty cool too).
I also think Freenet [sourceforge.net] and Darknet [bearcave.com] type networks will play increasingly important roles in the inexorable globalization of free speech. What's needed is a way to create secure, historied pseudonyms that are peer validated, verifiable by signature, but incapable of being route-traced. If done right, such a system could potentially put freedom of speech and trade beyond the reach of government suppression.
Re:Anonymous speech thriving (Score:2, Insightful)
However, the agencies that supposedly protect children are largely unaccountable and get away with almost anything - and what better way to silence others who may be parents, than to take away a child? These agencies are not held as strictly to Constitutional tests.
If you think government agents in the U.S. would not stoop to this, you are truly naive.
Waco. Ruby Ridge. Wounded Knee. Internment
Re:Proof of the need for Anonymous Speech (Score:4, Interesting)
Points for using an organisation no-one is likely to admit to wanting to join. What about NAACP? Any other organisation - please, for the benefit of us unwashed masses, tell us what is fundamentally wrong with supporting a cause without 'being subversive' (Ooh, we can't have that! I mean, look what happened when all the blacks decided America's white power way of life was a way of life they were not going to stand for!)
Am I being inflammatory? Hell yes... because you're using incorrectly exaggerated examples to smack someone down as being dangerous and 'subversive', when the reality is you're advocating the censorship of views you disagree with. This is the same reason why freedom of speech protects organisations such as the KKK, militia groups, and NAMBLA, regardless of how heinous their ideas or beliefs may be.
Your polygamy example is another fatuous and inflamed 'example' - the LDS church hasn't "advocated" polygamy in a century.
Parent
Dont' Get It (Score:4, Insightful)
Why shame yourself in public? It's not like attaching your name to your insipid and boring personal "I had eggs for breakfast" blog is going to bring you fame and fortune. Go anonymous and have some fun. Stop doing everything to get attention.
Re:Dont' Get It (Score:3, Insightful)
At which point I'll wonder: "Who was this person, who recommended that everybody hide their identity, in order to fool employers? Is this somebody that I really want to hire?"
Re:Dont' Get It (Score:4, Funny)
Dude! Give us a link!
Parent
Re:Dont' Get It (Score:2)
It makes it too easy for potential employers to cast prejudices because we all change our opinions over the years as we mature.
Re: Anonymous Online Publication - Fad or Trend? (Score:2)
A distinction needs to be made (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? (Score:2)
Then we are fucked and need to fix the problem. There are many ways for cops to be corrupt, abusing access to server logs is one of many possible actions. Note that tried and tested mechanisms are in place to prevent police corruption, but that does not make them infallable.
What happens when a whole nation has gone insane?
Ok so give me any law you can think of. What happens when the country goes insane, or the police go corrupt? Law X doesn't
E.T. Posts (Score:2)
Re:E.T. Posts (Score:2)
Time will tell. (Score:2)
IF people have anything worthwhile to say, and IF our Constitutionally-protected freedom of speech actually means anything to us, then yes, it is here to stay.
anonymity is a must sometimes.... (Score:2, Interesting)
Anonymity is important (Score:5, Interesting)
The most effective spam fighting effort [spews.org] is totally anonymous; they have to be, because that's the only way they can avoid being sued into oblivion by deep-pocketed croporations (it's outright ironic that in order to protect their freedom of speech - saying that so-and-so is a spammer, they have to register their domain in Siberia [dnsstuff.com], of all places!!!)
Spammers are outright criminals and will stop at nothing to damage antispammers.
Plenty of people had a load of trouble from a spectacularly inept spammer [google.ca].
For example, the author of this page [216.137.100.175] (a page denouncing the spammer) had the spammer complain to the police which launched a criminal investigation that found nothing. After this failed, he barrages everyone who mirrors the page with complaints to their ISPs (this page [chickenboner.com] get 5 DMCA takedown notices PER DAY).
When the police complaints did lead nowhere, he simply harassed various police departments [216.137.100.175].
Finally, seeing that the takedown notice make the mirrorers rotating the hosting of the relevant parts complained about, thus rendering it totally ineffective, he started to try to DDOs the sites hosting the pages.
Many of the mirrorers would never had been able to denounce that particular spammer if they had been doing so under their real identities; anonymity is particularly vital when dealing with criminals, or lawsuit-happy individuals.
Another example is this well-known spammer, threatening legal action against antispam fighters [google.ca]. If you follow the thread, you will find a frothing lunatic that demands the identity of several spamfighters who have to work anonymously in order to avoid the hassle of lawsuits from spammers.
In 2003, the same antispam outfit was sued by spammers [google.ca]. Even though the lawsuit was thrown out of court, it was not without considerable annoyance and expense to the antispammers involved.
Only absolutely positive anonymity can help protect antispammers against the spammers.
Context is usually everything (Score:2)
It won't do any good (Score:3)
Re:Postsecret? (Score:2)