9 ms·
I completely understand and actually agree with your stance. Consider this, the personal blog we love reading can remain anonymous, because it is private in the
by fyredge 6d ago
I completely understand and actually agree with your stance. Consider this, the personal blog we love reading can remain anonymous, because it is private in the sense that it is ostensibly the writings of a single person, it is not a platform.
To bring it back to analog, newspapers are platforms, where journalists are identified members of the public and can be held accountable for their words.
If you would like more personal stories, by all means, search for the personal blog online and share them with your friends privately. But if you share it on a public platform like HN, you are making an editorial decision that this is worth sharing to the masses and thus should be scrutinized.
- voakbasda 6d agoIf the blog is publicly published, so the author should be unmasked. Identification schemes would be fine if there were never abused, but every single instance of them has been abused in the past. There is zero reason to believe it will it be different on the internet. Are you familiar with how the DMCA gets abused? Do you really believe that bad actors will not find similar ways to abuse an identification system?
- fyredge 6d agoOh, that's not what I meant. It's the person who shared the content publicly that needs to be deanonymized, not the author. Think of it like advertising on billboards. When you partake in an activity with explicit intent to persuade others, you should declare who you are first. That's why my target has been solely focused on social media. Personal blogs don't advertise, social media does. Just like how a private business conducts themselves privately, but advertisements of a company should make clear if it is self advertisement or someone else advertising on behalf of them.