Skip to content
Switch branches/tags
Go to file
Cannot retrieve contributors at this time
title author created date status
Issa Rice

Some thoughts on anonymity... (for now)

  • that 4chan article

  • the other one on anon bbses


  • also quite useful for some things, like [Belle de Jour](!w Belle_de_Jour_%28writer%29) and activists etc.

  • Why Did why the lucky stiff Quit?

    There are lots of convincing arguments for anonymity–e.g., political or physical retribution for expressing opinions unpopular with corporations or organizations. But another perfectly good one that may apply here is that, for _why, the pseudonym was part of the game. He was doing performance art with a superhero mask on. Part of the fun was the anonymity itself. And when that was gone, at least some of the magic disappeared with it.

  • Why I wiped my LinkedIn profile

  • scanning

    • benefits:
      • candor
      • minimizes persecution/humiliation
    • drawbacks:
      • promotes short-term thinking
  • David Kirkpatrick writes in The Facebook Effect (p 199):

    "Having two identities for yourself is an example of a lack of integrity," Zuckerberg says moralistically. But he also makes a case he sees as pragmatic---that "the level of transparency the world has now won't support having two identities for a person." In other words, even if you want to segregate your personal from your professional information you won't be able to, as information about you proliferates on the Internet and elsewhere. He would say the same about any images one individual seeks to project---for example, a teenager who acts docile at home but is a drug-using reprobate with his friends.

    Zuckerberg, along with a key group of his colleagues, also believes that by openly acknowledging who we are and behaving consistently among all our friends, we will help create a healthier society. In a more "open and transparent" world, people will be held to the consequences of their actions and be more likely to behave responsibly. "To get people to this point where there's more openness---that's a big challenge," says Zuckerberg. "But I think we'll do it. I just think it will take time. The concept that the world will be better if you share more is something that's pretty foreign to a lot of people and it runs into all these privacy concerns."

    and later (p 202--203):

    Long-time Facebook programmer Charlie Cheever (now departed from thecompany) is another skeptic: "I feel Mark doesn't believe in privacy that much, or at least believes in privacy as a stepping-stone. Maybe he's right, maybe he's wrong." By "stepping-stone," Cheever means Zuckerberg sees privacy as something Facebook should offer people until they get over their need for it.