Topic: The Ethics of Pseudonymity (Read 832 times)

don't worry they will perish soon enough. and don't forget most of those people discovered internet with facebook and if not with you-tube/porn. they have no clues.

Anonymity begets a rumination unknown origin—lending, unto criticism thereof, a relative purity.

People like to argue all day "if you have nothing to hide, then what are you worried about?". I argue this is a bullshit statement. If you have nothing to hide why do you wear clothes? Why don't you post your credit card number and pin on your facebook? Why don't you sign up for every contest form you can find? Why don't you show your mother the types of pornography that you like? EVERYONE, and I mean every last person on Earth has something they don't want one or more people knowing about them, and often for very good reasons.

In addition to this argument, there is the further argument that an environment where information is totally transparent is DANGEROUS to the owner of said info. Criminals love gathering data just as much as governments, and they can use it in ways you never imagined. Additionally many of these massive databases that have been built over the last few decades have been compromised REPEATEDLY, and at the very highest levels of security available. The very existence of such databases is a threat to all those who have information about themselves within it.

Therefore by this logic I argue that there a lot more reasons to stay anonymous than there are to be transparent, and all you idiots out there crying about how it makes it harder to tell the good guys from the bad guys, let me ask you this... does knowing the name of your perpetrator prevent him from violating your trust in any way? I contend that people should focus on learning the behavioral traits of scammers rather than their names in order to best counter their activities.

A recent thread (https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/anonymity-tips-829091) got me to thinking. Is it OK to try to be anonymous/pseudonymous on the internet? I saw some replies in that thread and some other threads too that say it's "shady" or only for people trying to commit crimes or do something dishonest. But it seems obvious to me that there are legit reasons for people not to reveal their identity.

I think Satoshi definitely made the right decision. It's also funny that some people don't trust altcoin developers unless they "know who they are." Didn't Satoshi set the right standard?

Maybe this is a holdover from pre-internet days. In real life, I like to look someone in the eye and get to know them so I can judge their character. (Of course, there are con-artists in real life who've mastered the right eye contact.) But on the internet there's none of this anyway, so what's the point in giving "names"?

I'm starting to think using a pseudonym on the internet is like wearing clothes in real life. I don't want to see most people naked, and seeing them naked wouldn't help me judge their character anyway. What good does knowing someone's "name" on the internet do me?

Am I missing something?