Should anonymous posting be disallowed?

[gcorley]

It is sort of like poking fun at Biblical fundamentalist creationists and Teabaggers. You know you shouldn't, you know it is immature, but it is almost impossible to resist.

 

Gotta find the "like" button ...

[NOMBEDES]

requiring facebook logins to function. Facebook login would be one way to "enforce" Paul's idea. But that is a change that would make me leave the message board completely as I actually do like a little privacy.

 

 

Agree, I do not use Facebook for many reasons, privacy being only one of the reasons.

[DigiPete]

Educated thieves in Europe.

You would be safe posting your address and work hours here. The house hackers might take your computers. The pawn shops will not give people anything for audio gear. Same with TV's.

They hit Asians and Middle Easterns looking for cash and jewelry, and rednecks looking for guns. And of course other criminals to steal drugs and cash.

If they do not find cash, jewelry, guns, or drugs the other items are not worth carrying off. High end might go for artwork. But resale is tough here also.

The internet has made hi end audio too hard to wholesale.

Save your serial numbers for insurance purposes. Plus police. It will turn back up when changing hands.

 

 

You are talking about scum of the earth or poor drug addicts, I'm talking about professionals.

 

Valuables are stolen to order today.

Paintings, persian rugs, (Scandinavian) furniture and even high end hifi and cars.

Shopping lists of potential loot, often with pictures so you can choose the right style.

 

A RR is stolen in London to re-emerge in Kazakstan

A whole house of Scandinavian furniture and Bang & Olufsen is raided in Denmark and shipped to Dubai

A high end rig is carefully packaged in the US and delivered in Brasil.

 

This is how the world of modern thieves and stolen goods works.

[Paul R]

Every time someone posts something about how files with identical checksums can sound different, a troll from hydrogen audio gets his wings. The real problem is that people really do find some of the more far-out wacko stuff highly entertaining. It is sort of like poking fun at Biblical fundamentalist creationists and Teabaggers. You know you shouldn't, you know it is immature, but it is almost impossible to resist.

 

Pretty much exactly how I feel - and perhaps one of the best comments of the year.

[Paul R]

That's as opposed to Paul's suggestions (see prior "voting") where whole topics are banned from discussion just because they offend his sensibilities?

 

I also feel quoting that first line of my first post without the context provided by the second is a little rude. How would you suggest people prove their identity?

 

Eloise

 

No offense taken on my part Eloise, but I do think that anonymity in the 21st century internet is mythical. One would have to be totally off the grid to have any real measure of privacy. And that would be incredibly boring for social animals like us...

 

Oh and the first line in the original post was intended to get a laugh. Bill Scott's riff on it is utterly hilarious to me. Whether there is any truth in it or not, well, one must decide for one's self.

[RealAudio]

It is probably - almost certainly - imaginary of course, but anonymous posting does lead to people saying stupid things they would never say face to face, or if their real identity was known. And sometimes, people feel free to attack others because they feel sure they cannot be held accountable, no matter how untrue that idea is.

 

 

 

 

You need to get out more. The WSJ comment section requires people use their real name but that doesn't stop people from posting some of the most intolerant and frequently racist comments you can imagine. If things get out of hand on CA, Chris can always use his power as censor in chief.

[Audio_ELF]

No offense taken on my part Eloise, but I do think that anonymity in the 21st century internet is mythical. One would have to be totally off the grid to have any real measure of privacy. And that would be incredibly boring for social animals like us...

While in some respects you are right - but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to keep some privacy.

 

Eloise

[The Computer Audiophile]

The only way to attempt to enforce a real name policy is to require signing up through a Facebook link with CA. No way I would require that on CA.

[4est]

Thank you!

The only way to attempt to enforce a real name policy is to require signing up through a Facebook link with CA. No way I would require that on CA.

[realhifi]

The only way to attempt to enforce a real name policy is to require signing up through a Facebook link with CA. No way I would require that on CA.

 

Good thing seeing as I for one don't have a Facebook account.

[Teresa]

Good thing seeing as I for one don't have a Facebook account.

 

Years ago I quit Facebook, Twitter and Linkedin as I read they are all insecure as is all social media.

 

I voted Yes, perhaps a compromise of using first names due to security concerns? And if your name is already taken perhaps your first name followed by a number. If we get another Teresa, that would be Teresa2. What do you think?

[mwheelerk]

Sorry Paul I can't agree with you on this. I see no reason and feel no issue exists that's needs be addressed by the suggestion. I still appreciate many of your posts though.

[Paul R]

Sorry Paul I can't agree with you on this. I see no reason and feel no issue exists that's needs be addressed by the suggestion. I still appreciate many of your posts though.

 

No need for apologies! First, I never insist people agree with me, especially friends, and second, I may have been wrong. Possibly, at least a little. Perhaps to the point of compromising somewhat. I rather like Therese's idea...

[firedog]

No offense taken on my part Eloise, but I do think that anonymity in the 21st century internet is mythical. One would have to be totally off the grid to have any real measure of privacy. And that would be incredibly boring for social animals like us...

 

 

Paul obviously there is absolute privacy and there is relative privacy. I realize I'm not protected from people/organizations with extremely sophisticated technology; but I can protect my privacy from the millions of regular users, even some fairly sophisticated ones. That's about 99.9% of Internet users. Nickname posting is one element in this.

 

It's like locking/not locking your house.

 

Can you be burgled if you if you lock your house? Of course, any moderately sophisticated thief can get in.

 

Will you be burgled if you don't lock your house? Not necessarily, but it makes it more likely, and you open yourself up to all the lazy or unsophisticated theives. Ask the police - a lot of thieves simply look for unlocked/ easy entry homes. Any home with a minimal level of protection is skipped over as "too much trouble".

[Raym87]

I am who I am. Or am I?

[Musicophile]

My perception is that the concern for privacy is much higher in Europe than in the US.

 

Personally, I'm out if I have to give my real name here. That is not to say that I'm not happy sharing it with individuals I trust but I don't need even more stuff revealed about me than what is absolutely needed.

 

And to be honest, I don't think using your real name will fix Paul's problem in the first place. People who are obnoxious tend to be so even in person, not only virtually.

[Skeptic]

No offense taken on my part Eloise, but I do think that anonymity in the 21st century internet is mythical. One would have to be totally off the grid to have any real measure of privacy. And that would be incredibly boring for social animals like us...

I don't know, do you consider not having a social media account to be "off the grid"?

Because I have never understood why people would post private matters publicly online, as so many people seem to do (even on a "private" account, anything that goes on Facebook may as well be public) and so I have never created a social media account.

 

It probably wouldn't be too difficult to create a fake Facebook account anyway if that were to become a requirement for using "real names" on CA - it's not like they verify who you are when you create an account, do they?

 

Just because a majority of people choose to give up their right to privacy willingly for the sake of convenience, does not mean that no-one should be entitled to it.

 

Do you believe that simply having an internet connection means that you give up your rights to privacy?

[Musicophile]

 

Do you believe that simply having an internet connection means that you give up your rights to privacy?

Side note: unfortunately yes.

 

The moment you use any kind of regular search engine, you're already giving up some privacy. Google knows more about me than any physical person on this planet. So far it is a trade-off I'm willing to take, as I still hope they are not going to use it beyond more targeted marketing. But this is a willing trade-off. Same for facebook: I do have a facebook account, but beyond liking my favorite bands to stay in touch with them I barely post anything. Again, a concious decision.

 

And with 80% negative votes it seem like most here seem to agree.

 

In any case, as stated before, I don't believe giving your real name is going to help Paul's problem of some people's controversial attitude.

[Skeptic]

Side note: unfortunately yes.

 

The moment you use any kind of regular search engine, you're already giving up some privacy. Google knows more about me than any physical person on this planet. So far it is a trade-off I'm willing to take, as I still hope they are not going to use it beyond more targeted marketing. But this is a willing trade-off. Same for facebook: I do have a facebook account, but beyond liking my favorite bands to stay in touch with them I barely post anything. Again, a concious decision.

 

And with 80% negative votes it seem like most here seem to agree.

 

In any case, as stated before, I don't believe giving your real name is going to help Paul's problem of some people's controversial attitude.

Choosing to give your information to a service (Google) is not the same thing as saying that simply having an internet connection rescinds your rights to privacy though.

 

There are many alternatives to using Google search, such as DuckDuckGo or Startpage.

Even Bing has a better privacy policy than Google does, and Google has a record of ignoring privacy laws anyway.

 

If you are concerned about advertisers tracking your every move online (you should be) then you should use Firefox to browse the web and install an add-on such as EFF's Privacy Badger.

 

There are a number of other add-ons you can use which block all external requests, scripts, cookies, or advertising by default, but those can be quite inconvenient at first.

 

You should also remove any browser plug-ins such as Flash and Silverlight, though not everything supports HTML5 video yet. At the very least, you should set the browser to ask before they can be used.

 

It depends what is more important to you - privacy, or convenience?

[Musicophile]

Choosing to give your information to a service (Google) is not the same thing as saying that simply having an internet connection rescinds your rights to privacy though.

 

There are many alternatives to using Google search, such as DuckDuckGo or Startpage.

Even Bing has a better privacy policy than Google does, and Google has a record of ignoring privacy laws anyway.

 

It depends what is more important to you - privacy, or convenience?

Unfortunately, in my experience Bing (and most other search engines) are much weaker than Google when it comes to non-US results, hence the virtual monopoly Google has in most European markets.

 

So in this case, it is convenience over privacy.

[Skeptic]

Unfortunately, in my experience Bing (and most other search engines) are much weaker than Google when it comes to non-US results, hence the virtual monopoly Google has in most European markets.

 

So in this case, it is convenience over privacy.

I don't know that it's just non-US results, Google just generally seems to be the best search engine out there.

But I have recently been noticing more and more advertisements high up in the search results list, instead of useful results now.

 

Many sites simply anonymize Google results - but this will take you out of your Filter Bubble, so the results might not be as relevant as you were expecting.

[sandyk]

So far it is a trade-off I'm willing to take, as I still hope they are not going to use it beyond more targeted marketing.

 

If you sign in you can turn off targeted advertising. I looked at Nulon Synthetic Motor oil, which I did intend purchasing, but after a week I got fed up with the nagging advertisements for Nulon all of the time.

[Paul R]

I don't know, do you consider not having a social media account to be "off the grid"?

Because I have never understood why people would post private matters publicly online, as so many people seem to do (even on a "private" account, anything that goes on Facebook may as well be public) and so I have never created a social media account.

 

It probably wouldn't be too difficult to create a fake Facebook account anyway if that were to become a requirement for using "real names" on CA - it's not like they verify who you are when you create an account, do they?

 

Just because a majority of people choose to give up their right to privacy willingly for the sake of convenience, does not mean that no-one should be entitled to it.

 

Do you believe that simply having an internet connection means that you give up your rights to privacy?

 

 

You bet . The ISP's know exactly who you are, since you pay them. And they do carefully track where you browse too, even if you browse with privacy enabled. They also track your inbound connections, blocking or throttling them jusy as they please. Not to mention they keep those records and willingly hand them over to "associated companies" as well as, when requested, to local, state, and federal agencies.

 

The newest kick is adding Phone and Security to their TV and Internet bundles. Now they know when you are home too, as well as your phone records.

 

Privacy? In your dreams. Unless of course, you have these services and never ever use them.

[Sam Lord]

Here are my two letters deleting this post.

[Sam Lord]

Here are two more letters deleting this extra post. I have lots of letters on my computer. I can even postulate a bizarre answer to the question of why the edit function lacks a delete function, but that would give this post a function it never earned.