If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Daily Mail)   China now forcing EVERY internet user to register their real name in new free speech crackdown   (dailymail.co.uk) divider line 152
    More: Obvious, official corruption, ruling party, official misconduct, chemical plants, Runaways, Xinhua News Agency, rule following, VPN  
•       •       •

4299 clicks; posted to Main » on 29 Dec 2012 at 6:05 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



152 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-29 09:44:50 AM
It's going to be a great day when the Chinese realize that they are strong. Mind you it's going to also be farking TERRIFYING, but still, a great day.

/We live in interesting times
//whether this is good or not is debatable.
 
2012-12-29 09:47:20 AM
but there is no free speech in china. sucks to be them. but if they dont like it, they can change it by just over throwing their government
or not using the internet
 
2012-12-29 09:50:58 AM
Another small component of P. Fart O'bama's masterplan to take all my guns. Why can't you libs see it? Free speech in China? Tax rates in France? Rape-rape in India? These are distractions while his sinister plan to take all the guns goes into effect. He's sneaky. Steps 1 and 2? Sign bills that allow for more gun rights. Steps 3? Frequently insist you have no plans to create additional restrictions on firearms. Steps 4 - 11000? Government-staged gun violence.

WAKE UP SHEEPLE!!11,!
 
2012-12-29 09:54:07 AM
So they're getting their ideas from youtube, now?
 
2012-12-29 09:55:45 AM

namatad: but there is no free speech in china. sucks to be them. but if they dont like it, they can change it by just over throwing their government
or not using the internet



Armed with... chopsticks?
 
2012-12-29 10:00:18 AM

Mike_LowELL: Good.  I'm sick of trolls who hide behind fictitious personalities and spew garbage.  I can say this, since I am the head of a multi-billion dollar corporation and you are all poor and smelly liberals.  Lol.  Get stenched, nerds.


10/10
 
2012-12-29 10:08:57 AM
Welcome to Dubyas 'Murica.
 
2012-12-29 10:14:58 AM

stirfrybry: why are fark liberals so ignorant that they say Republicans are pushing for this in america when it's their own messiah doing it?

Fark liberals are the most ignorant farkers on the internet


Tee-hee!
 
2012-12-29 10:17:28 AM
More Chins than a Chinese Internet Registry.
 
2012-12-29 10:18:21 AM
This will come to America. Just watch. The total fark left will embrace it in the name of safety. That is the real reason Obama and Hilary tried to blame the Middle East attacks on a Youtube video. Setting the stage to make it safer for us. Won't somebody think of the children?
 
2012-12-29 10:27:26 AM
The funny part is the people thinking the government can't attach your name to your Internet activities here in the U.S.
 
2012-12-29 10:37:19 AM
Lol some of you guys are taking Mike seriously.
 
2012-12-29 10:45:42 AM

borg: doglover: Weaver95: i'm sort of expecting the GOP to try to push this sort of legislation here in the US.

They already is.

Except it's President Obama

House Republicans urge Obama not to issue cybersecurity order


Weaver and the others in the Czar_angelus/Linux_Yes crew will pretend you never said this. Just wait until the next thread.
 
2012-12-29 10:55:52 AM

0Icky0: ShannonKW: There are plenty of examples of this in business, government, and academia. My university, for example, has a closed message board to which only faculty members may post. It's damn civil and to the the point, as you can imagine,

I can well imagine.
But what I can't imagine is how this has any relationship to the world-wide Internet.


Well, let me help you.

Knowing who you are dealing with would would regulate dealings on the Internet just as it always has in face-to-face encounters. Knowing whether or not your correspondent is a child, to give just one example, would greatly assist in judging how to respond to him.

On the receiving end, responsibility on the Internet would be diffuse, but significant. In the West at present no prudent employer hires a man without doing a Internet search for him. Were our Internet postings linked to our true identities, the all those Stormfront rantings against brown people and Jews would be wedded to our names, and soon civility would wash over the Internet like a perfumed breeze -- at least among people who who hope for respectable employment. The rest we could put on "ignore"

It shouldn't be that hard to think of other good effects that would come of knowing the identity of the people you deal with on the internet. Reputation is an ancient device for ordering the behavior of people, even in the absence of law, and it could be made to work for us on the Internet.
 
2012-12-29 11:03:58 AM
You don't need to give people freedom, you just need to tell them they are free; and they'll believe it.

For example, the United States.
 
2012-12-29 11:06:21 AM
I don't know how much it will matter. As Mira said in the movie:

cps-static.rovicorp.com

"Aren't there like a bilion John Lee's in China. Oh, right."
/okay, so it's a bit snarky
 
2012-12-29 11:17:21 AM
Wait, that's not relevant. It's apparently too early.

But, I suppose it's too late to retract the statement with dignity.
 
2012-12-29 11:25:47 AM

Nemo's Brother: borg: doglover: Weaver95: i'm sort of expecting the GOP to try to push this sort of legislation here in the US.

They already is.

Except it's President Obama

House Republicans urge Obama not to issue cybersecurity order

Weaver and the others in the Czar_angelus/Linux_Yes crew will pretend you never said this. Just wait until the next thread.


They're whining about it because it will make their rich corporate masters pay more money to protect critical infrastructure like water and power from cyber-attacks. NOT, like the GOP, because they're scared of a peasant uprising.

Nice try though.
 
2012-12-29 11:37:31 AM

serial_crusher: The measure would require service providers to ask users to provide their real names and other identifying information if they want to post information publicly or sign up for access to the internet and telephone services, Xinhua said.

Isn't that basically how it works in America?  You try signing up for an ISP or phone company without providing your name and billing address.


If you're going to be *BILLED* you of course have to identify yourself. That doesn't mean you can't use non-billed services (such as prepaid or the like) without providing identifying information.

As a foreigner using internet cafes in China (I'm NOT posting from there now--while FARK itself is useable from over there most of the linked articles aren't) I have seen this develop:

Originally there was no ID requirement at all. I walked in, picked up a card and sat down at a machine. When I was done I turned the card in and paid for the time I had it. (Enforcement was based on having to have the card sitting there in plain sight while using the machine.)

At the time the machines were W98, no USB ports which means no flash drives--no way to transfer a file. I had my wife talk to the people there (she's a native speaker), they were willing to let me use my laptop there rather than the provided machines. Technically this wasn't kosher as my system didn't have the monitoring software but since I'm a foreigner who only is over there for a few weeks at a time it's a little silly to try to keep parts of the web from me. Even a couple of cops who noticed the situation understood it was stupid to block me. I much preferred my machine as their keyboards were garbage and the monitoring software had a resource leak--it would take Windows into la-la land after a bit over an hour of discussion forums. (Most of the people played games and didn't run into the problem.)

One day a local who was called on failing to sign in made a stink about the fact that I obviously had not signed in. There was no way I possibly could as the sheet was in Chinese. I did the only thing I could, I handed over the only ID I had on me and let them figure out what to do. Later I noticed that I was in the log as "Mr. Driver".

Times changed, the machines became XP with USB ports and it switched to pre-pay. You buy your card and get change when you turn it back in.

Times changed again, a new cafe. Rather than buying the card for each visit (still possible but more expensive) I bought a card that I keep. I just check in and out each time and I have to sign on to the machine itself. (There is a way to sign off, I have no idea how. When I check out it signs off.) They took a scan of my passport when I got the card, that scan is linked to the card. (When I check in it comes up on their screen, I've seen it.)

Times changed again, now despite the fact that they have the scan of my passport tied to the card they also have to scan it every time I check in. (Which occasionally proves problematic when they have a new employee that doesn't know how to do it.)

Since my last visit times have changed again, now to use the free Wi-Fi in the airport you have to get a code via SMS--this ties your usage to you.


At least in the earlier years there apparently were no consequences from trying to access blocked websites. I did so repeatedly (I was accessing an unblocked website that pulled ad banners from a blocked one.) and nobody seemed to follow up on it.
 
2012-12-29 11:56:13 AM
affordablehousinginstitute.org

2.bp.blogspot.com

Try to remember before you forget.
/we should have boycotted the shiat out of everything Communist Chinese and sold Taiwan whatever they wanted.
 
2012-12-29 12:06:24 PM
This policy will soon be exported to the United States. We live on Chinese imports.
 
2012-12-29 12:12:50 PM

randomjsa: doglover: Weaver95: i'm sort of expecting the GOP to try to push this sort of legislation here in the US.

They already is.

One of these days you're going to figure out that the people in power on the left, such as Obama, Pelosi, and the like are not the same as the rank and file liberal on the left.

And almost without exception, when the people in power on the left are left unchecked they will push through massive government control of everything because its "what's best" for "everyone" and by "everyone" they mean them and by "what's best" they mean control of the money.


Yes, try to scare me with what those evil scary liberals might do. Meanwhile completely ignore what has already been done from both sides.

B-B-B-Butt. You're talking out of yours, AGAIN.
 
2012-12-29 12:15:45 PM

ShannonKW: 0Icky0: ShannonKW: I wouldn't mind requiring all Internet users to post their name rather than some asinine logon. Anonymity is the cover that encourages most of the punks on the Internet to shiat all over everyone and everything.

Because if you knew my real name you would do what? Track me down and berate me for mocking you?

Being able to positively identify Internet users has more practical merits than enabling a personal game of name calling. There are plenty of examples of this in business, government, and academia. My university, for example, has a closed message board to which only faculty members may post. It's damn civil and to the the point, as you can imagine, because anyone who let his inner adolescent guide him to post worthless, offensive shiate would find himself on the carpet answering for it, just as much as if he had said it in person.

It's worth noting that you do not have the right to buttonhole your department head in a corridor and call him a reeking, syphilitic twat. Or, to be tedious, you do have that right -- while he has the corresponding right to have security pitch your ass out on the sidewalk with the contents of your desk tossed out after you. It is because we will be held to account for the things we say that we are encouraged to be civil and truthful, and for many of us this is the only thing that keeps us from from turning our daily society into a sordid shiat-flinging match resembling the Politics tab.


Can I demand proper identification from strangers on the street, that I overhear?
 
2012-12-29 12:19:45 PM
But my real name is mudpants.
 
2012-12-29 12:40:04 PM
Fook Yu!
s9.postimage.org
 
2012-12-29 12:40:50 PM

StoPPeRmobile: ShannonKW: 0Icky0: ShannonKW:  cover that encourages most of the punks on the Internet to shiat all over everyone and everything.

closed message board to which only faculty members may post


I was thinking 8/10 for Shannon, who argues in his bio that there's a fine line betwixt trolling and honest provocation.  How do you go on Fark -- a site on which the vast majority of people do not self-identify as they might on FB or others like that -- and argue with a straight face that anonymous online speech is harmful or nothing but vitriol and bile?  Thick skin, how does it work?  Shannon implies he is a faculty member at a university (in the Middle East?).  I guess he would support those asinine campus speech codes designed to prevent the snowflakes from getting their widdle feelings hurt.
 
2012-12-29 12:48:33 PM
Governments find it helpful to be able to identify the dissidents.
who knew?
 
2012-12-29 01:00:33 PM

ShannonKW: 0Icky0: ShannonKW: There are plenty of examples of this in business, government, and academia. My university, for example, has a closed message board to which only faculty members may post. It's damn civil and to the the point, as you can imagine,

I can well imagine.
But what I can't imagine is how this has any relationship to the world-wide Internet.

Well, let me help you.

Knowing who you are dealing with would would regulate dealings on the Internet just as it always has in face-to-face encounters. Knowing whether or not your correspondent is a child, to give just one example, would greatly assist in judging how to respond to him.

On the receiving end, responsibility on the Internet would be diffuse, but significant. In the West at present no prudent employer hires a man without doing a Internet search for him. Were our Internet postings linked to our true identities, the all those Stormfront rantings against brown people and Jews would be wedded to our names, and soon civility would wash over the Internet like a perfumed breeze -- at least among people who who hope for respectable employment. The rest we could put on "ignore"

It shouldn't be that hard to think of other good effects that would come of knowing the identity of the people you deal with on the internet. Reputation is an ancient device for ordering the behavior of people, even in the absence of law, and it could be made to work for us on the Internet.


Yes, we should all be forced legally, and at gunpoint I might add, so that you can feel satisfied.

No one will ever take advantage of the fact that you are forced to id yourself. Plus some companies will make a lot of money and the bueracracy will grow. It's a win-win situation all around.
 
2012-12-29 01:19:13 PM

StoPPeRmobile: ShannonKW: 0Icky0: ShannonKW: I wouldn't mind requiring all Internet users to post their name rather than some asinine logon. Anonymity is the cover that encourages most of the punks on the Internet to shiat all over everyone and everything.

Because if you knew my real name you would do what? Track me down and berate me for mocking you?

Being able to positively identify Internet users has more practical merits than enabling a personal game of name calling. There are plenty of examples of this in business, government, and academia. My university, for example, has a closed message board to which only faculty members may post. It's damn civil and to the the point, as you can imagine, because anyone who let his inner adolescent guide him to post worthless, offensive shiate would find himself on the carpet answering for it, just as much as if he had said it in person.

It's worth noting that you do not have the right to buttonhole your department head in a corridor and call him a reeking, syphilitic twat. Or, to be tedious, you do have that right -- while he has the corresponding right to have security pitch your ass out on the sidewalk with the contents of your desk tossed out after you. It is because we will be held to account for the things we say that we are encouraged to be civil and truthful, and for many of us this is the only thing that keeps us from from turning our daily society into a sordid shiat-flinging match resembling the Politics tab.

Can I demand proper identification from strangers on the street, that I overhear?


Why in the world would you be able to request info from a conversation that you're not part of? This would be a digital equivalent of a private chat. Now, if this was posted publicly (i.e. Facebook, Fark) then you are publicly stating an opinion to be your own. Why not man up and take accountability for what you say publicly instead of equpping your Cloak of Internet Annonimity +10 to Asshattery?
 
2012-12-29 01:47:26 PM
images.yuku.com.s3.amazonaws.com
 
2012-12-29 01:48:45 PM

StoPPeRmobile: Yes, we should all be forced legally, and at gunpoint I might add, so that you can feel satisfied.


"Force" hasn't been mentioned, and bringing it up is silly and hysterical. Guess what sweetie -- you are "forced" to identify yourself if you publish a book or article or (God forbid!) a rap lyric. Everybody knows who Snoop Dogg and Spike Lee are, and they have stood unassassinated behind their opinions, and every Internet jackass can do so too. Even you can do so, if you are so noble and brave as Snoop and Spike.

Richard Dawkins and Noam Chomsky have published their works under their own names. People hate them for it and wish them dead. They are alive in spite of this. You do not need anonymity to do what they have done. The Chinese censor dissident ideas, and this is something that they will one day pay for (assuming some Western power doesn't give them sanctuary when their aggrieved citizenry finally give them the bum's rush). We who wish the Chinese well hope that they will be granted freedom of political expression, but quibbling about one of the many ways in which the Chinese state squelches dissent amounts to nothing.
 
2012-12-29 01:52:20 PM
China, newest employee of Facebook.
 
2012-12-29 01:56:10 PM
Me? I'm Harry Manassas.
 
2012-12-29 03:14:13 PM
China now forcing EVERY internet user to register their real name in new trolling crackdown"
FTFY
 
2012-12-29 03:30:23 PM

Ed Finnerty: serial_crusher: The measure would require service providers to ask users to provide their real names and other identifying information if they want to post information publicly or sign up for access to the internet and telephone services, Xinhua said.

Isn't that basically how it works in America?  You try signing up for an ISP or phone company without providing your name and billing address.

They can always use a Virtual Private Netwok.


The Chinese don't like Netwoks because their food keeps falling through the holes when they try to cook up a stir fry
 
2012-12-29 05:47:56 PM
They're just copying Facebook and Google+.
 
2012-12-29 07:00:00 PM

ghare: Tumunga: stirfrybry: why are fark liberals so ignorant that they say Republicans are pushing for this in america when it's their own messiah doing it?

Fark liberals are the most ignorant farkers on the internet

I've been saying that about the FarkLibtards for years.

So, as a FarkIdiot, you think encouraging banks and power plants and so forth to be secure is bad, and you prefer the Republican CISPA plan, which is a far greater Federal intrusion into your privacy, because it was proposed by Republicans.

Got it.


Yes?
 
2012-12-29 07:37:50 PM

Loren: serial_crusher: The measure would require service providers to ask users to provide their real names and other identifying information if they want to post information publicly or sign up for access to the internet and telephone services, Xinhua said.

Isn't that basically how it works in America?  You try signing up for an ISP or phone company without providing your name and billing address.

If you're going to be *BILLED* you of course have to identify yourself. That doesn't mean you can't use non-billed services (such as prepaid or the like) without providing identifying information.

As a foreigner using internet cafes in China (I'm NOT posting from there now--while FARK itself is useable from over there most of the linked articles aren't) I have seen this develop:

Originally there was no ID requirement at all. I walked in, picked up a card and sat down at a machine. When I was done I turned the card in and paid for the time I had it. (Enforcement was based on having to have the card sitting there in plain sight while using the machine.)

At the time the machines were W98, no USB ports which means no flash drives--no way to transfer a file. I had my wife talk to the people there (she's a native speaker), they were willing to let me use my laptop there rather than the provided machines. Technically this wasn't kosher as my system didn't have the monitoring software but since I'm a foreigner who only is over there for a few weeks at a time it's a little silly to try to keep parts of the web from me. Even a couple of cops who noticed the situation understood it was stupid to block me. I much preferred my machine as their keyboards were garbage and the monitoring software had a resource leak--it would take Windows into la-la land after a bit over an hour of discussion forums. (Most of the people played games and didn't run into the problem.)

One day a local who was called on failing to sign in made a stink about the fact that I obviously had not signed in. There was no way I possibly could as the sheet was in Chinese. I did the only thing I could, I handed over the only ID I had on me and let them figure out what to do. Later I noticed that I was in the log as "Mr. Driver".

Times changed, the machines became XP with USB ports and it switched to pre-pay. You buy your card and get change when you turn it back in.

Times changed again, a new cafe. Rather than buying the card for each visit (still possible but more expensive) I bought a card that I keep. I just check in and out each time and I have to sign on to the machine itself. (There is a way to sign off, I have no idea how. When I check out it signs off.) They took a scan of my passport when I got the card, that scan is linked to the card. (When I check in it comes up on their screen, I've seen it.)

Times changed again, now despite the fact that they have the scan of my passport tied to the card they also have to scan it every time I check in. (Which occasionally proves problematic when they have a new employee that doesn't know how to do it.)

Since my last visit times have changed again, now to use the free Wi-Fi in the airport you have to get a code via SMS--this ties your usage to you.


At least in the earlier years there apparently were no consequences from trying to access blocked websites. I did so repeatedly (I was accessing an unblocked website that pulled ad banners from a blocked one.) and nobody seemed to follow up on it.


You are required to provide ID when activating prepaid phone/internet services in the US.

Additionally you can't use prepaid cards internationally now, per US law. Which I found out when I tried to reactivate an old account on Eve Online. I only use prepaid cards since I drive over the road. So I can only use services hosted in the US.

In addition, you are limited to under $1000 in purchases of things like money orders because it is illegal to move funds around anonymously except through direct cash transfers. I have about $20k in cash in my truck as I save up for truck of my own because I don't want anyone to know I have assets to go after. Especially with a divorce in progress. Plus I'm in the middle of a dispute with Sallie Mae who erroneously reported me as in default to the government (been paying 3x the amount owed every month and have the bank statements to back it up) and I'm sure the government can freeze bank accounts in the event of a public default.

But the moment I try to do anything with that cash I have to have my ID connected with it. If I do anything with telecommunications I have my name attatched to it. I suppose cybercafes may be an exception but it's been a decade since I have seen one of those. I can access public wifi at restaurants but I'm sure those click through screens capture your browser settings which are usually unique enough to lead the feds to you eventually. Who knows how long McDonalds' wifi provider holds onto that info. Hell they may just archive it automatically for the NSA to data mine.
 
2012-12-29 07:55:57 PM

Chariset: Good luck.  My real name IS sexygrrl69



Checked your profile. Nice to see you have pictures of your pussy there
 
2012-12-29 08:02:43 PM

ShannonKW: StoPPeRmobile: Yes, we should all be forced legally, and at gunpoint I might add, so that you can feel satisfied.

"Force" hasn't been mentioned, and bringing it up is silly and hysterical. Guess what sweetie -- you are "forced" to identify yourself if you publish a book or article or (God forbid!) a rap lyric. Everybody knows who Snoop Dogg and Spike Lee are, and they have stood unassassinated behind their opinions, and every Internet jackass can do so too. Even you can do so, if you are so noble and brave as Snoop and Spike.

Richard Dawkins and Noam Chomsky have published their works under their own names. People hate them for it and wish them dead. They are alive in spite of this. You do not need anonymity to do what they have done. The Chinese censor dissident ideas, and this is something that they will one day pay for (assuming some Western power doesn't give them sanctuary when their aggrieved citizenry finally give them the bum's rush). We who wish the Chinese well hope that they will be granted freedom of political expression, but quibbling about one of the many ways in which the Chinese state squelches dissent amounts to nothing.


Have you ever even read a book in your life?
upload.wikimedia.org
 
2012-12-29 08:04:48 PM

Critatak: StoPPeRmobile: ShannonKW: 0Icky0: ShannonKW: I wouldn't mind requiring all Internet users to post their name rather than some asinine logon. Anonymity is the cover that encourages most of the punks on the Internet to shiat all over everyone and everything.

Because if you knew my real name you would do what? Track me down and berate me for mocking you?

Being able to positively identify Internet users has more practical merits than enabling a personal game of name calling. There are plenty of examples of this in business, government, and academia. My university, for example, has a closed message board to which only faculty members may post. It's damn civil and to the the point, as you can imagine, because anyone who let his inner adolescent guide him to post worthless, offensive shiate would find himself on the carpet answering for it, just as much as if he had said it in person.

It's worth noting that you do not have the right to buttonhole your department head in a corridor and call him a reeking, syphilitic twat. Or, to be tedious, you do have that right -- while he has the corresponding right to have security pitch your ass out on the sidewalk with the contents of your desk tossed out after you. It is because we will be held to account for the things we say that we are encouraged to be civil and truthful, and for many of us this is the only thing that keeps us from from turning our daily society into a sordid shiat-flinging match resembling the Politics tab.

Can I demand proper identification from strangers on the street, that I overhear?

Why in the world would you be able to request info from a conversation that you're not part of? This would be a digital equivalent of a private chat.


If I can overhear it, is it still private?
 
2012-12-29 08:31:07 PM
大麻的伯爵勃起希特勒 is a bit of a mouthful.
 
2012-12-29 08:36:08 PM

JerkyMeat: Didn't the GOP suggest the same thing for Americans?


You mean like Randi Zuckerberg?

Oh, no, I guess not...
 
2012-12-29 10:46:16 PM
With over a billion people, they are going to have some repeat names....just saying..

Which Zhu Chen Hiu is the real Zhu Chen Hiu?
Will the real Zhu Chen Hiu please stand up, please stand up, please stand up?
*Sound of a gunshot*
Thank you comrade citizen.
 
2012-12-29 11:40:11 PM
I guess there have never been authors writing under a nom de plume then.
You have no right to be anonymous? Not even to protect yourself from
criminals in positions of power?
Fakebook and their trained monkeys can take a flying leap at a rolling donut...
As long as this is an imperfect world, I have the right to defend myself from it.
 
2012-12-29 11:57:58 PM

ShannonKW: 0Icky0: ShannonKW: There are plenty of examples of this in business, government, and academia. My university, for example, has a closed message board to which only faculty members may post. It's damn civil and to the the point, as you can imagine,

I can well imagine.
But what I can't imagine is how this has any relationship to the world-wide Internet.

Well, let me help you.

Knowing who you are dealing with would would regulate dealings on the Internet just as it always has in face-to-face encounters. Knowing whether or not your correspondent is a child, to give just one example, would greatly assist in judging how to respond to him.

On the receiving end, responsibility on the Internet would be diffuse, but significant. In the West at present no prudent employer hires a man without doing a Internet search for him. Were our Internet postings linked to our true identities, the all those Stormfront rantings against brown people and Jews would be wedded to our names, and soon civility would wash over the Internet like a perfumed breeze -- at least among people who who hope for respectable employment. The rest we could put on "ignore"

It shouldn't be that hard to think of other good effects that would come of knowing the identity of the people you deal with on the internet. Reputation is an ancient device for ordering the behavior of people, even in the absence of law, and it could be made to work for us on the Internet.


Removing the option of anonymity forces the individual to cede power to the state or its agents/partners. You can be called out by name for your racist statements, yes, but you can likewise be called out for (or forced to disavow) your legitimate criticisms and complaints, or shamed for your peccadilloes or preferences. Both of these can be done on a massive scale, by both state and corporate entities. "Civility" is a nice thing, to be sure, but when it's used as a cover for exposure, control, and censorship, it quickly becomes tainted and worthless. Forced removal of anonymity across the board like you suggest has absolutely no place in a modern democratic society. It would be double-plus good for a police state, though.
 
2012-12-30 12:32:32 AM

Ghastly: Didn't some legislator in Kentucky try to pass a bill that would have made it illegal to post anonymously on the internet?


That doesn't count.  It's understood that people from Kentucky don't know anything about the Internet.
 
2012-12-30 02:08:10 AM
I wonder how many guys named Mi Hung Lo have been registered?
 
2012-12-30 05:10:25 AM
i.imgur.com
 
2012-12-30 10:51:58 AM

ShannonKW: Reputation is an ancient device for ordering the behavior of people, even in the absence of law, and it could be made to work for us on the Internet.


And pen names are an ancient device for keeping your identity secret when you write stuff that might get you in trouble.
 
Displayed 50 of 152 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report