Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Blog Anonymously

uglyduck.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 482 posts

Re: Blog Anonymously

#41

Post by pydry »

grenoire wrote: post #8
dijit wrote: post #4

This goes into the how, but to me the more interesting question is the 'why'. Why should someone interact with something that the author doesn't throw his/her/their name into? I only have one example of why; I'm a genuinely curious and open person and I like having my beliefs tested, some of my beliefs are nuanced enough that I sometimes break down my current beliefs and my reasons into blog posts. Things that I thin…

Interesting example from print media: The Economist doesn't have author names. Critique and appreciation have both been expressed over this, but I don't think there's an answer that will convince you.

It's often said that nobody would read the Economist if they saw the kind of pimply faced recent graduates who actually wrote it.

My cynical side says that this is a way of preventing journalists who work there from accumulating a fanbase which would give them leverage over the magazine (since they could then viably threaten to take to different publications). It fits in with their neoliberalish philosophy.

Re: Blog Anonymously

#42

Post by ta262727464648 »

I ventured into this a while ago. After thinking about it, I decided that if Google or the Government decided they wanted to know who I was, they'd find me one way or another. I'd go insane trying to stop them. But they weren't really my threat model anyway - I just wanted to write political ideas without strangers tying their perceptions of those ideas to my real self.

I wasn't planning to write anything that could be perceived as illegal or close (eg, no inciting hate/violence/treason).

So I thought of a pen name, created a Gmail for it, then a Twitter with that, and a Medium account with that. I blogged on Medium.

I wasn't too worried about pissing off a rogue Medium/Twitter employee enough for them to try to doxx me, though it was the only thing to give me pause - and honestly, a run-of-the-mill VPN I only and always use for that probably would have been enough.

Ultimately, if an internet mob was going to get me, it'd be because of my writing style or facts of my life I allude to in my posts. But even there, plausible deniability is likely good enough unless I really piss a lot of people off and drop a lot of personally identifying hints - which would be my own damn fault.

Re: Blog Anonymously

#43

Post by verytrivial »

Years ago I recall something with a name like anonyblog [Edit: invisiblog.com -- Thanks!] which accepted account creation and posts by--and only by--pseudonymous email. You remember--that crazy Mixmaster/PGP signed and forwarded stuff? Seemed really powerful for the 'publication' side, but still fragile regarding the hosting side. Admittedly 95% of the pages were various flavors of "OMG IT WORKED!" but that says more about pseudonymous email than anything.

ps. Regarding censorship resistant hosting, the rabbit hole regarding e.g. Freenet is very deep and frankly leads to a hive of villainy.

Re: Blog Anonymously

#44

Post by 2038AD »

netsharc wrote: post #12
2038AD wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> especially if they can correlate visits and posting times... You could schedule posts so times will not correlate. Tumblr has a queue which you can use to post at regular intervals throughout the day.

The paranoid would worry that the men in black would ask Tumblr for the server logs, "When did this blogger insert this post in the queue?". I guess they could try using a blogging service hosted in a "non-cooperative" country. E.g. Russia, unless you want to blog about Putin.

VK would probably be your best bet for Russia.

We could keep playing this game forever. Really you'd want a self-hosted site running from an anonymous VPS paid using a cryptocurrency like Monero (these exist) and your domain would use a similar service (say Njalla) or be TOR-exclusive. Alternatively you could go a more classic route and host with SDF (à la http://voidnull.sdf.org/).

Or, if you're really paranoid, you'd give up on the whole thing. Maybe you'd still write but you'd keep it to yourself. As I see it, any interaction is a risk of exposure even if very small.

Re: Blog Anonymously

#45

Post by nmfisher »

grenoire wrote: post #8
dijit wrote: post #4

This goes into the how, but to me the more interesting question is the 'why'. Why should someone interact with something that the author doesn't throw his/her/their name into? I only have one example of why; I'm a genuinely curious and open person and I like having my beliefs tested, some of my beliefs are nuanced enough that I sometimes break down my current beliefs and my reasons into blog posts. Things that I thin…

Interesting example from print media: The Economist doesn't have author names. Critique and appreciation have both been expressed over this, but I don't think there's an answer that will convince you.

I actually prefer pseudonyms (or the Economist's anonymity/column name policy) in print media.

It could be simple selection bias - perhaps better quality outlets tend to operate under pseudonyms, rather than pseudonyms themselves improving the quality of the publication.

But I speculate that operating under one's real name might increase the propensity to craft and cling to an "identity". That horrible concept of a "personal brand", if you will. You want people to remember you - which means constant soundbites, hammering the same dumbed-down points from the same angles.

There's no respite - it's under your real name, after all - so you slowly subsume yourself into this talking head that you've created. One day, you wake up, and you've completely lost any capacity for impartiality or objectivity.

Pseudonyms also allow multiple people to write the same column. I've long wondered if the Economist engages in this practice (not that I would be critical if they did, it's out of sheer curiosity).

Re: Blog Anonymously

#47

Post by akaryocyte »

verytrivial wrote: post #43

Years ago I recall something with a name like anonyblog [Edit: invisiblog.com -- Thanks!] which accepted account creation and posts by--and only by--pseudonymous email. You remember--that crazy Mixmaster/PGP signed and forwarded stuff? Seemed really powerful for the 'publication' side, but still fragile regarding the hosting side. Admittedly 95% of the pages were various flavors of "OMG IT WORKED!" but that says more…

invisiblog.com? Explained a bit here: https://globalvoices.org/2005/04/13/a-technical-guide-to-ano...

Re: Blog Anonymously

#48

Post by dijit »

teddyh wrote: post #31
dijit wrote: post #4

This goes into the how, but to me the more interesting question is the 'why'. Why should someone interact with something that the author doesn't throw his/her/their name into? I only have one example of why; I'm a genuinely curious and open person and I like having my beliefs tested, some of my beliefs are nuanced enough that I sometimes break down my current beliefs and my reasons into blog posts. Things that I thin…

> Why should someone interact with something that the author doesn't throw his/her/their name into? Once again: Who is harmed by a "Real Names" policy? https://geekfeminism.wikia.org/wiki/Who_is_harmed_by_a_%22Re...

This is really good and distills the point much better than I could have, thank you.

Re: Blog Anonymously

#49

Post by nisuni »

dijit wrote: post #4

This goes into the how, but to me the more interesting question is the 'why'. Why should someone interact with something that the author doesn't throw his/her/their name into? I only have one example of why; I'm a genuinely curious and open person and I like having my beliefs tested, some of my beliefs are nuanced enough that I sometimes break down my current beliefs and my reasons into blog posts. Things that I thin…

> why

Cancel culture.

People lose jobs for things said 30 years ago, and that were completely acceptable 30 years ago.

> Niel Golightly stepped down after an employee complained about an article he wrote in 1987 that said women should not serve in combat. He said those views do not reflect his opinion today.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/08/business/boeing-resignati...

You want to be insured against that.

Re: Blog Anonymously

#50

Post by dandellion »

pydry wrote: post #34
Jaruzel wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We currently live in a "there is only one correct opinion, all others must be canceled" culture. I fully blame twitter (and the medias obsession with it) for this.

This is a problem that probably existed before writing itself, never mind Twitter.

It's not new. It was huge when religion was more prevalent, for example, but it was becoming less of a problem as society became more educated and secular. Now there's a new wave riding on top of social media like Twitter, and as it gains more popularity it's becoming more about flaming vs virtue signalling than making actual progress.
Post reply on HN