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

Want anonymity? Make a persona not a mystery

sive.rs

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 329 posts

Re: Want anonymity? Make a persona not a mystery

#181

Post by hyperdimension »

RajT88 wrote: post #46
bilbo0s wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of what you say is true. But it's even worse than that. A persona won't even confer anonymity these days. So now you're dishonest and attributable.

Indeed. Despite your best efforts, they know that Sir Olivier Stubbingwicke lives at the same address as Bill Swerski, who pays for the Comcast internet. Similarly, very few people are unaware that XFinity is the pseudonym for Comcast.

I know I'm running with the off-topic comment, but I like to point that out whenever possible. Companies know that if they just change their name, they lose any bad connotations they had with the previous name.

Comcast changed the name of its Internet service to "Comcast Xfinity" for a few years, then silently dropped the "Comcast" at one point.

Spectrum is also Charter, and Altria is Phillip Morris. It's crappy that it actually works most of the time, so I like to point it out to try to counteract that.

Re: Want anonymity? Make a persona not a mystery

#182

Post by Animats »

xapata wrote: post #30

The trouble is when you've been using your alternate persona, chatting with a stranger, and encounter someone who knows your real name that wants to say, "Hello." "Oh, uh, ... that's my middle name."

Encountering someone who knows you is one of the big risks for people working undercover. Read "You're Stepping on my Cloak and Dagger", by Roger Hall.

Re: Want anonymity? Make a persona not a mystery

#183

Post by eastof »

O__________O wrote: post #16

As a counter example, I have been largely anonymous online and offline for awhile; yes, aware it is nearly impossible to be completely anonymous, that’s fine, largely a “hobby” for me. Very direct about it, and yes, some people completely shut you out once you tell them, but vast majority don’t; while my opinion, those who do aren’t people I am interested in knowing. Very similar prior to me being largely anonymous,…

I'm really curious about the offline piece. If you're at a conference or bar and someone asks your name, what do you say?

Re: Want anonymity? Make a persona not a mystery

#184

Post by boring_twenties »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #109

I don't really bother hiding anything. Anyone who wishes me harm, can figure out who I am, fairly easily. I own a home, and I'm not sure if people know how much that exposes folks. I want people to know who I am. I don't think that I have much bad about me (although a number of folks think I'm a stuffy old boomer -they're probably right). It also helps me to behave better. I was not always a stuffy old boomer, and I…

> I own a home, and I'm not sure if people know how much that exposes folks.

OT but even more maddeningly, only those of us not rich enough to own our homes outright are subject to this stupidity. If you don't need a mortgage, you can just buy your home under an LLC or other entity. If you do, this becomes difficult or maybe impossible.

Re: Want anonymity? Make a persona not a mystery

#185

Post by akerl_ »

hgsgm wrote: post #179
akerl_ wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I tend to just not invent "rules" out of thin air. In absence of this supposed "rule", where "Something can not be immoral if it is the best of a series of bad options", you'd need to actually consider whether a decision is immoral. The rule shortcuts that and lets you say "well, there's no other option, so I must be in the clear morally here", which would be laughable if it wasn't so dangerous.

How is "do the best you can possibly do" not (a) a rule and (b) not moral?

That's not a quote that appears anywhere prior to this in the thread, from what I can see. You seem to have made it up from scratch here.

The rule given above is "Something can not be immoral if it is the best of a series of bad options". In the context of the thread, it's being used to justify creating a fake persona and providing false details about yourself as part of a strategy of maintaining anonymity. And already the cracks start to show: the other option, "just don't respond" is classified as bad, and thus doesn't count as a viable option. So what you're left with is "lie about yourself", which the rule holds up as being definitely moral because it's the "best" option. But "just don't respond" is only described as bad because it doesn't give you maximum anonymity.

If I'm broke, and I need some money for lunch, "steal from my richest friend" could be reasonably argued to be the "best" of "bad options". I need to eat, it'll hurt them the least, so lets crack open their wallet. Because I get to arbitrate the option pool and the definition of "bad" and "best", I've got a neat package that lets me absolve myself of all tricky moral quandries.

Re: Want anonymity? Make a persona not a mystery

#186

Post by Animats »

The CIA's retired head of disguise pointed out, in commenting on a movie, that you can't really have a drawer full of fake personas (the intel community calls them "legends") ready for use. Good personas are high-maintenance. They have to have some reality behind them - mail drops, email accounts, phone numbers, social media presences, even physical offices. Those take time, money, and ongoing attention. You can't just create them and box them up for future use.

Re: Want anonymity? Make a persona not a mystery

#187

Post by jrm4 »

zajio1am wrote: post #119
rt4mn wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That said, as someone who prizes ethical behavior, it's not possible to practice this and remain wholly honest without some sort of ethical loophole The primary "ethical loophole" here is that there is no viable ethical alternative. Something can not be immoral if it is the best of a series of bad options, and if you want to exsist in the world and protect your privacy, the only real option is to create a persona.…

> The primary "ethical loophole" here is that there is no viable ethical alternative. Something can not be immoral if it is the best of a series of bad options, and if you want to exsist in the world and protect your privacy, the only real option is to create a persona. There are simple ethical alternatives, just not disclose that information, or just avoid that questions. Lying in this case is clearly unacceptable.…

There is emphatically no "universal social contract not to lie," nor should there be, because what this leads to is "invisible obligations to parties more powerful than you, since you're expected to tell the truth to whoever asks it." -- but right to truth ought to be earned.

It is true that it most cases it's not favorable, but the way you're putting it is the stuff of repression.

Self defense, it's good to misinform bad actors, Santa Claus, surprise parties,etc.

Re: Want anonymity? Make a persona not a mystery

#188

Post by hgsgm »

j0hnyl wrote: post #153
imhoguy wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Proof? Please

Banksy is represented by the world's top gallerists. You think they don't know who they're doing business with?

Why would they care?

They just have to meet with Banksy's agent.

Knowing who Banksy is puts them at real risk of demystifying him/them and lowering their profit.

Re: Want anonymity? Make a persona not a mystery

#189

Post by zirgs »

mikece wrote: post #3

Anonymity is impossible, especially online. About the best one can do is to engage in clever obfuscation though there's a benefit to creating multiple personas for online activity: it makes it easier to keep your silos of interest separated. It's not for everyone but it can be handy.

It's not impossible if you don't attract attention of law enforcement/intelligence agencies. If you use different usernames everywhere and don't reveal private information then a random civilian is unlikely to find out who you really are in real life.
Post reply on HN