231–240 of 329 posts
If the original poster wants to chime in how he found this writer that would be of interest to me. Thanks for this post. Posts like this make the world a better place to live in.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Banksy is purportedly Robin Cunningham. Google is the greatest OSINT tool ever created.
that's just one theory. everything i've read lists both del naja and gunningham as possibilities at the least, and often tosses a couple of other names into the mix.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 alrea…
I don’t think you can argue that steal from friend is the best in that situation. If truly the options are steal from friend or starve to death right now, then perhaps but that’s not realistic. I’m not sure what you think someone should do rather than make the best decision given all options. There are many ways to absolve yourself of tricky moral quandaries. But I don’t think using a fake name on a web form is a mor…
Ah yes... I'm Skimmington Harborough, Esq., I come from a family that made its fortune in philanthropy generations ago. This seems like a pretty straightforward mechanism for covert operatives, to generate a believable (and memorizable) cover that pulls attention away and maintains coherence. That said, as someone who prizes ethical behavior, it's not possible to practice this and remain wholly honest without some so…
Maybe I'm from a different era, but I still think that the best default position is that anything somebody has listed about themselves online may be a work of fiction that we shouldn't be expected to take at face value in most contexts. If encryption is not immoral, encrypting your personal information is also not immoral, even if you also want plausible deniability. Privacy is not unethical. If a persona and pseudon…
You can be honest or dishonest and it will be encrypted and decrypted all the same.
Your second argument to me doesn’t follow. You are saying what you say and do is more important than what you value, I think, but you are also saying that what you say and do are not important so you can be dishonest.
My conclusion is that you prize winning over being ethical.
Just think of all the other cases where honesty and ethics have been put on the back burner on the basis that you think your thing is more important; a lot of them legal.
Ah yes... I'm Skimmington Harborough, Esq., I come from a family that made its fortune in philanthropy generations ago. This seems like a pretty straightforward mechanism for covert operatives, to generate a believable (and memorizable) cover that pulls attention away and maintains coherence. That said, as someone who prizes ethical behavior, it's not possible to practice this and remain wholly honest without some so…
Maybe I'm from a different era, but I still think that the best default position is that anything somebody has listed about themselves online may be a work of fiction that we shouldn't be expected to take at face value in most contexts. If encryption is not immoral, encrypting your personal information is also not immoral, even if you also want plausible deniability. Privacy is not unethical. If a persona and pseudon…
I am not sure I follow - what we say and do is who we are, how could it be otherwise?
Satoshi is the only very high profile person I’m aware of to remain completely (pseud)onymous. Many others have tried and failed (though they often broke the law, so that might be the main distinguishing factor)
Law enforcement/intelligence services involvement raises the bar on maintaining anonymity a lot. They can access a lot of information that even an army of armchair sleuths probably can't.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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.…
I don't agree that your RL identity is a "minor" thing. It's right up among the most important things.
Ah yes... I'm Skimmington Harborough, Esq., I come from a family that made its fortune in philanthropy generations ago. This seems like a pretty straightforward mechanism for covert operatives, to generate a believable (and memorizable) cover that pulls attention away and maintains coherence. That said, as someone who prizes ethical behavior, it's not possible to practice this and remain wholly honest without some so…
Is lying in-of-itself unethical? I'd be curious to probe a framework that thinks it is, while not holding that axiomatically. As someone who leans heavily into consequentialism, I can think of plenty of times lying can lead to a net positive for everyone. Likewise, there are harmful truths that should be suppressed. That suggests to me that lying is, in-of-itself, amoral. The effect of the lie (or the intent, if you…
Ah yes... I'm Skimmington Harborough, Esq., I come from a family that made its fortune in philanthropy generations ago. This seems like a pretty straightforward mechanism for covert operatives, to generate a believable (and memorizable) cover that pulls attention away and maintains coherence. That said, as someone who prizes ethical behavior, it's not possible to practice this and remain wholly honest without some so…
> 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.…
My name is Matt Chaboud. My username is my last name, and I'm easy to find. I try to behave online in a way that doesn't rely on anonymity (though I recognize that that carries some risk).
But I think your point is understood. However, a handle, to me, by virtue of convention, leaves little room for confusion as to whether it is a real or artificial/partial identity (generally).