What's this tool vs typing a user name in google to find similar to same info?
Sherlock: Hunt down social media accounts by username across 400 social networks
51–60 of 168 posts
Re: Sherlock: Hunt down social media accounts by username across 400 social networks
#52I dont plan to run for president or anything, but find myself increasingly censoring my online speech. I think the biggest risk is some out of context post being pulled into a civil suit, or professional cancellation following that. Things like advice in an alcohol recovery forum would be prime evidence for a liability suit. There are also groups that vacuum the internet for offensive posts, and use them to try to ge…
> for things they said 10 years ago. I don't think this is an automatic negative as you are implying. There's definitely lots of qualifiers involved though. There would have to be significant evidence to show that the sentiment expressed is still no longer held which could be more than problematic to prove. If it was someone up for supreme court justice that posted pics showing how much they liked beer and their anti…
That second example pretty much demonstrates why it is so dangerous. There were attitudes that were commonplace 30 years ago that are now considered racist, in many cases because they were racist, that people don't subscribe to today. I imagine the same can be said about 10 years ago. People's values change. We should not be giving them life sentences when the have reformed their attitudes and behaviors, otherwise the incentive to reform is taken away.
Re: Sherlock: Hunt down social media accounts by username across 400 social networks
#53What's this tool vs typing a user name in google to find similar to same info?
Even less useful than google for couple of monikers I tried.
Re: Sherlock: Hunt down social media accounts by username across 400 social networks
#54And this makes it obvious why you should use a unique username everywhere! It makes pervasive tracking a lot harder. Also when you do any research on health related topics, be extra privacy conscious.
This is why I try to use the same name across websites. I want to be identified as the same person. Just resist the urge to post information you don't want others to have.
Re: Sherlock: Hunt down social media accounts by username across 400 social networks
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
I thought canceling never stopped. It was just politically motivated. (Ironically, Dems eat their own for that stuff, so maybe "politically motivated" doesn't quite capture it... compare e.g. Al Franken and Katie Hill vs Roy Moore or Matt Gaetz)
Democrats cancel and Republicans mostly double down. I don’t think there is anything Trump can do at this point to horrify or even just dissuade his base, for example.
> "I don’t think there is anything Trump can do at this point to horrify or even just dissuade his base, for example."
Pretty sure it's pretty close to true at this point that he actually could get away with literal cold-blooded murder in public at this point and his cult would fold themselves in half backwards tryin' to justify it somehow. [0]
[0]: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/donald-trump-fifth-avenue-...
Re: Sherlock: Hunt down social media accounts by username across 400 social networks
#56I dont plan to run for president or anything, but find myself increasingly censoring my online speech. I think the biggest risk is some out of context post being pulled into a civil suit, or professional cancellation following that. Things like advice in an alcohol recovery forum would be prime evidence for a liability suit. There are also groups that vacuum the internet for offensive posts, and use them to try to ge…
Being authentic is the ticket to public office now I’m kind of glad that the value of blackmail futures has plummeted to zero I always thought millenials would be the culprit because millennials have so much online, but nope, it was just old fashioned baby boomers that have spearheaded it and double down on their indiscretions to be the role models for the country’s top offices
> Being authentic is the ticket to public office now
No, its not.
The preferred image may be more combative, aggressive, and anti-social than in the recent past, but as always adherence to it is more important than actual authenticity.
> I’m kind of glad that the value of blackmail futures has plummeted to zero
It hasn’t, though the value function for current negative information is different, so things that were once valuable for blackmail or otherwise harmful to public image are less so (and things that were not are moreso.)
> I always thought millenials would be the culprit because millennials have so much online, but nope, it was just old fashioned baby boomers that have spearheaded that double down on their indiscretions and are the role models for the country’s top offices
The only boomer I can think of that you might be talking about denies them constantly (even if there is past documentation of his acknowledging them in a general sense) and is supported by favor-currying media magnates who either actively promote propaganda favoring his messaging on that or, at a minimum, actively spike critical coverage.
And even within his movement and with the support of his cult of personality and the same favorable media, others in his orbit have often been less successful in having their indiscretions given a pass (see, e.g., Matt Gaetz’s nomination for Attorney-General of the United States.)
Re: Sherlock: Hunt down social media accounts by username across 400 social networks
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
Being authentic is the ticket to public office now I’m kind of glad that the value of blackmail futures has plummeted to zero I always thought millenials would be the culprit because millennials have so much online, but nope, it was just old fashioned baby boomers that have spearheaded it and double down on their indiscretions to be the role models for the country’s top offices
Only for this cycle. The pendulum will swing back to cancelling and pitchforks after this era of cult of personality.
I don't really get that impression, in my experience people just realize cancelling is a two-way street and stop it
I’ve been told “I’m making someone uncomfortable” and I said “they’re making me uncomfortable”, and follow that up with “why are you privileging their discomfort over mine” and when they or the mob say something gendered or sexist as the explanation, then I get to cancel all of them or get a nice fat paycheck
Re: Sherlock: Hunt down social media accounts by username across 400 social networks
#58And this makes it obvious why you should use a unique username everywhere! It makes pervasive tracking a lot harder. Also when you do any research on health related topics, be extra privacy conscious.
This is why I try to use the same name across websites. I want to be identified as the same person. Just resist the urge to post information you don't want others to have.
> Just resist the urge to post information you don't want others to have.
Self-censor you mean?
I personally like that information anonymous account `William Shakespeare` posted around 1585–1613.
Re: Sherlock: Hunt down social media accounts by username across 400 social networks
#59And this makes it obvious why you should use a unique username everywhere! It makes pervasive tracking a lot harder. Also when you do any research on health related topics, be extra privacy conscious.
This is why I try to use the same name across websites. I want to be identified as the same person. Just resist the urge to post information you don't want others to have.
The secret is multiple accounts. I too have a Brand Name Account(tm) I like to float around but it sure as heck isn’t this one.
Doing the multiple account thing isn’t as easy as it sounds though. Some sites like Reddit make switching between accounts incredibly easy while others aren’t so much. Plus laziness kicks in and soon enough your Brand Name Account gets tainted and you have to consider taking it out back to the dumpster.
Such is life I guess.
Re: Sherlock: Hunt down social media accounts by username across 400 social networks
#60I dont plan to run for president or anything, but find myself increasingly censoring my online speech. I think the biggest risk is some out of context post being pulled into a civil suit, or professional cancellation following that. Things like advice in an alcohol recovery forum would be prime evidence for a liability suit. There are also groups that vacuum the internet for offensive posts, and use them to try to ge…
> try to get people fired for things they said 10 years ago
I assume the implication here is that the thing they said 10 years ago was less inappropriate back then. So how do you predict sensitivity changes 10 years in the future to limit your speech today? Even if you delete posts after, say 1 year, archives exist. Shouldn’t you just not say anything if you’re afraid of this? Maybe discussion of self-censorship like this will be taboo in 10 years and the ship has already sailed.