talouselama.fi
Linux Torvalds have told that internet anonymity is overrated:
"Some people think that anonymity and privasy go hand on hand but I think thats not true"
"If you cannot give the face to your insane ramblings on the social media, there should be no possibility to publish it and there should be no possibility for people to like and subscribe it"
Is he right? Does anonymity breed low value content?
Other urls found in this thread:
linuxjournal.com
twitter.com
In a world like today, saying something that is out of line can get you fired for "wrong think."
I'm sure as many people have been doxed at one point and has been pizza bombed and swatted, I can say with certainty these people like anonymity
Boomer doesn't know what anonimity is.
This website proves him wrong.
On this website, only the quality of your argument matters. Not your reputation or upvote points.
Because there's no reputations at stake, people here generally take each other's arguments in good faith rather than strawmanning to save face and avoid looking stupid, meaning that when two people argue on Jow Forums, they're always attacking the most charitable interpretation of the other person's argument.
>listening to anything Linus says after he went soft
You were always liable to get fired for saying something your employer doesn't like. Conservatives are bitching now because they aren't allowed to be racist pricks in the office anymore but try being a communist during the McCarthy years
As I've grown older, I've started to have less and less patience with what a lot of my childhood idols said. Linus is one of them, and this is just a stupid and honestly, contemptible, weak, pussy ass view to have.
>"If you cannot give the face to your insane ramblings on the social media, there should be no possibility to publish it and there should be no possibility for people to like and subscribe it"
Jow Forums literally disproves this shit. All Linus is doing is trying to silence political opposition. Right now, only certain viewpoints are allowed. A viewpoint that is outside of the Overton window is not allowed. Therefore it is in the interest of the ruling class to keep the Overton window within a manageable size. A big way to do this is to tie your in person reputation and livlihood to what you say. This keeps you in line. Especially if you are older, have kids, and thus probably have a better viewpoint.
Yup.
>people argue in good faith on Jow Forums
Imagine actually believing this
No. There are places are people's discussions are in much better faith than Jow Forums.
Funnily enough, most of them are places where you use your real name and have to stake your actual reputation on your opinions rather than just Jow Forums where you can shitpost into the void and nobody's the wiser.
Can you give any examples?
wtf i hate linus now
Hacker news for one, it's explicitly in their rules to argue in good faith and assume the best interpretation of the other person's arguments. And some people use their real names/professional identities
Other examples would be technical news groups and mailing lists.
its a lot better than reddit, especially on sensitive subjects. Its a whole metric fuckton better than IRL or facebook.
>Linus Torvalds
who?
>its a lot better than reddit,
It isn't though. Especially for depth of discussion.
The only reason HN succeeds is that it has decent moderation. As in, they don't do ideological bans, you'll only get banned for disruptive faggotry.
Sounds good.
Namecalling, adhominems, samefag calling, spreading actual misinformation are all too present here. Then there is the bravado attitude where people are always overconfident and extreme in their claims because if they make big mistake they can just casually leave the thread, and non-extreme arguments don't get the (you)s needed.
Everything Linus Torvalds said is right because he singlehanded made Linux.
He is absolutely right.
Linus Torvalds is, literally and unironically, an absolute retard. Let me tell you why in a few lines:
>likes (((ultrabooks)))
>likes (((macbooks)))
>likes (((Chrome OS)))
>sucks tranny CoC
>opposes the new GPL license
>thinks that anonimity is "overrated"
There you go. Have a nice day.
Hacker News is almost exclusively current events, I doubt it makes much difference when you are discussing things so uncontroversial as software updates however even there it's reddit layout has clear problems. All of the popular and soft opinions are usually at the top and as such your opinion has the strength or weakness of how popular it is. It is not for letting ideas stand up on their own. Countless times I've seen the top comment be nothing but worthless drivel like "Wow this is so worth discussing".
Why would they even have an upvote system but no downvote system in the first place? They are in principle the same but for some reason they only see the upvoting as a positive. Seems very inconsistent and as though they should just remove votes altogether.
On your other point, why should anyones reputation matter with their ideas? It's far too often for saying harsh truths ruins your reputation.
Oh look, it's the /v/ toddler who hates macs because they can't play his latest vidya gaems
>no possibility for people to like and subscribe it"
Then Jow Forums is a-ok because you can't do that here.
>retarded
>naive
>malicious
The only people who can say things like that unironically. Considering his "social standing" and past achievements I am leaning toward option 2 and under the external influence of individuals falling under 3.
>does anonymity breed low value content?
No, it doesn't matter. There will always be garbage content with or without anonymity. Take a look at YouTube
Namecalling and ad-homming is easily filtered and is not inherently fallacious. Having an authority decide what is and isn't misinfo sounds like no fun.
>The internet consists of Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Google Plus
And what do we learn from this? Employers are fucking dicks
It's the only way to guarantee safe and productive discussion. If you are too afraid to back your opinions with your identity then your opinions are garbage that shouldn't be shared.
As the goalkeeper of the Linux kernel it does makes sense for his work. He wants to know who is the people making contributions to the kernel and which company it'll benefit. In the context of his work it makes sense he'll say this.
>Conservatives are bitching now because they aren't allowed to be racist pricks in the office anymore
No, they're complaining because any complaint is misconstrued as racist, like your retarded self just tried to do. You can give a perfectly factual criticism of immigration for example and be turned into a pariah.
Anonymity might enable low quality content, but it also enables high quality content, the kind you could never get otherwise. Without anonymity the quality of the content becomes irrelevant because the subject matter is restrained to what's safest in terms of acceptability, it's worse than low quality, it's meaningless.
That's what taleb calls "skin in the game"
probably the reason why Jow Forums is just a shitpost landfill these days, There's no skin in the game to posting here. Nothing is at stake if I'm wrong, I'm just a critic without even a reputation for my criticism.
>Having an authority decide what is and isn't misinfo sounds like no fun.
It's not about authority, it's about the possibility of realization that the same guy who posted some bullshit 1 week ago that took people 2 hours to get through is also posting some bullshit again, but this time people know not to waste time and assume things as untrue.
It has a feedback loop where you can only really massively shitpost, lie, or do other things once or twice before people catch up to your tricks and flag you as the guy with extreme and mostly false claims. It also helps with yet another false flag thread.
What is this webm about?
>likes (((ultrabooks)))
Not bad
>likes (((macbooks)))
Not bad
>likes (((Chrome OS)))
Not bad
>sucks tranny CoC
Bad
>opposes the new GPL license
Good
>thinks that anonimity is "overrated
Debatable.
anonymity is fundamental for a free internet. take that away and people's willingness to communicate about sensitive topics or information goes away. as anonymity decreases, creativity and progress decreases as well. we are already beginning to see this now.
go on facebook/instagram/reddit and try to find people discussing a single thing has any sort of relevancy or importance. it's all fluff and bullshit because we've been trained to suppress our thoughts and opinions because these platforms are not anonymous and the things people post are permanent.
why would anyone post their distaste in their government if that post can be read by their employers, colleagues, or anyone else?
why would a scientist working for the cia reveal to the public some evil truth if him and his family/friends will face certain backlash if he does so?
so no. he's not right. this dude can go fuck himself with his orwellian ideologies
>Without anonymity the quality of the content becomes irrelevant because the subject matter is restrained to what's safest in terms of acceptability, it's worse than low quality, it's meaningless
This is only true if you only discuss politics...
What the fuck is going on with this man?
People only use anonymous image boards these days to either post inane or embarrassing shit without having to deal with the fallout. The idea that anonymity fosters constructive discussion is a joke.
yeah thats while Jow Forums is filled with retarded boomers and 14 year olds, only the highest quality of arguments are had over there
>This is only true if you only discuss politics...
And just what do you think Linus is referring to exactly?
geeet fucked
>only true if you only discuss politics
you must be new here
the hivemind exists in every single area of discussion on the internet
>posts the worst board possible
>it's still unironically vastly superior to the discussion had on facebook or reddit
really gets the noggin' joggin'
Anonymity exists to prevent persecution for your opinions.
When you're a conservative that agrees with the status quo you may be tempted to shit on anonymity but it's wholly short sited. Today you're the boot, tomorrow though? Guess again.
Do you really think any of the Trotskyites saw they were ironically laying the state framework for their own eradication? It's an act of arrogance or extreme naivety to assume you'll hold the levers of power indefinitely.
Well, it explains why everything on Jow Forums is everything porn or low content political shitposting since those are the only two domains where acceptability constrains content.
People who have interesting or novel points to make about technology would rather not post here.
Even with all of the blacked porn spam, it's already leagues better than everywhere else simply because nobody on there is at risk of losing their jobs just because they say what's on their minds.
>corporations wants us to engage in useless conversations
Dystopian af
Why is what Torvalds says relevant?
GNU/Hurd when?
RIP Linux, Window is better nigga.
Levels of anonymity have very little to do with the resulting quality of discussion. People are just as content with being retarded on facebook as they are anywhere else, they just won't give as many details.
People listen to what he says, making what he says relevant by definition.
How are you supposed to have anyone with the "wrong" opinions change, the actual safest option rather than enforcing "correct" opinions, when you are actively banning them from speaking out? Would you ban me for being an anti-vaxxer rather than let me be ridiculed and proven wrong?
Do you think such a thing would be effective and safe? I can think of one example, holocaust denial. Jow Forums constantly uses the laws around it to to spout "truth fears nothing" and such, having the exact opposite effect.
Nothing is stopping you from using a trip. You could put your money where your mouth is and make a "reputation". The only thing stopping you is the culture of this website that evolved organically.
Refer to my first point. And again, how do you plan to enforce this without an authority deciding what is and isnt misinfo?
Because how else are the discord trannies going to stick it up to the hackerman known as Jow Forums?
You are speaking like a politician.
>Too afraid to close the border!
>Too afraid to go to war!
Nobody is scared of posting their full names if they must, it's just that somehow they feel as though it's irrelevant.
>On this website, only the quality of your argument matters.
>Nothing is stopping you from using a trip
Why though? If I want to namefag and reap the benefits of being a namefag, I can do that somewhere else where the incentives are aligned for namefagging, rather than on Jow Forums where I might be told to kms repeatedly or get doxxed for namefagging. The result is that everyone stays user, people have nothing at stake to being wrong and post quality declines as a result.
Jow Forums is straight up some tragedy of the commons shit
meant for
How exactly are the incentives aligned for being a namefag anywhere else rather than here? Points?The truth is there is no incentive to be a namefag, its just an arbitrary rule that websites have. Hence why again this website evolved organically to hate namefags.
Like high quality content doesn't exist in academia. Go back to your shitty reddit discussions with this bullshit.
SHUT IT, NIGGER.
The state of Jow Forums. You fags didnt even read the article or at very least put any thought into it. Linus hates likes and traditional accounting. The face he talks doesnt even mean the death of anominity but accountability, ie /v/ shillbots and pepe shitposters get exposed but their real life personas wont.
>How exactly are the incentives aligned for being a namefag anywhere else rather than here?
You said it yourself, other website cultures don't instinctively hate namefags simply for being namefags, it's the norm and in fact required.
woah it's like shitpost don't exist
Yes, he is right.
>"Some people think that anonymity and privasy go hand on hand but I think thats not true"
He means that you can lack privacy and still have anominisity, vice versa. He is objectively correct, even if I type shit on 4chins through a proxy that doesnt mean I have any privacy. Even if I have no anominisity I can still have privacy when expressing myself.
>If you cannot give the face to your insane ramblings on the social media, there should be no possibility to publish it and there should be no possibility for people to like and subscribe it
He is right here too. If you lack a face, even if it isnt your own then you dont derserve a platform. This doesnt mean youre not anonymous, just that people can connect your posts to one opaque source. It doesnt mean one should be able to connect that source to you as a person
So having the mere option of being anonymous is enough to cause everyone to hate e-celebrity namefagging? Or is Jow Forums somehow a deity in this regard?
If that were true, why are you here?
More to do with the way Jow Forums developed and the whole "we r leejun" shit that happened in.
In the very early days of Jow Forums, it was all namefags and tripfags.
happened in late 2000s*
>Refer to my first point. And again, how do you plan to enforce this without an authority deciding what is and isnt misinfo?
Your first point doesn't refer to anything. You're not getting it because there is no central authority. Rather users can themselves see who posts things that mostly turn untrue, but is loud and opinionated, and who manages to post mostly correct information on a given topic. Users themselves are just more informed, so naturally just stop participating in discussion with people known for falsehood and arguing in bad faith, instead of either being naturally distrustful or spending time being dragged through namecall battles and double checking wild claims.
>We don't like namefagging because distinct event that nobody cares about rather than the principle of letting ideas stand on their own
Very doubtful.
The option is to be a namefag/tripfag, being user is the default. The way you worded this reply is kind of a subvertion. Hmmmm, I wonder who could be behind this post?
If you can't figure out why someone's argument is retarded on your own it's your own fault
>On this website, only the quality of your argument matters. Not your reputation or upvote points.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAH
Don't forget Jow Forums is always right
>So having the mere option of being anonymous is enough to cause everyone to hate e-celebrity namefagging?
No, that's not true at all. In fact, it's the opposite in some places.
Slashdot allows anonymous comments but anonymous comments are frowned upon much more than a post associated with a name.
Jow Forums's hatred of namefags didn't evolve naturally, it came as a result of forced anonymity by WT snacks.
May very well be true on the flip side you only get to read one opinion/discussion, and also the top comment is, 99% of the time, a joke/reference to something that has almost no relation to the original topic and adds nothing of value.
Now kys and go back.
>read the article
>in finish
>weeb
kys
reddit's dumb pun humor is the same thing as Jow Forums's edgy humor
just instead of some stupid pun you get "fuck niggers xd" and "kys xd"
same low content, unfunny shit
>not knowing Finnish
Olen hyvin pettynyt laudan tasoon
Apple Macbook has poison in it
How is Jow Forums better than practically any other forum for political discussion?
He has, and that's how he knows Jow Forums's argument are almost always complete garbage. It's even worse when you look at things in general
>Thing's Jow Forums finds based
Hating Jews
Capitalism
Fascism
Free Speech
Jews use capitalism to control "whites". Jow Forums loves to cry about free speech even though fascism requires state censorship of degeneracy.
>Jow Forums isn't one person
Yet according tot he first two posters mentioned in this post, every board that isn't Jow Forums is inferior for political discussion.
The retardation is obvious. It's your problem alone if you can't see how retarded Jow Forums is.
Forced anonimity by who?
Take a look at twitter and mass media and I'd say no. The quality is just as low, if not lower... with names and faces attached. This dude can suck an exhaust pipe. The one thing he is known for is being pried away from him by corporate money and pretty soon, he'll be yelling at clouds just like the rest of the obsolete boomer fucks left in the tech industry.
That's a poor example given that you have to fill out an entire form about your company to sign up on slashdot, whilst here you don't have to do anything. And from first glance once again it appears to be current events rather than abstract ideas.
I find it laughable that you think any historical event could fundamentally change how people use a website.
stop linking these fucking finnish sites
>That's a poor example given that you have to fill out an entire form about your company to sign up on slashdot,
no??? Why are you making up bullshit, I can go on post comments on stories under "anonymous coward" right now without any signup
You can have true discourse without any repercussions irl. That's why Jow Forums is better.
>You can have true discourse without any repercussions irl.
That's what you think. You think those retards on Jow Forums who post violent threats aren't on watchlists?
I couldn't give a flying fuck about what people on Jow Forums talk about, just don't use that as an argument to take away my anonymity on the parts of Jow Forums I use.
>You must be logged in to submit stories. You can login here. Once logged in you can still post anonymously.
Why would they say this then? I can't tell if you're trying to make a witty attack by making a username as anonymous coward or not.
>true discourse
Meanwhile most people on Jow Forums equate socialism to communism light, even though socialism can and does work already within capitalism.
Or the idea that niggers might actually be human.
That's submitting stories, not commenting.
Someone send Linus a link to Jow Forums so he can get hooked on this dumb site like the rest of us.
>he's right
>If I can't ad hominem at least your pseudonymous persona then you don't deserve to speak
Consider suicide but briefly consider that pseudonymity has never once stopped straw people astroturfers from existing. Your solution doesn't address your purported problem.
That's very inconsistent, arbitrary and not very intuitive then. Why require a signup for stories but not regular comments? The effect is the same as Reddit and Twitter anyway as all you can comment on is someone who has to go through the effort of signing up for a name which in their mind they may as well use so as not to waste their efforts.
Probably to prevent people from submitting literal fake news but not preventing them from expressing their anonymous opinion on it
Internet access should be linked to your ID. I'm glad even people like Linux are finally supporting proper policies regarding the Internet.
linuxjournal.com
>Bob: If you had to fix one thing about the networked world, what would it be?
>Linus: Nothing technical. But, I absolutely detest modern "social media"—Twitter, Facebook, Instagram. It's a disease. It seems to encourage bad behavior.
I think part of it is something that email shares too, and that I've said before: "On the internet, nobody can hear you being subtle". When you're not talking to somebody face to face, and you miss all the normal social cues, it's easy to miss humor and sarcasm, but it's also very easy to overlook the reaction of the recipient, so you get things like flame wars, etc., that might not happen as easily with face-to-face interaction.
But email still works. You still have to put in the effort to write it, and there's generally some actual content (technical or otherwise). The whole "liking" and "sharing" model is just garbage. There is no effort and no quality control. In fact, it's all geared to the reverse of quality control, with lowest common denominator targets, and click-bait, and things designed to generate an emotional response, often one of moral outrage.
Add in anonymity, and it's just disgusting. When you don't even put your real name on your garbage (or the garbage you share or like), it really doesn't help.
I'm actually one of those people who thinks that anonymity is overrated. Some people confuse privacy and anonymity and think they go hand in hand, and that protecting privacy means that you need to protect anonymity. I think that's wrong. Anonymity is important if you're a whistle-blower, but if you cannot prove your identity, your crazy rant on some social-media platform shouldn't be visible, and you shouldn't be able to share it or like it.
Oh well. Rant over. I'm not on any social media (I tried G+ for a while, because the people on it weren't the mindless usual stuff, but it obviously never went anywhere), but it still annoys me.