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.
Linus Torvalds: "Anonymity is overrated"
Jack Cooper
Caleb Lopez
>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.
Jayden Ramirez
>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.
Henry Kelly
That's submitting stories, not commenting.
Colton Cox
Someone send Linus a link to Jow Forums so he can get hooked on this dumb site like the rest of us.
Hunter Fisher
>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.
Christopher Morgan
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.
Aiden Adams
Probably to prevent people from submitting literal fake news but not preventing them from expressing their anonymous opinion on it
Ryder Hughes
Internet access should be linked to your ID. I'm glad even people like Linux are finally supporting proper policies regarding the Internet.
Isaac Wilson
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.