Question for the masses because I’m curious:

What do you think social media would be like if there was no anonymity?

Is it fair to say some people behave differently online because of anonymity?

Would it be good or bad if everything you posted could be tied back to you by your friends, family, employer, etc?

Some obvious concerns people express:

  • personal safety
  • freedom to express views contrary to community, government, etc without retaliation
  • fear of stigmas related to support, education, etc for stigma topics like mental health, sexuality, etc

What reasons do you have for not wanting to own your online identity other than being able to talk trash without being identified? Some people are public and still talk a lot of trash, looking at you Twitter.

You you got doxed, what do you think the impact would be just related to social media conduct?

Edit: With the introduction of online protections for minors, how does that affect the question?

Not from a political standpoint but from a technology one, how do you see that even working?

  • Dave@lemmy.worldEnglish
    24·
    11 months ago

    I’ll flip the question around: what are you trying to achieve with zero anonymity, and how could it be abused? Is the tradeoff worth it?

    If real identity is required to participate, but is not publicly displayed, who would you entrust with this information, and how could it be abused?

    • MSgtRedFox@infosec.pubOPEnglish
      29·
      11 months ago

      The phrase cognitive dissonance comes to mind.

      • I like the idea of being accountable for your activities, for some it would cause some thoughtfulness. It’s interesting to be able to scroll through a person’s activity and see how they treat people, the reasoning and logic behind their thoughts, etc. Facebook has this. I don’t think it counters much though. I feel like people double down on their views when challenged instead of reflection these days.

      • However, as well mentioned previously, people publicly scream ridiculous stuff. It doesn’t always prevent cyber bullying or curtail really convicted people from sharing unpopular, extreme, or hurtful things.

      • It’s sometimes nice to know who you are communicating with instead of a persona. I’m not a fan of deceitful context or misrepresentation. Opinions are funny. You ask a question, get a good answer, but have no idea who really said it. If you take advice from social media platforms, you might be taking advice from a kid, adult, senior, etc. There’s interesting pros/cons with that.

      • I think whistleblowers still need Anonymity to allow affective reporting, but I’m not sure that’s on social media sites.

      • calling out or spreading information on bad industry practices is a pretty good example of an advantage.

      • Overall, I don’t think there is as much idealistic positive effects on the social media experience as people might think/wish.

      • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
        English
        6·
        11 months ago

        You didn’t answer the questions that the poster asked.

        " who would you entrust with this information, and how could it be abused?"

        • MSgtRedFox@infosec.pubOPEnglish
          26·
          11 months ago

          Hmm, I trust the government because I don’t have a choice. Same for my ISP. Same for MS, Google, LinkedIn. They all mine data to compile and sell for ads. I don’t really care, I don’t buy crap I don’t want.

          A guy named ‘Jerry’ runs the instance my account is on. I guess I wouldnt care if he knew who I was. It would be nice if I knew exactly who he was since he owns all our data in his systems.

          Abuse in mild forms is a matter of opinion. I’m indifference to data mining in return for free services because I don’t buy crap I don’t want. I mostly hate advertising because it’s a distraction and you never get more time. Ever.

          Abuse towards identity theft already happens every moment of the day. If the government provided digital identity services that could be used to sign in everything, maybe I wouldn’t have to put my social security number into anything anymore.

          • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
            English
            5·
            11 months ago

            Hmm, I trust the government because I don’t have a choice

            It’s my understanding that the Arab spring was partially possible because of social media like Twitter which allowed organized protests against the government.

            Another huge problem with real names is internet creeps doxxing women. If teens go to extraordinary effort to uncover the real names of people like Boxxy, then there would be a huge increase in online stalking if getting a real name was trivial.

            As to Jerry watching your instance, a volunteer doing Lemmy as a hobby means there would likely be huge security lapses as time goes on and Jerry can’t keep up with maintenance because of work/family obligations.

            If you think real names are useful, then you could post your name and address right now instead of using a handle. It would be the start of a real name movement that is opt in instead of forced.

            (The reason for name and address is to identify the unique John Smith from the other John Smith’s. Otherwise people with common names keep their anonymity and people with unusual names are identified. )

          • dezmd@lemmy.worldEnglish
            51·
            11 months ago

            The irony of having an account on infosec.pub and not understanding even basic needs for personal infosec.

            Did you ever know a world without smartphones in your adult life?

          • MSgtRedFox@infosec.pubOPEnglish
            22·
            11 months ago

            I’d rather someone explain why they don’t like something then just down vote it. Seems lazy? I usually only down vote low effort or trash talk.