Is it time to remove anonymity online?

[dowie]

Lol keep digging, the OP references the recent News as another so implying it is a final nail in the coffin not just a reaction to this story. The post I quoted is utterly unrelated to the recent story and my reply clearly isn’t but you keep going

Well what other recent news story do you suppose he's referring to? And which society were you referring to?

 

[a1ex2001]

Well what other recent news story do you suppose he's referring to? And which society were you referring to?

He is referring to the football story i said that but the op’s words are ‘after reading another story’ implying it is one of many not something that stands alone. Which as I pointed out is irrelevant as I was replying to an entirely different comment that was general in nature and not related to a specific story (feel free to point out the specific story in the post I quoted). I was referring to people in general but even if you insist on tying it down to the U.K. a significant proportion (note I didn’t say majority etc etc) do still hold pretty abhorrent views as demonstrated all over the internet. You could just admit you went off on one without properly reading my post instead of diving down the Dowie hole…..

 

[dowie]

He is referring to the football story i said that but the op’s words are ‘after reading another story’ implying it is one of many not something that stands alone. Which as I pointed out is irrelevant as I was replying to an entirely different comment that was general in nature and not related to a specific story (feel free to point out the specific story in the post I quoted). I was referring to people in general but even if you insist on tying it down to the U.K. a significant proportion (note I didn’t say majority etc etc) do still hold pretty abhorrent views as demonstrated all over the internet. You could just admit you went off on one without properly reading my post instead of diving down the Dowie hole…..

LOL, I didn't go off on one, I think I made pretty fair comments, but sure, just call any reply by me a dowiehole

You referred to society allowing these views to persist but now you don't seem to want to specify which society you were referring to - I took that to imply the UK but if your use of "society" was a mistake and you didn't mean any particular society then fine... I still think you're wrong in the general case too and you have a rather pessimistic view of humanity.

As you are now commenting on the UK I would fundamentally disagree for the reasons given previously, we're talking about a tiny number of people, even including the obvious fakes and overseas posts in this recent incident. Unless you're conflating or thinking of stuff like voting for Brexit or being anti-immigration.

 

[a1ex2001]

LOL, I didn't go off on one, I think I made pretty fair comments, but sure, just call any reply by me a dowiehole

You referred to society allowing these views to persist but now you don't seem to want to specify which society you were referring to - I took that to imply the UK but if your use of "society" was a mistake and you didn't mean any particular society then fine... I still think you're wrong in the general case too and you have a rather pessimistic view of humanity.

As you are now commenting on the UK I would fundamentally disagree for the reasons given previously, we're talking about a tiny number of people, even including the obvious fakes and overseas posts in this recent incident. Unless you're conflating or thinking of stuff like voting for Brexit or being anti-immigration.

I concede obviously you know best - lol dowie hole!

 

[dowie]

Anyway, back to the topic at hand, some more stats for anyone who might think this is a particularly significant or widespread issue rather than one that has been amplified/hyped up, from well-respected news channel GB News, Andrew Doyle is sensible as per usual:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1415401738685800451

Note the analysis he mentions, he's thrown in the stats that have been mentioned in the other thread already but also the hope not hate analysis re: the group stages - they looked at 585,000 posts mentioning football players names, 2,114 were abusive (sadly fairly standard with football) so 0.36% and 44 explicitly racist so 0.0075% of the tweets!

OP has changed his views on anonymity online because of this issue - though is it really more of a perception issue because of the amount of media attention it has been getting as really it seems to be a fringe minority.

 

[pp111]

Do you want to be tracked for everything and anything? Why not have someone just follow you around all day taking notes on what you're doing? Going to the bathroom, oh hi there... etc.

You think we aren't already?

The moment you once give your real name and address while using a PC, whether that is to Microsoft or Amazon or whatever, then you are marked and tracked for life! They literally follow you around taking notes about every single thing you do. Your ISP records all the sites you visit, and almost every site you visit on the web has cookies that belong to the big names - Amazon, Google, and so on and so on. Some web sites will put up to 40 trackers on your PC. I mean I think at last count Curry's drops 9 trackers on your PC before you say YES to accept cookies then drops another 9 when you do say yes. Many medical sites will drop up to 30 trackers, because they love to know what illness you have. Even if you ditch the trackers it's too late, Google have access to millions of sites that don't even belong to them so even if you attempt to block them they still know you have been there! I think anyone who actually even believes that anonymity exists is misguided. The police just don't have access to the information or in most cases can not be bothered to get the information... but it does exist.
Personally I think anonymity should not exist if you care to give your opinion on the internet. We should always be accountable for what we do and say. But I also think that the loss of anonymity should be a decision and action we knowingly take and not just enforced on us when we aren't even aware of it. Companies and governments should not be allowed to gather our information without us knowing.

 

[Eurofighter]

We just need moderators on Facebook. Like this great forum. Perhaps Facebook could create jobs with all its dosh.

 

[Deleted User 298457]

We just need moderators on Facebook. Like this great forum. Perhaps Facebook could create jobs with all its dosh.

It employs tens of thousands of moderators. Unfortunately a lot of these are poor folk out in India, Philippines; can you imagine living a sheltered village life, joining a big tech firm, and then moderating gore and abuse videos?

 

[SixTwoSix]

Supposed to be a massively high burnout rate for mods on FB and similar platforms too, based on some of the videos and imagery they come across, violence, child abuse being the most obvious.

 

[dowie]

Supposed to be a massively high burnout rate for mods on FB and similar platforms too, based on some of the videos and imagery they come across, violence, child abuse being the most obvious.

That does pose a slightly worrying question re: who they end up selecting for long term if most quit for those reasons.

 

[Eurofighter]

Pay them more then. Facebook aren't short of cash.

 

[Dirk Diggler]

After reading another story about racist abuse online, is it time that anonymity is removed?

Back in the day I was against removing anonymity. But these days I'm not sure. Sadly people are exploiting it to cause so much trouble that it's becoming more difficult to defend it.

What do you think?

100%, yes.

 

[SixTwoSix]

Pay them more then. Facebook aren't short of cash.

I think the pay can only compensate so far, some of the imagery would stay with you for quite some time. Also dependent on personal circumstances, for example, since my 4 year old was born, any violence/abuse towards kids messes me up, even fictionalised in movies/TV. I'm sure there are others who can easily compartmentalise this however and more power to them. I sadly can not.

Quite a good article here, pay isn't great - https://www.theverge.com/2019/2/25/...-interviews-trauma-working-conditions-arizona

 

[Eurofighter]

I wouldn't like to do it either. Better AI maybe?

 

[SixTwoSix]

I wouldn't like to do it either. Better AI maybe?

I'm not sure what the answer is, for the moment I think it needs a human to check the content, maybe as systems improve, it could be more reliant on computers.

What shocks me is the amount it gets posted in the first place and in the most public of social media spaces.

 

[GGizmo]

If accounts are to be verified before being allowed to post then I hope the database is secure, and isn't farmed out to adult companies of a dubious reputation - like they were suggesting to do with adult verification.

 

[GGizmo]

Note the analysis he mentions, he's thrown in the stats that have been mentioned in the other thread already but also the hope not hate analysis re: the group stages - they looked at 585,000 posts mentioning football players names, 2,114 were abusive (sadly fairly standard with football) so 0.36% and 44 explicitly racist so 0.0075% of the tweets!

Andrew Doyle is one of the best presenters so far on the channel. It is really interesting stats from hope not hate. Because they are the top anti-racist group around. So for them to present this data, when many people might say they have an interest to inflate racism, makes this data even more valuable.

 

[fez]

Andrew Doyle is one of the best presenters so far on the channel. It is really interesting stats from hope not hate. Because they are the top anti-racist group around. So for them to present this data, when many people might say they have an interest to inflate racism, makes this data even more valuable.

Yes but as he said, there are groups who have a vested interest in pushing the message that the UK is institutionally racist and every other person is a terrible racist.

This is the logical result of taking what absolute bell-ends on twitter say as anything more than the raving of idiots. That goes for all topics. Twitter has been at the forefront of a lot of nonsense lately and quoting people on twitter in mainstream news like they represent the views of millions is downright stupid and irresponsible.

You can find someone on twitter who has every kind of bizarre view on a matter and you can probably find another 10 that agree with them. It doesn't make their opinion valid.

 

[Hilly]

Do you want to be tracked for everything and anything? Why not have someone just follow you around all day taking notes on what you're doing? Going to the bathroom, oh hi there... etc.

It's the almost the same thing, where that information can easily be requested and used against you. It can also be exposed in hacks, and used against you.

The reality is, if banks and Police can't be bothered to track down all the fraudsters out there, I highly doubt 'casual racists' are gonna be bothered with.

There's a difference between anonymity and being tracked;

I think the OP is referring to having a central identity which is linked to social media accounts upon sign up / verification; Meaning if you're the type of individual which will abuse people behind your social media account, using racist remarks and other hatred then that could be linked.

There's a whole plethora of what ifs based around this - who looks after the central DB, what happens if your account gets cracked (there would have to be MFA as standard on all accounts), what type of information will be stored in the DB etc etc

 

[dowie]

Andrew Doyle is one of the best presenters so far on the channel. It is really interesting stats from hope not hate. Because they are the top anti-racist group around. So for them to present this data, when many people might say they have an interest to inflate racism, makes this data even more valuable.

Yup, but you'll still get the people with brain worms being like "omg that's GB news, not objective" etc.. despite the fact it's directly citing fairly objective data from a well-regarded organisation.