Arguments Against Pseudonyms

Hate speech on the Internet is a growing problem for the United States and Japan because it is targeting individuals on the basis of personal characteristics. Brown (2017) argues that cyberhate has three different qualities: anonymity in the sense that individuals are not compelled to reveal aspects of their offline identity unless they wish to do so; invisibility there is a physical distance between speaker and audience; instantaneousness provides people with almost instantaneous publishing. The justification for promoting speech is founded on a concern for the facilitation of discourse democracy, while the rationale for preventing harm is based on a concern for human dignity.

“Dragnet Nation” author Julia Angwin and Bruce Wayne are surprisingly similar. Both have struggles with keeping private life private, dealing with baddies, and being a bit paranoid. However, unlike Batman, “Dragnet Nation” isn’t groundbreaking. Yet despite stating obvious facts, and doing more to entice paranoia than inform, Angwin does have a solid underlying point: They key to online privacy is pseudonymity. Providing false information in order to protect oneself and others, is quite simple to apply, and can deter social engineering attacks. Be that as it may, pseudonymity can be used for less noble purposes.

The media outrage over this young ladies recent suicide . It was reported that the organization released wrong information in trgsrds tp who the person was that commited such actions againt Todd. I don’t belive that the true anonymous should be protected. The minute he chose to be malicious in his acts, not just once but continued to persue her until she took her own life. At that moment I felt he lost that priviledge just like Amanda Todd did and had no option of getting that back. Life-threatening manipulation and criminal activity on the internet is one of the most noticeable problems to privacy. Overall, offensive anonymous correspondence and posting is done mostly by those who have just learned of inconspicuousness servers and when the newness wears off, the rate of recurrence of the exploitation declines. Nevertheless, a slight minority of individuals who use anonymity servers are sociopaths who are fascinated by the easiness with which they can evade accountability and liability for their doings. Amanda Todd harasser be it the accused that anonymous identified or someone else is the perfect example of these

There are a large manifold of arguments against obscuring of identities. For example, They say that it would be harder to find terrorists and cybercriminals online as a result as they could not be traced. However, that reasoning is false. The majority of terrorists and cyber criminals would obscure their identities or create fake web accounts whether or not it is legal. They also say Cyberbullying would increase due to the fact that bullies would not have fear of being caught(7). Still, these arguments are wrong on the grounds that it would be harder for cyber bullies to find their victims by

A simple definition of Anonymous tend to emphasize the fact that the concept cannot beencompassed. Instead, it is often defined by aphorisms describing perceived qualities. One self-description is: “We are Anonymous. We are Legion. We do not forgive. We do not forget. Expect us.”Reporter Chris Landers of Baltimore City Paper say “Anonymous is the first Internet-basedsuperconsciousness. Anonymous is a group, in the sense that a flock of birds is a group. How do youknow they’re a group? Because they 're traveling in the same direction. At any given moment, more birdscould join, leave, peel off in another direction entirely.”No official way of communication between members of Anonymous has been announced, but the group isbanded together by the Internet. Signs of members communicating has appeared on sites such as 4chan,711chan, Encyclopædia Dramatica, IRC channels, and YouTube. Social networking services, such asFacebook and

Secondly is the issue of anonymity and confidentiality of the participant. Ensuring that no one including the researcher can not link the information to the participant is very challenging (Coup & Schneider, 2007). To maximize the effort of protecting participant anonymity and confidentiality, the researcher suggested to use pseudonyms (or invented/fake names). Pseudonyms is usefull to protect participants anonymity and confidentiality (Coup & Schneider, 2007). However, only using

Registration is the most simple and acceptable way of discouraging anonymity, and limiting posts of negative comments. Many companies have started to follow this concept in order to prohibit anonymity on their websites. For example, in the writing "Where Anonymity Breeds Contempt" Julie Zhuo discusses the issue of anonymity and how this problem has effected many

Pseudonymity is the practice of doing work in the name of an author that is deceased, a person that was famous at one time or another. Jewish writers produced several books writer by biblical deceased writers such as Daniel, Enoch, Noah, David, Solomon, Isaiah, Ezra and Moses. The Book of Daniel was one of those book that was rewritten and accepted into the Hebrew Bible (Harris,2014).

Pseudonymity is the practice of creating new works in the name of famous deceased authors (Harris, 2014 p.  387). In Hellenistic Judaism and early Christian writing, it was common to see this and it was often used to express the thoughts and ideas of the author as if they were still alive.  Writers often use this practice to show praise for the author’s work, not as a means of deception.  However, this practice makes it difficult to determine authorship for some pieces of work, and scholars have questions several pieces of the New Testament, including six of the Pauline letters and seven Catholic Epistles documents (Harris, 2014 p. 387).  Some believe that this type of writing was tolerated by the Christian church, while others disagree, stating

The Internet has become a vast and limitless place for education, entertainment, and community. It is an extraordinary virtual world that abets in satisfying our insatiable curiosity. Every World Wide Web voyager controls their adventure from the security of their living room cockpit while retaining anonymity through a username. From this invention we have changed our daily routines dramatically; we have developed a desire to share our thoughts and opinions with complete strangers. From these two key elements: ambiguity and self-expression a new being has been forged, The Internet Troll.

The rapid growth in technological innovation has brought about an increase in information via digital platforms, bridging communications all over the world from different geographical locations. This progression of virtual interactivity has enabled the possibility of anonymity, and it has deliberated continuously whether it aids or hinders society, and questions the efficacy of anonymity. One aspect of anonymity is that it is implemented in the identity of online self-representation through the discourses of general communication, cyberbullying and hacker criminality. Therefore, the character of obscurity is crucial in specific online actions and this will be analysed throughout. Anonymity acts as a different tool for every purpose, and how it impacts individuals and society in varied measures. There are consequences of invisibility, in both positive and negative aspects which tailor an individual’s online portrayal. Focusing on how invisibility can be democratic and influence community building, but at the same time encourage immoral behaviour, reflects the prominence of cyberbullying and corrupt activity.

Numerous are of the perspective that when on the web, you are joined with the world, and nothing of what you share on this stage can stay private. They surmise that there is no such idea as Internet protection in the genuine sense. In any case, there are other people who advocate the need of protection on the Internet, and considerably favor namelessness while

The internet has created anonymity, which enables the internet users to fail to be recognized. There are certain sensitive issues within the society where people are afraid of speaking of publicly. For example, it is risky to provide certain facts about the president since there are certain laws that prohibit provision of certain information that does not have evidence. In such a case, it would be risky for an individual to provide such information especially when they do not have sufficient evidence. The internet has provided anonymity where users do not have to reveal their personal information. The anonymity feature enables users to address some of the sensitive issues within the society without fearing any form of intimidation from the government or the public. However, the feature of anonymity has been disregarded by some of the members of the public who state that some internet users use it in intimidating others and spreading fake news. Looking at the feature from a bright

“You look like an ugly slob” “who cares about you”-from no name. These comments are a growing problem. I hope to increase the awareness of media users on the pros and cons of using anonymity online. While elaborating with Guardian opinion editorial topic of anonymity, I will demonstrate the negative aspect of anonymity; cyberbullying, predators ,and unethical behavior. I will also show the positive aspect that anonymity has on privacy.

Incivility in the online world is partly caused by anonymity, but anonymity has its place in the internet and needs to stay. Incivility is often described as social behavior that is lacking in respect, or good manners. A lot of people have reasons to believe that anonymity is the sole reason behind incivility online, and while it plays a huge role, anonymity has an even bigger role in the conversations happening online in the first place. Maria Konnikova, a bachelor in psychology and creative writing, writes about anonymity encouraging people to participate in discussions because their words won’t be attached to them and that if comments on internet articles were taken away, the connections we often-times make with these articles or news stories are taken away as well. Richard Bird, a freelance writer who frequently speaks about the loss of civility today, argues in his article that the ability to communicate anonymously online threatens civility severely. Bird claims that anonymity encourages incivility, like Konnikova in her article. Finally, Rich Heldenfels, a retired pop culture writer for the Akron Beacon Journal, claims that American politics has always lacked civility and isn’t a new problem at all. Heldenfels claims that media makes incivility appear to be a bigger issue than it is. In my paper, I will explain the arguments of the authors of each paper, compare them to one another, and share my thoughts and possible solutions of the problem that is online