Slashdot Mirror


When Writing, How Anonymous Can You Be, Really?

An anonymous reader writes "Do you still think your online writing is, basically, anonymous? Think again! Research has it people put much of their personal traits into their writing, and computers may just be able to pick them up. That's at least what a recently announced competition on author identification (Given a document, who wrote it?) and author profiling (Given a document, what are its author's age and gender?) wants to find out. Alas, re-using other people's writing is no solution either; there's also a competition on plagiarism detection (Given a document, is it an original?). Wanna revisit your recent rants?"

184 comments

  1. Yes, we know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    As previously reported on Slashdot. Now, please identify me. Here's a hint: I have a 5 digit UID.

    1. Re:Yes, we know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      I got this one. You sir are Anonymous Coward, with UID 00666. Now, what prize do I get for this?

    2. Re:Yes, we know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Why are you replying to yourself?

      Wait. Why am I replying to myself again?

    3. Re:Yes, we know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Warning: Infinite Loop. {Author} Identified: {Unidentified Author}.

    4. Re:Yes, we know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1 Infinite Loop

    5. Re:Yes, we know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      2 Infinite Loop

    6. Re:Yes, we know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stack overflow

    7. Re:Yes, we know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm the real Anonymous Coward.

    8. Re:Yes, we know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Will The Real Anonymous Coward Please Stand Up Please Stand Up

    9. Re:Yes, we know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      All you other Anonymous Cowards are just imitating.

    10. Re:Yes, we know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And so's my wife!

  2. Guess who I am! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    >throw machine at 4chan
    >"Identify!"
    >all posters sound the same
    >machine concludes all posters are part of a highly advanced AI
    >machine becomes depressed that it will never create anything wonderful like the spaghetti threads or /mlp/
    >kills itself
    >mfw

    Based on the above, who am I?

    1. Re:Guess who I am! by Sasayaki · · Score: 2

      Moot? Is that you?

      --
      Check out my sci-fi book "Lacuna" at http://goo.gl/MVxX8
    2. Re:Guess who I am! by durrr · · Score: 2, Informative

      >Based on the above, who am I?
      Anonymous

    3. Re:Guess who I am! by somersault · · Score: 2

      >mfw

      Based on the above, who am I?

      I'm guessing a retard who doesn't understand that this abbreviation means "my face when".

      --
      which is totally what she said
    4. Re:Guess who I am! by durrr · · Score: 1

      Maybe he don't have a face?

    5. Re:Guess who I am! by Genda · · Score: 2

      No its his third cousin "Inane".

    6. Re:Guess who I am! by Genda · · Score: 1

      Are you suggesting this poor soul has a butt at both ends?

    7. Re:Guess who I am! by snspdaarf · · Score: 2

      Are you suggesting this poor soul has a butt at both ends?

      Yeah, like that's a rare condition in the world today.

      --
      Why, without your clothes, you're naked, Miss Dudley!
    8. Re:Guess who I am! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Based on the above, who am I?

      I know who you are not: APK. No mention of a Hosts file anywhere in your post (let alone in every sentence).

    9. Re:Guess who I am! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >>I'm guessing a retard who doesn't understand that this abbreviation means "my face when".
      >mfw he doesn't know people just say mfw without putting up a picture all the time

    10. Re:Guess who I am! by somersault · · Score: 1

      But I had a suspicion some people think it means something else. For example an obvious one you could guess is "motherfucking win". And if you go to UrbanDictionary, you'll see that some people do think it means that (though they've been downvoted to hell). This guys usage would indicate otherwise, as there's no way to even imagine what his face might be like after his random story. At least with yours we know it's probably a facepalm.

      --
      which is totally what she said
  3. Uh huh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Like facial recognition.... I am sure this works wonderfully when it only has 10 or 20 exemplars to compare against, but it fails miserably as it scales up. Good luck conclusively identifying an author when there are over a million profiles to potentially match with.

    1. Re:Uh huh... by Mitreya · · Score: 2

      Like facial recognition.... I am sure this works wonderfully when it only has 10 or 20 exemplars to compare against, but it fails miserably as it scales up. Good luck conclusively identifying an author when there are over a million profiles to potentially match with.

      Or like fingerprints that start giving off larger number of false-positives when compared against a large enough database of entries.

      Consider this: they don't have to conclusively identify the original author. It will be good enough to find someone with similar writing (i.e. also a subversive) and charge them instead of the original perpetrator. And good luck proving that you didn't write that

      Mmmm, a national database of writing samples collected from everyone in school... that sounds like fun.

    2. Re:Uh huh... by vlm · · Score: 1

      The profiling competition only bins into 10s / 20s / 30s which seems extremely lame. Can't they at least try Myers Briggs category or something? Maybe that would be too patented/copyrighted....

      Wake me when they make something monetizable (OK the categorize tool reports: highly educated, technically oriented, 30s, raised in the midwest, ultra low TV viewing quotient, classical education literature coeff extremely high, also a high sci fi reading coeff, verbal indications of extreme physical attractiveness ... mush that up against the user DB and ... oh I see that's VLM (69642) trying to post as AC)

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    3. Re:Uh huh... by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      ... it fails miserably as it scales up.

      Text recognition was good enough to identify Ted Kaczynski. One thing that helped in Ted's case was that they had a lot of text. His manifesto was 35,000 words.

    4. Re:Uh huh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You may be able to at least geolocate based on certain turns of phrase

    5. Re:Uh huh... by russotto · · Score: 2

      Mmmm, a national database of writing samples collected from everyone in school... that sounds like fun.

      I never thought not doing my homework would pay off so well :-).

      There's definitely going to be false positives. I've seen other people's writing that was nearly word-for-word identical with my own, and there's no way they saw mine (nor I theirs) before writing it.

    6. Re:Uh huh... by Kjella · · Score: 2

      Quoting from that WP page:

      which led to his brother and his wife recognizing Kaczynski's style of writing and beliefs from the manifesto

      It's a whole different thing to recognize a person's beliefs - if possibly in a more extreme form - than what they've written on an entirely different subject. Quite possibly they recognized specific examples, theories, arguments or conclusions he had used as well. I'd wager this was 99% content and 1% style which really clinched that it wasn't some other crazy nut bag with the same ideas. I recently ran into one online that had some rather unique conspiracy theories, if they started showing up anywhere else it'd 99.99% sure be the same guy. He could write a whole book and I wouldn't recognize him on writing style alone though.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    7. Re:Uh huh... by chrismcb · · Score: 1

      Consider this: they don't have to conclusively identify the original author. It will be good enough to find someone with similar writing (i.e. also a subversive) and charge them instead of the original perpetrator

      I doubt a major news network, would ever just blindly claim the wrong person did it.

    8. Re:Uh huh... by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      It is comparatively easy to establish that Author A did NOT write a particular document, than to prove conclusively that he DID write that document. In the latter case, you can establish that he probably wrote it, with a high confidence level in your findings, but it's not conclusive proof. It probably is proof enough to get a warrant to examine his computer(s), in an attempt to get that conclusive proof.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    9. Re:Uh huh... by Runaway1956 · · Score: 2

      The larger the sample of a person's writings, the more accurate this thing will become, of course. The nature of the writings will also influence the accuracy. In school, even an essay is going to be very similar to other people's essays, as they are unlikely to contain a lot of original thought. Everyone is doing their best to feed the teacher the responses that they believe the teacher wants to be fed.

      Now, if your ex girlfriend were to give these researchers everything that you ever wrote to her, there would likely be more original work, giving more insight into your mental processes, than your homework ever contained.

      Even more revealing, would be any discourses that you have ever written on politics or philosophy. With those, you would be revealing one hell of a lot about your mind, and how it works. Given a hundred pages of such musings and ramblings, you would be pegged pretty accurately, and a genuine researcher wouldn't mistake anyone else for you.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    10. Re:Uh huh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Well put.

      As a test, I just looked through my own posts on slashdot and selected a four word string I use pretty often that seemed somewhat unique, but not obviously so.

      I combined that string (in quotes) with site:slashdot.org on Google. At least two of the results returned in the first page were me, made over the course of the last few weeks.

      Now of course there are others that used that in their posts, but had someone picked that string from something I posted AC they'd know there was a good chance it was me. And they'd have my real name, website, etc.

    11. Re:Uh huh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ???!

      If it is possible to write programs that identify a style, it is possible to write program that copy a style. Nothing is certain. This is witchcraft.

    12. Re:Uh huh... by westlake · · Score: 1

      Or like fingerprints that start giving off larger number of false-positives when compared against a large enough database of entries.

      The false positive is significant only when it is plausible.

      Their partial prints may be a close match, but the 86 year old wheelchair-bound Vet in a hospice on Staten Island is probably not the killer who shot up a liquor store in Buffalo last week.

    13. Re:Uh huh... by Dr+Damage+I · · Score: 1

      If witchcraft can be used to manufacture probable cause, law enforcement officials will be dancing in circles skyclad faster than you can say "I really didn't need that image in my head thank you very much."

      --
      "Cursed is he who rises early in the morning..." Isiah 5:11
    14. Re:Uh huh... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      If it is possible to write programs that identify a style, it is possible to write program that copy a style.

      Processes are not necessarily symmetrical or reversible. It's much easier to calculate a hash for a file than to concoct a file with a given hash.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    15. Re:Uh huh... by war4peace · · Score: 1

      Everyone is doing their best to feed the teacher the responses that they believe the teacher wants to be fed.

      Interesting. In fact, I tried to screw the teacher with my original essays because I was smart enough both to do it and afford screwing the teacher. That activity, however, was limited to my native language and English.
      It was fun.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    16. Re:Uh huh... by girlinatrainingbra · · Score: 1
      re: Mmmm, a national database of writing samples collected from everyone in school... that sounds like fun.
      :>(
      A national database of writing samples... it already exists for a large number of high school and for an even larger number of college students. It's called Turnitin.com http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turnitin and many students are required to submit their homework essays through their site. Some students have sued to not include/submit their work, and some have sued (with two examples of students from McGill on the wikipedia page, Go Canadians!).
      .
      It does provide a sadly interesting example of where "click-wrap" licenses have been ruled to be valid: Nearly a year later, Judge Claude M. Hilton granted summary judgment on the students' complaint in favor of iParadigms/Turnitin,[22] because they had accepted the click-wrap agreement on the Turnitin website.

      Perhaps clicking on EULAs without reading them can be dangerous after all.

    17. Re:Uh huh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mmmm, a national database of writing samples collected from everyone in school... that sounds like fun.

      Cardinal Richelieu's wet dream come true!

    18. Re:Uh huh... by invid · · Score: 1

      They don't have to conclusively determine the author based only on text analysis. It is just one tool to narrow the search sufficiently to use other means to conclusively identify someone.

      --
      The Moore-Murphy Law: The number of things that will go wrong will double every 2 years.
    19. Re:Uh huh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also worth noting that this is the "short buss" implementation of the concept. A more thorough analysis of your writing could take advantage of details like:
      1. actually statistically significant word usages (rather that something eyeballed as being "uncommon and repeated a lot in your writing")
      2. spelling and grammar irregularities
      3. macro level organization of the work (for example common words which you are more likely to use in the introduction of a work than the conclusion but most people use with less bias)

    20. Re:Uh huh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok, symbolset

    21. Re:Uh huh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You had me at "tried to screw the teacher"

    22. Re:Uh huh... by war4peace · · Score: 1

      Sadly, most of them were male, and those who weren't... could've fooled me.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
  4. Can it beat Google? by sandytaru · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Google thinks I'm a 20 year old male. I'm in my early thirties and a gal. I think visiting Slashdot so much throws off its algorithm, as does all the video game sites I hang out at. You'd think the searches for things like "gel nails" might tip them off, but it's probably further confused by my lack of visits to Pinterest.

    I'd be interested to see if this program can do any better at analyzing my writing than Google does analyzing my search history.

    --
    Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
    1. Re:Can it beat Google? by monkeyhybrid · · Score: 4, Funny

      Thank you for updating your age and gender details in our databases.

      Yours sincerely,
      Google.

    2. Re:Can it beat Google? by Kergan · · Score: 2

      I second that. According to Google, I'm an old, obese dude in desperate needs for new abs and viagra. Go figure.

    3. Re:Can it beat Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Google thinks I'm a 20 year old male. I'm in my early thirties and a gal. I think visiting Slashdot so much throws off its algorithm, as does all the video game sites I hang out at.

      I think you misunderstand the purpose of the algorithm. A writing sample is, of course, insufficient to detect your age and gender precisely.

      There is a good chance that your writing style matches that expected of a male in their twenties, in which case the algorithm had done well. You may be a gal, but your interests and behavior is perhaps more similar to that of a male in their twenties, and for the purposes of predicting what to sell you or what to expect from you, that's actually more accurate than your actual stats.

    4. Re:Can it beat Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Since this is Slashdot, I'm betting you actually are a 20 year old male.

    5. Re:Can it beat Google? by sandytaru · · Score: 2

      See, that's where the Google algorithm programmers got lazy. They assume that too.

      --
      Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
    6. Re:Can it beat Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I second that. According to Google, I'm an old, obese dude in desperate needs for new abs and viagra. Go figure.

      Being female doesn't mean you're not in the market for viagra.

    7. Re:Can it beat Google? by demonlapin · · Score: 3, Funny

      You'd think the searches for things like "gel nails" might tip them off

      Nah, just makes it think you're emo.

    8. Re:Can it beat Google? by pla · · Score: 2

      I think visiting Slashdot so much throws off its algorithm, as does all the video game sites I hang out at.

      Back in my youth, a friend consciously chose a handwriting style specifically to throw off so-called "handwriting" analysts. Of course, he chose to incorporate all the worst traits possible, meaning anyone looking at a sample of his writing would either immediately get the joke, or would back away slowly in fear for their life.

      Funny to think that in the modern world, "handwriting" has become an all-but-deprecated "legacy" skill, but I did take a lesson from his example - I use an entirely synthetic online writing style, right down to an artificial regional dialect (though oddly, not the one I try for - automated profilers such as the summary links usually describe me as midwestern for reasons I don't quite know - Though still badly wrong, so, no harm done).

    9. Re:Can it beat Google? by pla · · Score: 1

      Why did you post as AC? You have the single most insightful comment yet!

      No one interested in this tech cares what reproductive hardware you have - They care what you'll buy, simple as that.

      Kudos for the good call!

    10. Re:Can it beat Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't speak for that AC, but maybe it's for the same reason I post as AC: I don't possess a Slashdot account. I don't need one. My opinions stand on their own merits.

    11. Re:Can it beat Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seems that Google has my account mixed up with yours. I'm that old fat obese man though I do not need viagra,yet.

    12. Re:Can it beat Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had a similar problem with Google showing me womens fitness sites and stuff like that. I'm a 27 year old male who is in to weight training. Google also shows me ads for womens clothing, probably because I clicked on an American Apparel ad once.

    13. Re:Can it beat Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I did this as well with my handwriting` though mixed good and evil traits throughout my writing characteristics... its been loads of laughs over the years` including getting security clearances and gun licenses and professional screening before etc,,, keep poisoning the wells of the enemy's surveillance databases... we shall remain free and bring them down

    14. Re:Can it beat Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you like lesbian porn?

    15. Re:Can it beat Google? by Gaygirlie · · Score: 1

      I'd be interested to see if this program can do any better at analyzing my writing than Google does analyzing my search history.

      I don't know where you can see what Google thinks you are, but I have used various tools that analyze my writing and then try to guess my age and gender, and well, all those tools typically guess me as a 40+ male. I do not expect any program based on this research to be any better.

    16. Re:Can it beat Google? by Jessified · · Score: 2

      He's just trying to throw you off his scent. The first guess was right.

    17. Re:Can it beat Google? by girlinatrainingbra · · Score: 1

      M.I.T. (instead of GaTech ) has an affiliated program at the University of Georgia? I would have thought/expected that Georgia Tech would be the affiliate program, rather than Massachusetts Institute of Technology...

    18. Re:Can it beat Google? by sandytaru · · Score: 1

      It's the acronym for the degree program - Master of Internet Technology.

      --
      Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
  5. astroturfers by vlm · · Score: 1, Funny

    This would have been a lot more fun about two months ago to detect paid political astroturfers.

    The ultimate AI-ish application would be an astroturfer plugin for chrome probably called "AstroturfBlock". So the site is a "tech" site, the contents are pure politics, and the text analysis system indicates an unemployed liberal arts degree holder... Go ahead and block it.

    --
    "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    1. Re:astroturfers by sco08y · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This would have been a lot more fun about two months ago to detect paid political astroturfers.

      The ultimate AI-ish application would be an astroturfer plugin for chrome probably called "AstroturfBlock". So the site is a "tech" site, the contents are pure politics, and the text analysis system indicates an unemployed liberal arts degree holder... Go ahead and block it.

      How is it going to detect whether people were paid to write something?

    2. Re:astroturfers by Mitreya · · Score: 2

      The ultimate AI-ish application would be an astroturfer plugin for chrome probably called "AstroturfBlock".

      How is it going to detect whether people were paid to write something?

      You also need a blacklist database of known astroturfers (well, their writing samples, you don't need their identity) for this system to work

    3. Re:astroturfers by Jeng · · Score: 1

      There are usually key words they are paid to promote in their writings, for search purposes.

      --
      Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
    4. Re:astroturfers by vlm · · Score: 1

      How is it going to detect whether people were paid to write something?

      Thanks for pointing out a minor bug in my project design. The answer, of course, is it doesn't matter. If a "tech" site is getting flooded with unemployed journalism grads posting stereotypical political talking points who cares if they're being paid or not, block the fools.

      AstroturfBlock would be exactly like how I don't care if an ad account is in collections with the middlemen, or its a donation, or whatever, I just want adblock to block ads.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    5. Re:astroturfers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same way you distinguish spam. Just as for spam there will be an arms race. For spam the good guys pretty much won so far. Who knows how the astroturf wars of the twenty-tens will turn out.

    6. Re:astroturfers by sco08y · · Score: 1

      Thanks for pointing out a minor bug in my project design. The answer, of course, is it doesn't matter. If a "tech" site is getting flooded with unemployed journalism grads posting stereotypical political talking points who cares if they're being paid or not, block the fools.

      AstroturfBlock would be exactly like how I don't care if an ad account is in collections with the middlemen, or its a donation, or whatever, I just want adblock to block ads.

      Okay, fair enough. The major bug, then, is that astroturf works because people buy it. Like all the fake shit *constantly* going around Facebook.

      You're trying to solve the troll problem: blocking the troll is easy peasy, it's blocking all the assholes who feed the troll that's the problem.

      Okay, granted, "deny: *.facebook.com", but there are a lot of false positives there.

  6. Why do you think I post on Slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That way I can muddy the waters by creating extraneous sets of data that can't be ruled out.

  7. This should prove... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Once and forall, IP is bullshit, because you can easily use a computer to forge all peoples un-original derivative work that is really just a result of their environement, upbringing and brainwashing.

    P.S. This rant was written in a different style and with better spelling and grammer then most of my other AC rants.

  8. I just don't try to be anonymous in writing by acroyear · · Score: 4, Interesting

    One example are the company performance surveys, that are supposed to be anonymous. I cant answer questions like 'how do you think the company leadership is doing' without effectively giving away who I am - my opinion is based on my position, and thus is easily inferred.

    --
    "But remember, most lynch mobs aren't this nice." (H.Simpson)
    -- Joe
    1. Re:I just don't try to be anonymous in writing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, writing style evolves. Sometimes quite dramatically.
      I read quite a bit and that's the trend I see, even for experienced writers, the style changes quite a lot in a series from the first book to the last.

    2. Re:I just don't try to be anonymous in writing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "my opinion is based on my position, and thus is easily inferred"

      Since you're one of only about three people in the world who actually knows what the word "inferred" means, they've got you pegged right there.

    3. Re:I just don't try to be anonymous in writing by Mitreya · · Score: 1

      I cant answer questions like 'how do you think the company leadership is doing' without effectively giving away who I am - my opinion is based on my position, and thus is easily inferred.

      You _could_ try talking to people in different positions (and write from their perspective) to solve that problem :)

      It could be that one of your underlings is already writing responses tailored to look like it is written by someone in your position in hierarchy.

      Anonymous surveys are easily gamed.

    4. Re:I just don't try to be anonymous in writing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > how do you think the company leadership is doing

      "Really shitty"

    5. Re:I just don't try to be anonymous in writing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and you and I are the other 2

    6. Re:I just don't try to be anonymous in writing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Run everything you write through a Yoda filter. :D

    7. Re:I just don't try to be anonymous in writing by Jessified · · Score: 1

      Well I think a more impressive piece of software than this one would be a program that can "understand" writing and deconstruct the meaning of the message to it's simplest form. If all anonymous writers used the same software, they would all have the same "style."

      Obviously you would only use it for writing that needed to be anonymous, because a large part of writing is the personality you put into it.

      Here's an example of software that seems to "understand" language, posted to /. in the past:

      http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2011/language-from-games-0712.html

    8. Re:I just don't try to be anonymous in writing by girlinatrainingbra · · Score: 1

      i don't get what you're implying... (sarcasm, in case anyone wants to respond to me with a "whoosh!" comment") [also a comment on people who confuse/misuse "infer" and "imply" in place of each other].

    9. Re:I just don't try to be anonymous in writing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought the other two were Price Albert - who is dead - and a German professor - who went mad.

  9. Authors can use these tools too. by StripedCow · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Of course, authors can use these tools too, and then iteratively change their texts until they cannot be correctly identified or profiled.

    Just like spammers can check whether their e-mails ends up in spam filters before sending them.

    It will be a never-ending cat and mouse game.

    --
    If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
    1. Re:Authors can use these tools too. by aNonnyMouseCowered · · Score: 1

      The only "authors" who would benefit from this would be undercover agents and trolls. What would be the point of mutating the way you write so that you can no longer be identified or linked as the author of what you wrote before?

      An example to make my point clear. Suppose you're an Islamic fundamentalist ranting about US cultural imperialism. Using the tools you gradually change what you write, under a sequence of aliases, until soon you have the online opinions of a Neocon!

      It would have been easier if you simply wrote less and didn't take strong opinions on everything under the sun.

    2. Re:Authors can use these tools too. by mdielmann · · Score: 1

      An example to make my point clear. Suppose you're an Islamic fundamentalist ranting about US cultural imperialism. Using the tools you gradually change what you write, under a sequence of aliases, until soon you have the online opinions of a Neocon!

      While I'm sure that the topic and position on that topic are part of the algorithm, I suspect it's a little more involved in that. Otherwise, there's going to be this one guy who just happens to be an Islamic fundamentalist, dislikes the Great Satan, and is quite a prolific writer. Likewise, I'm sure we could find a different tone of writing between the various Neocons.

      --
      Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
    3. Re:Authors can use these tools too. by AnotherBlackHat · · Score: 1

      What would be the point of mutating the way you write so that you can no longer be identified ...

      If you are writing characters for a story, you might want them all to have unique, easily identifiable speech patterns.

      Also the traits that stand out and identify you most are probably really annoying.
      You might want want to reduce them.
      For example, you might want to not use the phrase "might want" nearly so much if it was brought to your attention.

    4. Re:Authors can use these tools too. by Jessified · · Score: 1

      How about a protestor in a repressive regime, like China? Wouldn't they rightfully want to be anonymous?

      You basically argued "nothing to hide, nothing to fear."

  10. Betteridge strikes again by complete+loony · · Score: 2, Funny

    When Writing, How Anonymous Can You Be, Really?

    No.

    --
    09F91102 no, 455FE104 nope, F190A1E8 uh-uh, 7A5F8A09 that's not it, C87294CE no. Ah! 452F6E403CDF10714E41DFAA257D313F.
    1. Re:Betteridge strikes again by Psychotria · · Score: 1

      When Writing, How Anonymous Can You Be, Really?

      No.

      No? As an answer to that rhetorical question? Answering "No" doesn't make any sense at all; did you read the question?

    2. Re:Betteridge strikes again by Psychotria · · Score: 1

      I just had a sudden thought. A brainwave!

      I am going to start writing articles with headlines like "What is the average height of giraffes?" Answer: No. "How much do you plan to eat of the holidays?" Answer: No

      I shall be rich!

    3. Re:Betteridge strikes again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can hear Consuela say it..

    4. Re:Betteridge strikes again by sco08y · · Score: 1

      I just had a sudden thought. A brainwave!

      I am going to start writing articles with headlines like "What is the average height of giraffes?" Answer: No. "How much do you plan to eat of the holidays?" Answer: No

      I shall be rich!

      Can't wait for the German edition. "Should I vear lederhosen or bundhosen? NEIN! Vill ve invade Russia or Poland? NEIN! Do you prefer Strauss or Wagner? NEIN!"

    5. Re:Betteridge strikes again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When Writing, How Anonymous Can You Be, Really?

      No.

      No? As an answer to that rhetorical question? Answering "No" doesn't make any sense at all; did you read the question?

      Betteridge joke.

      Woosh?

    6. Re:Betteridge strikes again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You wooshed several people replying and two moderators. Well done sir.

    7. Re:Betteridge strikes again by complete+loony · · Score: 3, Informative
      Betteridge's_law_of_headlines

      Any headline which ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no

      Whoosh.

      --
      09F91102 no, 455FE104 nope, F190A1E8 uh-uh, 7A5F8A09 that's not it, C87294CE no. Ah! 452F6E403CDF10714E41DFAA257D313F.
  11. Who am I? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    well?

    1. Re:Who am I? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're Ike. I can tell by the lower case "w". How the hell are ya?

  12. How long until we have obfuscation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It wouldn't be that hard to write a script that would randomly swap your words with ones from a thesaurus run through Berkeley's FrameNet so it makes sense. Boom, statistically impossible to detect the same author.

    Additionally, with a little more effort you could alter your sentence length and swap prepositional phrases around with some pattern-matching algorithms.

    1. Re:How long until we have obfuscation? by Chrisq · · Score: 1

      It wouldn't be that hard to write a script that would randomly swap your words with ones from a thesaurus run through Berkeley's FrameNet.

      nevertheless conjecture it prevail comprehensible?
      (but would it be understandable?)

  13. Re:That's pretty easy by SpazmodeusG · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Your exact version of chrome combined with the exact version of various plugins you used (flash, pdf readers, add blcokers etc) can all be reported to the server and when combined they lead to a lot of bits of entropy. Tor won't help you get around that.

  14. Re:That's pretty easy by SomePgmr · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Most people would just use something like Tor (or Tor and another VPN/proxy service).

    Erm... the transport doesn't matter if you're analyzing message composition.

    Wasn't this part of what that Barr guy was doing to try to figure out who members of Anonymous were? I think I read recently that he turned out to be right about the one that ran to Canada.

  15. Re:That's pretty easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Actually, Tor comes prepackaged with a browser with privacy settings enabled by default. The server shouldn't be able to differentiate you from any other user of the stock Tor bundle.

  16. Not only writing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can tell a girl's age based on her trim.

    1. Re:Not only writing by snspdaarf · · Score: 1

      I can tell a girl's age based on her trim.

      Do they change cant or pitch as they age?

      --
      Why, without your clothes, you're naked, Miss Dudley!
  17. C'nsidr'n haw speshal ma ria'n is.. by kawabago · · Score: 1

    prbly ez to id me.

    1. Re:C'nsidr'n haw speshal ma ria'n is.. by game+kid · · Score: 1

      Took me a while to figure out if that was just bad spelling or a chant to Cthulhu.

      --
      You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
    2. Re:C'nsidr'n haw speshal ma ria'n is.. by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      I had no problem reading it, since I have two daughters in their twenties. The GP has seldom if ever used a keyboard and does all his writing on a numberpad-only feature phone.

  18. why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wanna know who why the lucky stiff is

  19. Re:That's pretty easy by Spottywot · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Actually, Tor comes prepackaged with a browser with privacy settings enabled by default. The server shouldn't be able to differentiate you from any other user of the stock Tor bundle.

    That's for the TOR bundle if used as they recommend, but the article is about identifying authors by what they write, them not about idintifying by technical means. On Slashdot not RTFA could be used as an identifying metric but on the other hand it's a rather wide net.

    --
    In a cybernetic fit of rage she pissed off to another age...
  20. So the author of Hamlet can finally be identified? by Mister+Liberty · · Score: 1

    I bet it's Shakspeare.

  21. which way do you want it? by swell · · Score: 1

    As a professional writer, I wish to be less anonymous. Hello, New Yorker?

    As one of billions who are exposed, I doubt that I will attract any attention regardless of this technology. Perhaps they will figure out who really wrote Shakespeare's plays, but surely they will devote fewer resources to the rest of us.

    --
    ...omphaloskepsis often...
  22. Very Anonymous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because nobody would bother to go that far to find out who said anything that I say anonymously. If I was really worried about someone figuring out it was me I'd be a lot more careful.

  23. We all do it, so why not an algorithm? by Spottywot · · Score: 4, Interesting

    We can all (I hope) recognise authors quotes whom we have some familiarity even if we haven't read the passage in question before. Terry Pratchet quotes for instance stand out a mile, Frank Herbert can be identified by the fact that he'll use the word 'subtle' at least twice a paragraph. Even here on /. certain posters styles identify them without having to read their UID, Girlintraining is an example (for me at least), hell I can spot her posts purely based on the responses to her posts for gods sake.

    With the privacy arms race going on right now on the internet, identifying people based on what they write *and* their style, is not only the magic bullet for Big Brother, but quite acheivable given a big enough sample,

    --
    In a cybernetic fit of rage she pissed off to another age...
    1. Re:We all do it, so why not an algorithm? by onyxruby · · Score: 1

      Interesting claim, since I know girlingtraining. I would be curious to see if you can identify alternate accounts girlintraining has used.

    2. Re:We all do it, so why not an algorithm? by Spottywot · · Score: 1

      No I don't know any of her alternate accounts, but then again I haven't been looking for any, unlike the software suggested in TFA. Now that I *do* know I'll maybe keep an eye out for them, though even suggesting that sounds a bit creepy.

      --
      In a cybernetic fit of rage she pissed off to another age...
    3. Re:We all do it, so why not an algorithm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yup, you're right. We can all recognise someone like, say APK(Hosts file anyone?) even with him posting AC.

    4. Re:We all do it, so why not an algorithm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Onyxruby, I served with girlintraining. I knew girlintraining. Girlintraining was a friend of mine. Onyxruby, you're no girlintraining.
      .
      jk
      .
      ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senator,_you're_no_Jack_Kennedy Senator, I served with Jack Kennedy. I knew Jack Kennedy. Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine. Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy.

      2nd joke: do you know girlintraining, or do you know girlintraining? Or in fact, is onyxruby another avatar for girlintraining? I hadn't thought of that until just now...

  24. Anonymity In The Digital Age... by SuperCharlie · · Score: 1

    The problem with anonymity is that we have become addicted to digital..well..everything. Once you have the data in a digital format it is merely a matter of algorithms, storage, and computational power to pretty much wring whatever you want out of the data. I was a loud mouth Libertarian for quite a few years.. I ranted and threw in my 2 cents at a lot of places online.. then things like the att closet data capture and facebook image recognition started popping up and the writing on the digital wall was pretty much done. I expect nothing I do digitally not to be intercepted, databased, scanned, weighted saved for future use. Imho the only real option for any privacy is not to make it digital in any way including cell phones, land lines, or any other type mass communication.. but thats just me and my tinfoil hat..

  25. that's not how it works by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    they use the analysis to identify a small range of who to watch to find certain confirmation they have the right guy

    law enforcement tools are not limited only to 100% certain ones. the fuzzy ones are used to narrow down a list of targets, where law enforcement's limited manpower can be better spent to find certain confirmation

    It will be good enough to find someone with similar writing (i.e. also a subversive) and charge them instead of the original perpetrator. And good luck proving that you didn't write that

    if you live in a country with good law enforcement, this is hollywood fantasy and/ or paranoid schizophrenia, not reality. you want to actually catch the actual perp because you actually want to prevent crimes

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:that's not how it works by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if you live in a country with good law enforcement, this is hollywood fantasy and/ or paranoid schizophrenia, not reality. you want to actually catch the actual perp because you actually want to prevent crimes

      Tell that to Gerry Conlon.

    2. Re:that's not how it works by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if you live in a country with good law enforcement, this is hollywood fantasy and/ or paranoid schizophrenia, not reality. you want to actually catch the actual perp because you actually want to prevent crimes

      The problem in the US is that some districts have crappy law enforcement, where the cops are so over-worked that they are tempted to take short cuts to get the "guy they know did it but can't get enough proof to make anything stick" to confess.

      In those cases is't not out of the realm of possibility that they run in the wrong anti-social weirdo because the computer matches his high-school paper to the Unimbomber manifesto, then beat the shit out of him until he confesses. In that case you have a tool designed to be used to narrow a suspects list being effectively solely responsible for the conviction.

  26. Re:That's pretty easy by Genda · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I have Dupytren Contacture. It foreshortens the tendon on my ring fingers of both hands. The result is that when I typing fast I make common repeatable mistakes in typing as well as common typographical errors due to muscle memory. The use of certain vocabulary fixes who you are to those who may be watching, illuminating social exposure, education or intelligence. There are simply so many ways to measure the content a person generates. In a world that growing abhors common anonymity, but reserves that right only for those with the wealth and power to build high walls, we need to ask whether or not we are willing to limit our self expression to remain quietly safe.

    I for one would rather be known as a trouble maker, than not known at all for what it is that I feel moved to say.

    Give me liberty or give me death is still the moral high ground.

  27. Re:That's pretty easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Most people would just use something like Tor (or Tor and another VPN/proxy service).

    Erm... the transport doesn't matter if you're analyzing message composition.

    Right, it's not about the identity - it's about matching different pieces of text as written by the same author

    Once the texts are matched, your identity is compromised as long as ONE of the texts is coming from a known identified source (email, etc.)

  28. Re:So the author of Hamlet can finally be identifi by M.+Baranczak · · Score: 3, Funny

    Kevin Bacon.

  29. Re:That's pretty easy by Spottywot · · Score: 2

    >

    I for one would rather be known as a trouble maker, than not known at all for what it is that I feel moved to say.

    Have to agree with you there, however I imagine there are people out there for whom this style of tool would be a terrifying prospect, depends where you stand I guess.

    --
    In a cybernetic fit of rage she pissed off to another age...
  30. Re:That's pretty easy by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

    Traceability, ie, masking your IP address, has almost nothing to do with the article. Just damned near nothing.

    You can find a few dozens of my posts here on slashdot. You might browse to another site, where someone has posted, using my identification. Based on my thought processes, my writing style, my use of punctuation, etc, you can COMPARE the documents, and decide with a pretty high probability that either, A: I am the same author or B: I am not the same Runaway1956 that posted that other document.

    The title is a little misleading, as I might post thousands of posts online, and remain anonymous. It's likely that the more posts I make, the less anonymous I become, but anonymity isn't really the issue addressed in TFA.

    --
    "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
  31. Re:That's pretty easy by Runaway1956 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Yep - that was part of Barr's stock in trade. He compared posts made by anon members in various venues, then traced some of those members to identify them. An IRC server was critical to Barr's process, as I recall. Or, more accurately, the IRC server was critical in this particular instance, as it maintained logs that some of the other servers did not.

    --
    "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
  32. Wanna revisit your recent rants? by PvtVoid · · Score: 1

    Timothy's put-downs have been getting a lot of undeserved attention recently. For starters, I don't care what others say about Timothy. He's still nasty, two-faced, and he intends to dig a grave in which to bury liberty and freedom. Now stay with me a moment here; I am making a point. Specifically, if my own experience has taught me anything, it's that he thinks that he's a tribune of the oppressed. However, his endeavors are so lewd that they are easily taken up and assimilated by spiteful, fork-tongued authoritarians, whose intellectual level corresponds to the material offered. On the other hand, I admit I have a tendency to become a bit insensitive whenever I rebuke Timothy for trying to lay all of society open to the predations of organized criminality. While I am desirous of mending this tiny personality flaw, Timothy has made it known that he fully intends to emphasize the negative in our lives instead of accentuating the positive. If those words don't scare you, nothing will. If they are not a clear warning, I don't know what could be. Let me conclude by saying that we who want to deal summarily with unscrupulous snobs will not rest until we do.

    1. Re:Wanna revisit your recent rants? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lol wut?

  33. Freedom of speech by ub3r+n3u7r4l1st · · Score: 1

    are only afforded by the rich, connected and well-armed. For the others, be careful what you say, anywhere.

  34. Re:That's pretty easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Scenario:
    Repressed journalist uses Tor to write blog on evil dictator.
    Evil dictator can read blog, but owner is anonymous.
    Evil dictator puts text into identification machine.
    Identification machine spits out a name of a journalist in his country (doesn't even matter if its the right one.)
    Journalist is tortured and dies in squalid prison conditions.

  35. Nobody Cares Enough To Find Me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nobody cares enough to identify me by my writings.

    Isn't most of what we say pure vanity anyhow?

  36. Left a Bad Trail by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    Wanna revisit your recent rants?"

    Oh shit!.....I mean, oh darn!

  37. RTFA by Omestes · · Score: 1

    Which is pointless if your actual writing can give you away. No amount of Tor/VPN or whatever, will do anything useful if your actual writing itself can lead back to you. If I use every anonymity trick in the book, the gig is still up the second I say "Hi, I'm Bob Smith, of 6424 N. 22nd Street, Akron OH".

    Sure, you could make a magical anonymous internet, but it defeats the purpose of trying to disseminate whatever your writing to an audience, unless your only going for a very small, select audience of people using the same scheme. And even then, if others could access it, you still might not be anonymous.

    --
    A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    1. Re:RTFA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'm Bob Smith, of 6424 N. 22nd Street, Akron OH

    2. Re:RTFA by Omestes · · Score: 1

      AKA Spartacus, or AKA John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt? If the later, that is my name too.

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
  38. Re:That's pretty easy by Omestes · · Score: 3, Interesting

    n a world that growing abhors common anonymity...

    I'm not even sure of this anymore. I'm beginning to think the death of anonymity is inevitable due to nothing but technology; ubiquitous networking, computing power, and near infinite storage. Even without the government, and unregulated corporate behaviors (how else do you stop data farming?), the ability would still be there, and someone would harness it.

    I'm not supporting killing the ability to be anonymous, or supporting the actions of people who would exploit it. I just think that it is going to get increasingly hard to maintain it. Soon we'll see anonymity like we see encryption, not a concrete, perfect, thing, but a matter of degrees. There will be no true anoniminity, but only how much time and resources it would take to unmask people. This, probably, is already true. A determined person, with expensive resources, could probably find almost anyone.

    Hell, a couple months ago I got curious about a childhood friend, someone I haven't seen or talked to in over 20 years. It took about 15 minutes of half-hearted idle searching before I figured out where he lived, how much his house cost, and when he bought it (including a recent Google map of it, and a builders layout, where he worked, his rough income, the car he drives, his wife's name, where her parents live, that his mother recently died, and his father is in a retirement home, etc... I gave up after 15 minutes because I got a bit creeped out. I'm not a PI, I didn't buy any tools for this, I only used Google. I can't even imagine what I would have found if I spent more time, and effort, and money on it.

    --
    A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
  39. No -- he got the guy's name from WHOIS by TheSeatOfMyPants · · Score: 5, Informative

    The only thing that Barr did correctly was look up WHOIS info on the People's Liberation Front's website after an Anonymous guy claimed to be "Supreme Commander" of the PLF... When Barr confronted him, the guy claimed it was a joke, so Barr pointed to an innocent man instead. (Ars Tech article on the 'correct' Commander X.) Otherwise, Barr's tactics -- including analyzing what the people wrote -- gave him completely wrong answers.

    --
    Now mostly at Usenet:comp.misc & SoylentNews.org (it's made of people!)
  40. Re:That's pretty easy by wmac1 · · Score: 1

    Face recognition software can recognize individuals out of a huge pool of millions using statistical classifiers. It is also possible to identify a person's handwriting with similar methods.

    I bet it is possible to use a classifier to find the author assuming that it has been trained with a long enough text written by him and the unidentified text has enough length.

    It has nothing to do with your internet link. It uses the traits you leave in your text.

  41. good luck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This message is encrypted with triple google translation.

  42. KDD Challenges and Previous Research by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This isn't new news. There have been KDD challenges for this exact subject for years now. I did one at Rutgers in 2005 trying to differentiate the various Suzuki's who published to PubMed. Plenty of other research in this area too: http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=kdd+challenge+author+identification&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart&sa=X&ei=ZZnOULLcNOHWiwL7t4GACQ&ved=0CDAQgQMwAA

  43. Re:That's pretty easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Easy - use spell check, and a google translate round-trip... Now you get this:

    I have Contacture Dupytren. It shortens the tendon in my ring fingers of both hands. The result is that when I do write quickly repeatable common typing errors and common typing errors, due to muscle memory. Using a fixed vocabulary are the ones who can see, illuminating social exposure, education or intelligence. There are many ways to measure simply the content of a person generates. In a world that hates common anonymity growth, but this right is reserved only for those who have wealth and power to build high walls, we must ask ourselves whether we are willing to limit our expression to remain silent safe.

  44. And you wonder why... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm posting as AC.

  45. You should know better.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you type in a computer that run a program NOT made by you, then you already subject yourself to "invasion of privacy". This is a sample of how many line of code some of the OS in the world:
    http:// en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Source_lines_of_code#Example

    Have you examine all of those source code for malware/0-day exploits?

    Even if you type in the computer that you yourself program it from the beginning. Are you sure the hardware chips that it run, doesn't have a "rough" circuits on it? And are you sure your program doesn't have any 0-day exploit because you forgot something?

  46. Re:That's pretty easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's likely that the more posts I make, the less anonymous I become, but anonymity isn't really the issue addressed in TFA.

    Yarhg! Be that as it may, I say it be bad form and dim to boot, unanonymizing this way! Damnation seize my soul if'n I pay no heed to keep'n me cloak about ye ol' peg-legs. T'is be simple as a break'n wind along with it t' keep hidden from them low-down lily livered scalawags wot're search'n me out: Why, I merely tangle me tongue and the trail's gone dead as doorknobs an' twice as twisted.

    Can not imposter posters post postings hosting hosts of most of prior sent sentences with intent to sentence sentence science reliant on compliance to rules to fools' tools?

    I'll even toss them bilge rats a bone: I be havin' a southern accent! Yarrr!

  47. Re:That's pretty easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, it's pretty scary. I make anonymous posts on here sometimes when I'm unable to help myself. You see, I'm a pedophile... but not a child molester, and never offended against a child in any form or fashion (avoid them at all costs). IOW, I've never done anything wrong as far as my pedophilia goes. I consider myself a good person because I didn't do anything to deserve this. I can't help that I'm attracted to boys... all I can do is control my actions, and I fully understand that any sexual behavior with boys, including grooming or anything, is wrong and there's never any circumstances where it's okay. However, I feel a lot of guilt, self-hatred, low self-esteem, depression and lots of other stuff about it. Sometimes I post here on /. when the topic comes up. I try to get people to become aware that being a pedophile doesn't mean that that person is a bad person. Being a pedophile doesn't mean they are a child molester. That I'm a good person and I do a lot of good things. People hate pedophiles because they can't understand them, and they associate them with rapists, kinda like how in the past a black person = rapist or a homosexual person = rapist etc. We're the class that everybody loves to hate, the bottom of the totem pole.

    So yeah. When I post here anonymously, I worry that I will eventually be recognized by my writing style, vocabulary choice, etc. I know it's unrealistic paranoia, but things like this article can be a bit scary. If people knew who I was then I might be threatened, harassed, or hurt because of it. And I don't deserve that.

    Here's some other posts:

    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2841383&cid=39963075
    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2972853&cid=40623507
    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3286189&cid=42157271

    Just by posting this, I am allowing a little risk to occur. How anonymous am I, really? I must be crazy for typing these messages. I just want people to know that there are a lot of people like me who haven't done anything wrong and are really good people who are, unfortunately, dysfunctional and lead very painful and dismal lives trying to cope with their sexual deviancy. I know I won't ever do anything to a boy. Ever. But I still get suicidal over it now and then. I still hate myself very much. I still feel shame and degradation. It still completely disrupts everything in my life because everything stems from it. Because of the guilt and pain, I'm an addict who escapes it by getting fucked up. because of that, I'm very dependent, have no diploma, driver's license, career, job, insurance, money, nothing. very few friends, and I'm avoidant and suffer a lot from depression and anxiety and guilt. Even though I've done nothing to deserve this.

    I know everybody has their demons and their problems. Mine aren't the worst. But it is a very difficult hand of cards to play with. Often it is unbearable.

    Anyway, I can understand what you're saying about how powerful Google is and how difficult it is to be truly anonymous now. How much information you can glean about someone is scary. I have a friend who fell in love with a girl he met casually. he only knew her name but with google he was able to find out so much and it wasn't long before he was following her on facebook, on pinterest etc. While it was fairly innocent, I mean, he wasn't doing anything bad (he wasn't stalking her), it was illuminating and frightening to see what it's like now. When I was a kid things were nothing like this. Things continue to evolve in unexpected directions.

    Sorry. I shouldn't post this. Nobody cares about this.

  48. assimilation rape by epine · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Wanna revisit your recent rants?

    I can't stand how every slashdot story submission has to end with a pink flamingo smoke grenade. I'm guessing that sober "just the facts, ma'am" submissions still exist, but rarely make it through the selection hoop of our post-counting overlords.

    I have several online pseudonyms which I make an effort to keep separate. I rarely post the same idea under more than one identity. If I post it here, it doesn't go there. I prefer to keep things separate so far as I can. I also have some background in computational linguistics. I've known for fifteen years that there is absolutely no way to win this battle long term. Only the most insipid comments will escape long-term annealing. If the word "gay" is the all season tire on your social media K-car, then your identity is safely concealed within the deep-wank weeds.

    If every post you write contains colourful language or idiom such as "all-season tire of deep-wank camouflage" you're toast and you know it, clap your hands. Merely getting my possessives and plurals and possessive plurals right more often than not narrows the net substantially. I might pedantically write Harry S Truman without putting a dot after the S (Snopes: "Although the 'S' was not technically an abbreviation and therefore did not need to be followed by a period, Truman's full name was generally rendered as 'Harry S. Truman' during his lifetime ..."). I make use of colons, semicolons (these come and go), mdash appositives, and parenthetical side-notes--at least one of these in almost every paragraph I write. I post way more links than the average person. My thoughts meander. There is playful use of language with double readings. I subvert cliche to achieve double readings that enable me to circle away from my target, then loop back from an unexpected angle. My unit of thought is the paragraph more so than the sentence.

    Even with all those signatures, originality in word selection is my neon tattoo. The corpus analysis algorithms likely don't do much (yet) with originality. Hard to characterize. For a while my anonymity might pass through the gun-metal algorithms unmelded by virtue of my writing being too bright and distinctive and easy to trace. But not for long. Even the fractal filigrees of originality will be coded eventually. (Pay no attention to the alliteration: an accident, not a stylistic signature.)

    Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn.

    This is about respect. We all live a double life, pretty much all the time. We speak differently in front of our mothers (most of us) than with the lady-killing rough necks at the peanut bar or power tie horn-dogs at the chichi sushi bar.

    I value anonymity because I don't wish to own everything I say on a literal level, stripped of context, devoid of my original conceit or persona.

    I happen to regard linearity as a social construct. Humans are not inherently linear in cognition or constitution. We learn how to cultivate linear facades in our areas of competence (but not necessarily around the edges: this is why a competent accountant consults his astrologer Madam Threenipple). If you like the primary facade you have, and it suits all purposes, then I suppose you'll see the charm in proclaiming it from the RealName rafters.

    If you're a Baptist homosexual (I've known a few), you might wish to string your public identity by separate ropes.

    Or maybe you've just got things to work out. You're figuring things out on the fly and trying them on for size and you don't wish to fall prey to the Joseph McCarthy clean-nose auto-da-fe "have you ever". Implication: Anything you've ever said will be permanently recorded and will classify you irretrievably. This despite 0/1 statistics never passing T-scores. If the same person also has an NRA membership and has been a career employee of the Hoover Institute for two decades? Still a communist. Ten times more dangerous.

    The kind of person most willing t

    1. Re:assimilation rape by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude . All you have to do is make your entire post in BOLD and say words like, oath breaker, mother fucker, and commie fag, piece of shit, domestic terrorist, unconstitutional (or any re-arranged cluster thereof) and you've got my style . Stick your periods in the middle sometimes, or even add numbers.

      1. Jackasses
      2. Wackadoodle
      3. Domestic Terrorists

      The more vulgar slang you can fit in the better, some people say every other fucking word out of my god damn mouth is the word fuck!? Do you think they're right in being upset, or they are fucking piece of shit morons who can't see the constitution coming down around them like I do? When you understand the scope of the corruption, treason, war profiteering, monetary system raping, and just plain evil psychopathic shit, you will find it's harder to speak, your words may even be slurred from justified anger.

      So why not start at the source? Fuck the DSM 5!
      Psychiatrists are engaging in quack science as a political weapon. Don't like your enemy, pick something NDAA -- see ya, DSM - see ya, enjoy your paxil, xoloft down the pie and then rabbit hole, who knows maybe you can be the next mass shooter? thanks DSM world is such better place now.

      Regarding the Spying:
      This desire to identify people for everything they do is not the way humans were designed to interact
      We were designed to have THREE separate lives

      Public - Work/Television
      Private - Wife/Children/Close Friends
      Individual - God/Belief/Religion/Self

      When you mix these three lives, disaster happens, this shit destroys lives.

      When you force people to jump through hoops to hide their identity from the police state, it's not the individual that's the bad guy, it's the police state.
      Why do we put up with this shit? They're the ones who consistently said fuck the constitution after raising their hand to swear to protect it.

      We the people are not bad. These Oath breaking scum are.
      Question is, what the fuck are you going to do about it.

      This concludes my style. Now dear spies, go fuck yourselves.
       

       

  49. Fortunately your anonimity is safe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please formulate this into a query that is computable in polynomial time.

  50. The Unabomber concurs. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Unabomber concurs.

  51. It can be done without software by AxeTheMax · · Score: 1

    About two years into my current job, I was able to guess which of my longer serving colleagues had written or contributed to various anonymous documents and reports floating around the office. The processes are easy; learning what words they use misuse or confuse, who writes in a more formal or a more chatty style, those who seem to be unable to leave out detail or write a precis when appropriate, et.c. What confuses this is copy-editing and the numerous copied passages that are typically found in such documents.

  52. Google translate by acid_andy · · Score: 2

    I just have to turn my writing English Finnish, Russian, and, finally, through the back to English again. Analysis software!

    --
    Your ad here.
    1. Re:Google translate by acid_andy · · Score: 1

      Just for completeness here, that started out as: I'll just translate my writing from English to Finnish, through Russian and finally back to English again. Analyse that, software!

      --
      Your ad here.
    2. Re:Google translate by JockTroll · · Score: 0

      No. You must think in Russian. You cannot think in English and then translate.

      --
      Geeks are so full of shit that "beating the crap out of them" takes a whole new meaning.
    3. Re:Google translate by bingoUV · · Score: 1

      So, they just have subpoena Google to get you? Cool.

      --
      Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
  53. Re:That's pretty easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    you can COMPARE the documents, and decide with a pretty high probability that either, A: I am the same author or B: I am not the same Runaway1956 that posted that other document.

    Or that C: Someone imitated your linguistic style.
    Just because most people avoided Creative Writing class did not mean all of us did, and there are quite a few people who are more than capable of mimicking various linguistic styles which are not naturally their own.

  54. There are 4 simple rules by nickol · · Score: 1

    There are 4 simple rules that will help you to avoid this type of identification:
    1. Be brief
    2. Write seldom
    3. Plagiarize!
    4. Do not write in your mother tongue.

    1. Re:There are 4 simple rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. 4 may actually be detrimental if you make characteristic mistakes.

  55. ctrl-c ctrl-v by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tha iss why I only quote other people. It is for you to guess from whom this is comming.

  56. Re:That's pretty easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, and this is why I have vmware and several VMs. Depending on which identify I feel like being today is which I will use. I also change browser and plugins and use other methods.

    Although, considering that simple javascript can ID a machine based on its clock I'm not exactly sure how successful I am.. still.. it's worth a try.

    So. Any guesses on my slashdot id? :P

  57. translate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Simple, write in one language and run through online translator to another.

    If you only speak one language, write then translate, then pick another translating service and run through that.

    I highly doubt that any algorithm is going to be able to figure that one out.............today. The future well who knows.

  58. This only works for old people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now, if they could make their research apply also to conversations involving meme generators or lolcats, that would be something...

  59. Challenge accepted! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Re: see if you can identify alternate accounts girlintraining has used... Challenge accepted!
    1 - are you a black gem?
    2 - do you wear a training bra?
    3 - is your sock a puppet at times?
    4 - are you female exclusively, or are your accounts bisexually identifying?
    5 - do you have an animal account and a vegetable account to go along with your mineral (onyxruby) account?

  60. Automated translation? by Swervin · · Score: 1

    I wonder what happened if you used automatic translation, like google translate, to translate to a different language and back. I bet that would make it a lot harder to match to other things you wrote, especially if you used a different intermediate language each time. Having to touch up the obvious errors might still provide a partial "fingerprint" of your writing style though.

  61. Not Really News by assertation · · Score: 1

    This isn't really news. I've been having discussions online since before AOL & Windows 3.1 existed, when the hot things were email lists and Usenet.

    Trolls were around even then and once they would get booted off or blocked they would don new aliases, which fooled nobody.

    Their style of writing gave them away.

  62. Re:That's pretty easy by Omestes · · Score: 1

    Anyway, I can understand what you're saying about how powerful Google is and how difficult it is to be truly anonymous now. How much information you can glean about someone is scary. I have a friend who fell in love with a girl he met casually. he only knew her name but with google he was able to find out so much and it wasn't long before he was following her on facebook, on pinterest etc. While it was fairly innocent, I mean, he wasn't doing anything bad (he wasn't stalking her), it was illuminating and frightening to see what it's like now. When I was a kid things were nothing like this. Things continue to evolve in unexpected directions.

    This is another thing... People are much less adverse to sharing now, at least in the younger generations. When I was young, and the Web new and full of pretty much no-one but nerds, everyone I knew strove of pseudo-anonymity, and tried to keep a divide between their "real world" self, and their "online" self. Now, psychologically, it seems that that divide has lifted, and the internet is as real as your actual life (until things go wrong, obviously), so people are much freer with sharing their personal details. Back when "social networking" became the thing to do, I had a few accounts under various pseudonyms, and I valued those identities almost like my real one (I've been using this one for over 15 years now, for example), since they accrued recognition, and credibility just like if I was using my real name in real circumstances. But now I, too, am using my real name on places like Facebook and Google+. There came a point where there was no point resisting. I still keep a wall up, though, since I recognize that everything I ever say will be around forever, and can be potentially accessed by anyone.Most people I know don't even bother anymore.

    It amazes me what people will say on Facebook, publicly.

    --
    A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
  63. I wonder what authors might confuse there analysis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think back to Neil Stephenson's Baroque Cycle, where when he would change POV from lead character to lead character, he seemed to change his writing style. It felt like a collaboration of authors, not just one. I suspect those three books would confuse the analysis, and I wonder what other books/authors would also likely confound their analysis.

  64. Americans Have To Fear, Too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Everybody under Pax Americana Rule will have to pay a price for seriously challenging whatever the ruling class and their minions currently do. Of course it is vastly different than in Russia, China or the Arab/Muslim tyrannies. They won't lock you up as easily as it is done in Turkey. They won't shoot you as in Russia.

    But "free" speech is not totally "free". Rumors and Lies about you will come at a cost. Non-violent Intimidation will exact some cost on your life.

    As an exercise, start with campaigning about the armed theft of land by Israel and make yourself identifiable. Then watch the rumors about you grow, watch the "terrorist collaborator" lies spread. Wait for the intel people sitting behind you in the train and making nasty remarks about you.

    THAT is why using TOR is a very, very good idea. And I don't subscribe to the notion that "they can break it anyway, so it is useless" - that's the FUD spread by those who want to eavesdrop.

  65. So Then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ..why do you use a handle ???

  66. Re:That's pretty easy by mcgrew · · Score: 1

    Hell, a couple months ago I got curious about a childhood friend, someone I haven't seen or talked to in over 20 years. It took about 15 minutes of half-hearted idle searching before I figured out where he lived...

    You got lucky. There's a person I've been trying to find for a couple of years, finally gave up. If they're named Galron Metamucil you'll have no trouble finding him, but if he's Andrew Jackson, well, good luck finding the right one.

  67. Re:That's pretty easy by Omestes · · Score: 1

    I knew a bit about him before hand, and found his Facebook page (protected and neglected), so I could figure out that he was still in state, at least at some point in the more recent past. He did have a somewhat unique surname, with a unique spelling, so I could narrow it down a bit. I did have to tear through several people though, since even a unique surname, isn't. Mine is rather uncommon as well, but thanks to the internet, it seems very common now. On the first page of a search, there is 6 people who share my exact name/surname, one of whom lives in the same city as me. I've always been tempted to look them up.

    The more information you have to start with, the better. Which high school they went to is very useful, as is any previous addresses, as various sites index these. Women are tougher, though, since their names can change. It took me a couple years of idle searching to find a girl I went to high school with, in the intervening years she married twice, move a bunch of times, etc... I only found her thanks to an old mutual friend finding me on Facebook.

    It really hasn't been worth the trouble. In the end, what do you have to say to someone you haven't seen in decades? With the girl the conversation was basically "So, your a professor now?
    "Yep."
    "Wow. You ever finish that tattoo?"
    "Nope."
    "Crap."
    "... silence and crickets..."
    "Gotta go, kids got home."

    I also had an ex-girlfriend track me down 15 years later, basically the conversation died after; "what have you been up to?"... How the hell do you even answer that?

    --
    A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
  68. That Implies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ..don't ever use pseudonyms. Go for Anonymous Coward and TOR all the time. Restart TOR on a regular basis.

  69. I am anonymous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People have been analyzing style with manual work to uncover authors of written unknown or intentionally anonymous speakers for hundreds of years before the Internet ever existed.

    All of the sudden you apply this same concept to computer algorithms against useless blog postings and somehow this magically becomes something new noone ever thought about before?

    As if humans are incapable of manually adjusting style to thwart automated correlation if they so desire. Machine algorithms are notoriously bad at dealing with false information.

  70. +1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think We The Geeks should grow much more sceptic and cynical. If you really think you have to take things literally, you are essentially screwed. Then "socially intelligent" use codewords all the time. It is their way to control those who are not inducted into their world of codewords.

    Reflect about what happens around you and think about social dynamics, about hidden agendas about wholly egotistic motives. Be as cynical as possible. Analyze the people-programmers (priests). Only then you will understand what is really going on.

    This is a world of nastyballs and you have to understand and handle this if you intend to survive.

  71. NOT ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do you seriously think Google Translate is not part of the NSAGOOGLE system ? They will certainly log(and store forever) each and every input and output of their service. So that "obfuscation" works only against the lesser enemies; those who are not allied with NASGOOGLE. And these are generally speaking incompetent guys anyway.

  72. Forget about anonymity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I stopped using my Slashdot account to make posts a few years ago for this exact reason. I realized that at some point author identification software would be good enough that any large body of text would be uniquely traceable to who wrote it. Slashdot posts never go away. By making all posts from my account, I was making a huge body of text all neatly tied together. That doesn't matter now, but it will eventually. Someone is going to make a "look up person X" site that uses such technology and then it will be as easily available as Google is now - you won't even need person X'es name, photo or any details about X. All you will need is a large text sample that X wrote.

    Slashdot themselves could probably still tie my anonymous posts together if they log IPs, browser settings and such. I wouldn't be surprised if spy agencies the world over log a lot of the traffic across their part of the internet, specifically in the US. They might even have a list of "potentially embarrassing or incriminating things person X said/wrote/did" for every X who is online, including things X posted that X thought was anonymous (like what I'm writing right now). Would be interesting indeed if someone went Bradley Manning on that database.

    Forget about anonymity. Assume anything recorded, even if it appears anonymous now, is going to be sent to everyone you know with your name on it the day before your wedding.

  73. Re: acronym by girlinatrainingbra · · Score: 1

    Gracias! Pardon my misunderstanding, and Thanks for telling me. The first thing that came to my mind was M.I.T. the school in Massachusetts. (My dad said that when he first moved to San Diego he kept misreading the "S.D." initials in the local paper as "South Dakota" and kept wondering why they would print so much news about South Dakota here in California. His "L.A." frame of mind must have rubbed off on me) Good luck with your Masters Degree!