Slashdot Mirror
In Defense of Anonymous Cowards
In recent weeks, chronicles here of my stumbling (and yes, still ongoing) attempts to grasp the intricacies of Linux have sparked both praise and hostility. As usual, the praise tends to come mostly in e-mail, the hostility in public postings, the most assertive of which have come from anonymous contributors calling me various names, as in "This guy is a moron.." On Slashdot, these posters are given the pseudonym "Anonymous Coward."
First-time visitors and many e-mailers, largely friendly, intelligent and generous people, are appalled by this name-calling - lamenting and even apologizing for the flamers. "We really should stop anonymous posting," wrote Greg. "It's just a vehicle for teenagers to jerk off."
But, singed though I sometimes am, I disagree. Anonymous postings are one of the things that makes the Net and the Web so distinct from TV, magazines and newspapers.
Anonymous flamers, like cypherpunks students of mnemetics or crypto-geeks, are one of the many fascinating sub-species on the Web. People wonder at their almost indefatigable hostility. No other medium permits their equivalent, and a whole language and sensibility has formed around them. There's even a term - "flamebait" the producers and editors of Slashdot use for writings and writers (not just me by any means) likely to draw the small but angry hordes.
Flamers are so familiar to me they're almost comforting. I've written for a number of websites, from Hotwired to Newstolls to The Freedom Forum and Slashdot, and in almost every writing, I've been flamed in public postings, whether I'm writing about the Web, politics, media, geeks, movies, Buffy or OSS.
Anyone willing to venture a strong idea or opinion online should expect to be flamed; he will be. It's as intrinsic to Web writing as a keyboard. I've come to value it, in an odd way; maybe out of self-delusion, I equate flaming with being interesting. Every writer knows, whether or not he admits it, that there's rarely such a thing as bad controversy.
What the marketer of ideas most fears isn't that people will criticize his ideas, but that people won't respond at all. This is especially true online, where it's so easy to measure feedback, in public postings, column hits and e-mail messages. For the writer, a column that sparks 400 posts is a home run; a column that generates 20, even if they're nice ones, is a dud.
I don't write to be agreed with, though praise is always welcome; I write to offer ideas, pass on information and observations, start conversations, challenge thought, and then become the beneficiary of lots of feedback. I rarely assume I'm right. So the flamer is, in a curious way, my best cheerleader, a sign of vitality.
Besides that, anonymous postings do valuable things:
They permit people in corporations, government agencies and other risky environments to post news, messages and opinions we would not otherwise see. Living in the age of the megacorporation - Disney, Microsoft - and the era of impulses like the "Halloween document," that's crucial.
They give shy or phobic lurkers the chance to post messages they might not post under their own names and ID's.
They're a curb on the pomposity, authority and arrogance of people at the top of media chains, from newspaper owners to software companies to columnists. The hallmark of mainstream journalism - on display all year in the Monica Lewinsky trial - is the notion that truth and conventional wisdom is the province of journalism, to be passed down to the ill-informed. Thus journalists have felt free to ignore public opinion all year, since the public has no way to express itself beyond polls and surveys, and since the public is presumed to be too ignorant, greedy and immoral to make rational decisions. Anonymous posters make that kind of top-down manipulation impossible online.
Anonymous posters correct mistakes and challenge opinions. Before the Net, people unhappy with the facts, writing style and opinions expressed in the press had - have - few effective ways to reach opinion-givers and information distributors. That's no longer so. When people like me make mistakes, from factual errors to poor grammar to faulty logic, they are corrected instantly and continuously. The writer is not abused by the process, but improved. He or she can become smarter, better informed.
Even though people often reassure the flamee that the flamers aren't representative, or are simply sensitive about certain subjects, the truth is that flaming is almost never personal. That's what e-mail is for. The open display of hostility is attitudinal, a posture, always having more to do with the fact that's it's public than personal.
That's why I almost never get flamed via e-mail.
And Anonymous Cowards keep sites from getting boring or complacent.
The most difficult issue raised by anonymous posting is the personal abuse by flamers, most of whom are young males acting out one or another form of adolescent hostility. But seen in context, they cause little real harm. Besides, anonymous posting may be a healthy outlet compared to slugging peers or running cars into trees.
Like airport noise or graffiti, they are part of life. People who call other people names anonymously have little real influence. Since they offer no rational criticism, they don't have to be taken seriously and have no influence. The kid who says "You're a jerk, go away" almost can't, by definition be someone who must be listened to. Intelligent and thoughtful criticisms are much more disturbing, because they are harder to ignore or dismiss.
The real damage anonymous posters do is drive away people who have important or interesting things to say but don't want to participate in the digital equivalent of dodgem. Many women, older posters, people with demanding work and newbies in particular are disinterested in or frightened off by tostosterone-charged flamers. This is a real loss, judging from their e-mail, since many intelligent, thoughtful and useful observations are never seen. Some Websites suspend the posting privileges of people who engage in repeated personal attacks, while others provide moderators to steer conversations in more rational, civil directions.
But the understandable impulse to chase these people off ought to be resisted. The right of Anonymous Cowards to sound off under a pseudonym is important, part of the online chemical mix. Their existence, like many things online, represents a tradeoff. They're a symbol of the freedom available online, but increasingly rare off-line. More than the mastery of software, they are a much better test for any writer of whether or not he belongs online. And whether or not he ultimately has anything to say.
You can e-mail me at jonkatz@slashdot.org
> AC's are a unique sub-species of the Net and
... whatever... I think its painfully obvious to the people that know their "stuff" that you _don't_.
> the Web, like hackers or cypherpunks.
You are a harsh loser. What lame-ass sub-species do you belong to? This is not a flame. This is the cold hard truth. You write like those stupid low budget neo-science fiction hour long shows that are taking over the tube. You think just because you use some technical words or
> corporations and government agencies, whose employees might
> not be so free to post messages.
Hey didja stop to think that we might just the people who can't be bothered to fill out yet another stupid form?
> the price we pay, the tradeoff. They may
> mostly be testosterone-crazed adolescent dirtballs, but they're our dirtballs.
Yeah, well, I'm not adolescent, nor am I testosterone-crazed. And if I am a dirtball, I am _definitely_ not one of yours.
Sincerely,
Real Person.
no flame, but, I mean come on.
... to do more. but eventually ...... the people who talk have to shut up to let the people who do do.
There are people who do and people who talk.
The talk can help the people who do
Do we have to listen to this?
No, you are your own dirtball swimming in a pool of your own festering anal ozze, drinking it in. You have no life, except to put down anyone else in attempts to place yourself on a pedestal. If you do not like it, just refrain from using your left hand to type slashdot.org, while you are whacking off with your ight hand on you pitiful excuse for manhood.
I've used the Anonymous Coward here on /. several times. Any time I want to point out a discrepancy that might come out the least bit pro-MS or anti-Linux, I use Anonymous Coward. Why? Because there are a bunch of UNREASONABLE TWITS out there who havent yet mastered the intricacies of COHERENT THOUGHT, and I don't want these folks bothering me. It's a useful tool that I can use to make valid (from my perspective anyway) points without having to deal directly with the flamage.
I couldn't have said it better myself.
Sometimes we like to shout without our names being called out.
Let me know so we can put him back as soon as possible!
Seriously, though, this guy uses a Linux book to hold his door open and he thinks he's got a good understanding of the whole community.
This man contributes nothing positive to our community. He doesn't know it, certainly doesn't understand it, and has no other area of expertise that makes his diatribes a worthwhile literary contribution.
Ni! Ni!
Congratulations, Jon. You've finally managed to post something worthwhile on Slashdot.
I've been critical of you in the past, but this article shows a glimmer of cluefullness. I think it's worth stepping back and looking a what you did right here.
1. You kept it quick and to the point. You didn't go off on some huge meandering pointless story about how you met some guy who yadda yadda yadda. You made your point, you explained your point, and that's pretty much it.
2. Although you did talk about yourself, perhaps a little too much, what self-referential material you did bring in was largely relevant to your point. You didn't talk about writing for Wired.
3. You didn't harp on the 'geek' thing.
4. you kept politics more or less out of it, and where you did bring it in, it was in a very practical way, without a whole lot of ideological puffery.
I'm not sure I like the fact that you called ACs a "subspecies" but I may be reading more into that than you intended.
If this is the future of Jon Katz, I could deal with it.
-Joe Merlino
Seriously, why create an account? Why not just fill in your nickname @ e-mail like other message boards? Besides, I tried to set up an account, but my company's @$%!*& NT-based network won't let me receive internet e-mail right now (send, yes, receive, no). And our "system administrator" can't fix it! Dontya just LOVE Microcrap? Linux Forever!
Mr. Anonymous Coward
Hi all, I always post as an AC. Given where I work, I have to. If I couldn't, then I'd never be able to make comments.
I love the name AC. Just enough truth and humor.
Jon, why do you assume that it's teenage males
that are doing the flaming? Anonymous posting
is exactly the type of forum to free everyone
else to act out as well.
Based on what the sport utility vehicle has done
for family oriented drivers (they drive with the
kind of brash overconfidence once reserved for
teenagers), I'm willing to bet that anonymous
posting has had the same effect in cyberspace.
I know it seems really stupid that you should have to log in to discussion site to post anything, but that's the way they want to run it!
Of course, I liked the old way better. And they could easily have added optional logins which would have caused a little "authenticated"-icon to appear beside your name. This would have put a stop to posters masquerading as others.
But they have their own ideas, don't they...
Mike Greaves
I actually like the setup you have here, but I dislike the fact that I would need to create an account to use a name other than AC.
Perhaps adding a way for someone to use a different name (if I remember correctly, it used to be that way), but have it note that the user is still not confirmed (eg "by Cmdr Burrito (Unauthenticated)").
-keith
I don't want to have Yet Another Account And Password to memorize. I must have subscribed to 100 damn sites that require a login and now I can't get into them (ny times, for example).
Mark
I don't know about you, but I post all the time as anonymous coward... the name to me seems funny. Lighten up.
I just wanted to say that in my experience, anonymous coward postings are NOT any more obscene or dumb on the average... its just that whenever there is a stupid post, people are more quick to be judgemental about it.
it's free speech. I dislike assholes as much as anyone...but all too often, muzzling them results in muzzling the rest of us.
/., put it it (as I just have above), and have it posted as AC anyway....
Of course, then there folks like me, who created a netname, got a password from
mark
Why do this guy always post boring stuff with all those dense verbiage?
I'm beggining to think he's worse than sengan.
Some of us may be shy little English lit majors who read /. every day but don't like to call a lot of attention to ourselves
I disagree with the assessment of
the press that Katz has offered. The press is
half-dominated by people who think "We don't
merely report the news, we make it. We don't
merely show people the world, we try to make it
better. If we don't report something, it won't be
there." Sometimes even Slashdot is guilty of this
make-news mentality, and they advertise it openly
as the "Slashdot effect!" Arrgh! What about the
TRUTH?
As far as the people being incompetent, I'll say
it this way: yes, the people ARE incompetent...
to control MY life... but each and every person
is competent to control his or her own. The press
makes no distinction; they think everybody's
either competent or incompetent to control
people's lives. Then they vie for that control.
Slashdot should not make that mistake. Slashdot
should not take the approach that "If we don't
print the idiotic opinions, they won't be there."
Far from it; the idiocy of people's replies
is news just as much as the articles! But that's
not why we should keep them.
Keep the ACs. The one percent who make sense
justify the other ninety-nine. Don't punish the
whole for the crimes of the majority; treat each
AC as an individual. Help readers filter through
the muck by letting them display comments more
flexibly and quickly. Use some of that legendary
Linux programming finesse, why don't you!
It's a lot more than fear of being flamed. It's fear of being DoSed by some punk kid, or fear of your boss reading something that could get you fired. As far as I'm concerned, it's far more prudent to remain anonymous when arguing on a public board. If that makes me a coward, so be it.
Besides, people should care about the points being made, not the people behind the points. The whole idea that a post is more valuable because you know where it comes from is IMHO bullshit.
Yes, I'm an Anonymous Coward.
Why?
I don't like signing up for a board I only write to once every 2 or three months. Keep loosing the passwords.
I do work for a software company, and don't want my views being mistaken for theirs, by you or my bosses. (Who being more computer geeks read much of the same stuff.)
And as to flamage. If it's an honest opinion, the flamers are gonna have to work to send me an email bomb, that cuts out most of the 10 year old wannabe's. If it's something I post with the intent to cause an inferno, I don't do it as an A.C., I make a fake identity and use that. Haven't done it for a couple of years now, but I have.
And an honest opinion here, people who use A.C. just to flame someone are total jerks!
(hmmm... does that include me now that I've just insulted them?)
Take that up yer arse!
Here's an little known factoid. All web servers records the IP of the machine that the user is posting from. Theorectically, this means that the police/Nazi/fascists can go in and seize the web servers, look at the logs and trace postings to the person's machine. Very easy I'm afraid. This is how they managed to find the people posting criticisms about the Church of Scientology through the anonymous email remailer server. There are NO hiding place on the net. ph33r m3, l4m3rs!
How would the quality of posts change if AC's were banned? By your own logic AC's would just end up getting anonymous email accounts which they would use to post here.
Not that it's relevant one way or the other - the threshold setting is there for a reason, genius. If you don't like AC's set it to 1.
AC's the price we pay, the tradeoff. They may mostly be testosterone-crazed adolescent dirtballs, but they're our dirtballs.
why do you, like everyone else, insist on insulting us? we are no different than the masses that use nicks, except that we are easyer to identify because we have one name instead of many!
As usual, the praise tends to come mostly in e-mail, the hostility in public postings, the most assertive of which have come from anonymous contributors calling me various names...
come now jon, if you cared enough to take notes you would prolly notice that the worst of the insults against you are not from AC's only. it is much more evenly distributed. and lets face it, most ppl wouldnt send insults via email simply because it takes more effort than to post to the boards and the insults tend to have more to do with posturing than real feeling anyways.
Anonymous flamers, like cypherpunks students of mnemetics or crypto-geeks, are one of the many... [big snip]
I rarely assume I'm right. So the flamer is, in a curious way, my best cheerleader, a sign of vitality.
why are there 5 whole paragraphs here equating AC's with flamers? you realy need to start taking notes on these things but for the record i will give you a little tip. many nick-users flame to! *sigh* *gasp* yes it's really true. lets also not forget the significant number of nick-users who go AC just to flame so they wont be held accountable. these ppl have got to be the lowest of the low, they want the best of both worlds without having to suffer the pain of eithor.
the truth is that flaming is almost never personal. That's what e-mail is for. The open display of hostility is attitudinal, a posture, always having more to do with the fact that's it's public than personal.
That's why I almost never get flamed via e-mail.
hmmm... yet earlyer on you said you never got flames in email because ppl couldnt send them to you anonymously. well which is it jon? i mean for the first 2/3rd's of this essay you go on and on about how all AC's are just a bunch of flamers and now you start to make a 180 and claim AC's are good and that most of the flamers are just young punks. if you keep this up i might also start to take offence to the fact that your now insulting young males.
But the understandable impulse to chase these people off ought to be resisted. The right of Anonymous Cowards to sound off under a pseudonym is important, part of the online chemical mix.
what do AC's have to do with this in perticular? you seem to be forgetting the large number of anonymous nick-users who post here. they assume an identity here and give no information to any one as to what their real identity is. why does that make them better just because they spent a few minutes to sign up for a nick? lets face it jon, getting a throw away email is too easy today and that is all you need to get an account here and on many other boards. it has become fairly trivial for someone to create an identityn that looks real but provides them with no accountability because it isnt real.
jon i think you need to start doing some research to support you articles!
- sincerely,
- just another face in the crowd
...that it isn't so much the AC nonaccount that is the problem, but the people who use it. Take the account away, and S/N won't improve; you'll merely have registered I'm-eleet-I-work-part-time-for-my-ISP teenager rantings.
We have to face the fact that the quality of nerds has gone way downhill over the last 8 or 10 years. Unmasking these folks merely makes the rest of us have to see their faces.
The same way nerd and geek aren't insults anymore ;-)
the first time i read slashdot, i said, "gee, this guy who calls himself Anonymous Coward sure chose a nifty, clever, funny name for himself, but he's a jerk!" and then a minute later i saw another post from "him" that was completely different -- very sensible and well thought out. then another, and another, and after a while i figured out that it wasn't all one person with that name
i still think it's funny. i agree with malda.
Linux is already suffering from feature bloat. Thank God we still have some lean distributions floating around. Widespread acceptance doesn't mean anything good for me. I already have everything I want from Linux. Folks like Katz coming in and hopping on the bandwagon will just obfuscate things and divide developers into so many projects that nothing will get done (this is already starting to happen).
Let's see why do write as an AC...
1. I really don't want to bother with another username and password. And I don't really like cookies either.
2. I don't want my email address out on the net anymore than I have to. (I've learned that lesson the hard way.)
3. A lot of times I don't have anything incredibly profound to say, so I see no reason to attach my name to it. Also, I hardly ever flame, as it is too much trouble, and usually not very nice.
4. However, if I do have something to say that I think is important, than I sign my name as such:
-Moshe Katz-Hyman
P.S. Even thought I think some things that other ACs do are childish and stupid, that should not warrant the removal of the AC privilage for all.
ok, i can't take this guy's little commentaries anymore. i have had enough.
... uh ...read.
... i think they should hire him to write the sequel to Hackers, or better yet, maybe he should play the leading role in the next The Net movie.
... please take him away, and never bring him back! the linux community i am familiar with never needed someone like this to write commentary for us. John Katz is *not* what the linux community is about (i know that sounded pretentious, and i fully agree that it is, but it just has a ring of truth to it, doesn't it?)
who the fuck is this guy? is he some self-proclaimed spokesman of the linux community? one thing i know, he's really excessive in his use of buzzwords and catch-phrases. he is one of the lousiest writers i have ever had the misfortune to
i for one think he has no clue what he is talking about. and the words he uses!!
this guy sucks
Mani
Hey,
I just don't remember where I put that password...
Sorry, you're right. Linux is the indestructible OS, with no security holes. How could I ever be so foolish?
Heh. Sorry. Couldn't resist.
I'm use AC because I'm too much of a lazy ass to remember my password. I've got cookies disabled on my browser, so I'd have to type the damn thing every time I wanted to post, and as sluggish as the network has been lately, I'd just as soon avoid all that.
Jon got to you that time didn't he? Take it easy, you'll get to be an adolescent some day.
I work for MS.
I tend to post to slashdot about the stupidity that goes on around here, misconceptions people on slashdot often have, etc.
There is no way in hell i would risk my job by having any kind of email address or name, however fake it is, associated with me.
Mr Brain Child States:::::
Such cowards like you should definitly *NOT* beeing allowed to poison senseful discussions.
right!! makes sense, while yer at it lets create a national ID system so everyone can be linked to everything they do.. so you could cross-reference someones Slashdot Posts with how much they spend on star fruit at ACME.. yeah good idea.. what government do you work for? or are you really that just stupid and misguided? Could ya enlighten me please?
Thanks in advance
Privacy advocate
I don't code so i don't know how feasible it would be, but couldn't this site implement a switch at the top of each thread...something like "click here to ignore all posts by anonymous cowards..."
Of course this could make for unsightly sub-threads, but it could work. And it would redirect the battle between the anonymous cowards who post "legitamately" (whatever that means) and those who are just out to get some attention...
There might be a few less anonymous cowards
about if the Slashdot source was a bit better
able to handle people who sit behind firewalls.
(This is a gentle hint!)
LIGHTEN UP!@2# IT'S A JOKE@!
Hey, genius. Try setting your threshold to 1. Then you'll filter out all the ACs. Personally, I wish there was a way to killfile self-important arseholes like yourself, but that doesn't seem to be in the cards.
You should be judging people on what they say, not on who they are. The best part about posting here is that everyone's on equal footing - what you say is judged on its own merits, not on "reputation". If I log in, does what I say somehow become more valid if I associate it with a handle - a handle which doesn't have an email address or anything else associated with it? That's completely non-sensical. I'll be goddamned if I'm going to get a hotmail address to make people like you happy.
To conclude, if you don't like it, SET YOUR THRESHOLD TO 1. Many of us have good reason to be anonymous, and you're an arsehole for tarring all the ACs with the same brush. People can get FIRED for what they say in a public forum. Vindictive kiddies can do a lot of damage to someone if they know who they're dealing with. In your instance, they'd have a web page complete with your picture and all sorts of assorted info to start with.
I don't think you're paranoid enough. Been to fugly.net lately?
Bullshit.
Dig through the voluminous Slashdot archives and find me two instances of someone from a big corportation posting anything of value, but hiding as an AC to keep from getting canned.
Waiting...
Waiting..
Oh, that's right, there ain't no such thing.
replying to myself...shouldn't have been so harsh/profane. I is sorry!
I am terrible AC bastard!
As the local cloning and biotech expert, I love the fact that I can post the truth without getting in trouble. I can't tell you how many forms I'd have to file before I could post something with my name attatched.
As for conjecture, it is not allowed by low life gov't types. As for ethical questions, well we have technocrats for those... real scientists need not apply. So thanks for the coward option. It also allows me to admit I'm listening to depeche mode while I write this anonamissive.
He should stay because he does in a way represent some of us lurkers who are interested in Linux but have not participated in the community through fear, ignorance, or just timidity. I've been reading /. for about 9 months but have yet to install Linux (hopefully that will change within the next month or so).
I agree with his posting about anonymous postings though I also agree with the comment "Finally". This is his most focused, concise article on here so far. I think too many people have forgotten some basic self-editing with the ease of rapid posting on the internet.
Actually, it seems to me that having to accept the denegrating title of "Anonymous Coward" is a subtle, non-harmful way to push those who post towards doing so under their own name.
and is jekk your fully qualified given name? it certainly dosent look that way to me, but i could be wrong.
No one who feels a real need to be shielded by the cloak of anonyminity will be disuaded from posting
and exactly how are you not being anonymous now? i see no proof of identity, no phone number, no email address, no home address. it certaily looks to me like you are an anonymous coward with a different name.
Now all we need is an Anonymous Coward filter. I wouldn't use it myself, but its very existance would strengthen the drive towards accepting responsibility for ones opinions, without prohibiting anyone from posting anonymously.
where exactly is all this responsiblility you are implying that you have because you are not an AC?
please explain these things to me, i would really like to know how you are better than i am.
Your contradicting yourself... give it up..
I post as an AC because I'm very busy, have only limited time to help, and I need to limit my workload to job related deadlines.
I have posted with my identity, here and other places, but I must limit it to once every two months or so, or I'll be buried in email.
And it's polite email. How do I set up such and such? Where can I find TCP/IP software on the MS website? How to incorporate PHP into my web server. I've got ten people on a network, can we share just one modem? Why diald rather than masqdialer? So just what good is Linux (I tell them it is good at glueing together networks of MS client machines, much better than NT)?
Now can you imagine the blizzard of email I would get from this? Hey, I need a vacation, too.
Perl is so useful. I got tired of this "Coward" crap almost immediately, and so now I get to read things like Commander Taco saying, "I don't see what's wrong with posting as Malda's Mom. I'm 2 attached to it to give it up," and "Malda's Moms often have useful insights to offer." Heh.
I agree.
Just look at his last posting:
'In 20 years computers will be as smart as we are'.
A fairly safe prediction considering the fact
that 'smart' isn't defined at all. Of course,
this prediction doesn't mean anything either.
It is completely empty sentense.
Cheers,
AC usually post useless crap. With their posts they draw the whole discussion into a piece of emotional useless mess. There are too many guys out here who get trapped by dumb AC's posting as they try to argue on their comments.
/. account.
hmmm... so do many nick users, get your facts straight. in fact, judging from the other posts in this thread i have the feeling i am going to get trapped by a dumb nick user while trying to argue my point.
And most important:The existence of AC's can not be justified by anonymousity.
uhm, well, anonimity is the only justification you need. that should be more than plenty.
Thanks to many free of charge email services it is still possible to stay anonymous *AND* to have a real
this is really just stupid. nobody should have dirty cars too because after all water is mostly free.
through out history many opressed groups have taken the derrogitory identifiers of their oppressors and used them as symbols of defiance. this is actually a rather common action, it gives empowerment and creats solidarity.
:)
i too was originally annoyed with the anonymous coward moniker but today, like the original poster, i wear it with pride. it is kinda my little slap in the face to all those sanctimonious nick users who think they are better than i am.
also with regards to your statement:
The terms "geek" and "nerd" have never been true insults since they were based on a person's hobby or interest, not their overall integrity as a human being, hence your comparison is invalid.
this is a very valid comparison, the terms "geek" and "nerd" were at one time very widely used insults that were very hurtfull to many ppl. luckily for you it seems you may just be to young to remember those dark days
...because they link an individual's posts and make it easier for a poster to return to their previous posts (to reply to any disputes); In this way, having any account (even a throwaway) is superior as it still provides a link from a person back to the post they made (even if nobody else can identify that link).
wel personally i dont have any problems finding any of my posts. so this isn't really any kind of valid argument against ac's. and please stop thinking you are superior than us because you are not.
So whats the difference between being an Anonymous Coward and having a faked email address/name on you user account? They both let you get away with posting without anyone knowing who you are.
What is it about an account that automatically stops people flaming even though its details are a complete fake?
AC and proud.
I'm a computer hobbyist (whose real job is transplanting organs).
/. member!
I hate to admit it, but virtually all of my experience is with Windows. I don't think I deserve a Slashdot account until I remedy this humiliating situation.
As a New Year's resolution, I have vowed to partition my hard drive at home and get Debian up and running. Once I have acheived this goal, I will proudly submit my first posting as a legitimate
Heh. I guess you just demonstrated that :) And katz's
:)
you didn't catch the meaning of
"testosterone-crazed" in this context.
You obviosuly feel like you belong to some
uber-we-know-our-stuff-geek-elite-club...
Very macho and very tribal
point exactly.
Kudos to you for giving me today's giggling
attack, though
(an example of the usefulness of being AC)
.emacs?
I'm using Xemacs 20.5 (non-MULE) that comes with Debian hamm. When I edit an ascii file that was originally done in DOS, I get those annoying ^M at the end of the lines. I don't want to hide them, I want to get rid of them altogether (I'm going to keep them in a unix environ).
Should I be able to just save the file, kill it, and re-find it? (doesn't work) Or do I need to add something to
Why not just post our IPs?
Part of the AC problem is the handle. Not to defend the flamers, but how would you react if you were called a coward every time you posted anonymously?
If free discourse is such an integral part of freedom on the web, there should be some respect for those who post anonymously.
I'm not a coward, just anonymous.
Look, it's really very simple. Many of us who post here work for computer companies who have deals with the Great Satan in Washington. We can't possibly post anything which can be linked back to our work IDs -- even from private accounts -- because it would put our jobs in peril.
If I want to post something useful to a slashdot thread I post it anonymously or not at all... and it seems that numerous other people feel the same way. Stop people posting anonymously and we will leave, and you'll lose a lot of valuable input. Slashdot has already gone downhill since IDs were enforced, and if anonymity is removed then I'm outta here.
Frankly, the use of 'Anonymous Coward' is childish and insulting, and it's immensely hypocritical for people here to complain about Intel forcing IDs on us in their chips and simultaneously argue for forcing IDs on us in these forums. I have a much, much larger problem with people who want to force us to attach 'real names' to posts than I do ignoring the occasional flame.
Unfortunately the idiots are taking over the Net. Even more unfortunately the idiots are not those posting flames as 'Anonymous Coward', but the control-freaks who want to ban anonymity and end freedom of speech here.
I posted a few comments as an Anonymous Coward mainly because I was too lazy to create an ID for myself.
I always hate going through a registration process to have it fail at the end because they insist I use cookies or javascript or some other security hole.
Good thing SlashDot doesn't.
Hey, lotz of us have coworkers who just love to stab people in the back. They do nothing but troll the net looking for comments posted by their peers - and they toss them at your boss.
"Anything you post can and will be used against you in salary review."
So I create a hotmail account, create a /. account from that, and then ignore the hotmail account forever more. I'm still anonymous, I just don't have 'Anonymous Coward' on all my posts. The benefit of this is..? No, I didn't think there was one.
You know, I'm just dazzled by the clue deficiencies on the part of the anti-anonymity folks. They get flamed by someone and their immediate response is to ban anonymity, even though it will do NOTHING to prevent flames. Do you even think for a second before you post this crap?
The one, sole, only benefit of forcing people to use email addresses on posts here is that people who disagree can mailbomb them. There's none other than that. If you ban anonymity the anonymous idiots will stop posting anonymously and start mailbombing those they disagree with instead. Your ban will make your situation WORSE.
I don't know what else to say. This whole argument is just so brain-dead that I can't think of any rational comment to make.
Slashdot used to be an interesting, amusing, rough-and-tumble, anarchic forum. IDs have reduced some of that, and banning anonymity to please those too wimpy to handle flames will make it a dull, safe backwater.
--Anon
Wow. What a great job you're doing to refute Katz's statements. Honestly, I've seen more mature comments on bathroom walls. Now if you want to take issue with someone, what do you do? That's right, criticize what he says. This will not only earn you much more credibility, but you'll avoid playing right into the AC stereotype proposed by Katz. Remember: Think! Then type.
> corporations and government agencies, whose employees might
> not be so free to post messages.
AC are important. I work for one major financial company. I would never post anything on Slashdot from my own name. One search in Altavista - and people can see all my posts at Slashdot. I really do not want my collegues and supervisors see my postings. I would be asked: why are you posting this during business hours.
Who the f**k are you to judge the quality of discussion on /.?
/. too.
/. are allowed. Of course that means that most postings won't make it onto /., but then it would raise the quality -- so Candy would be happy and then we could all rest at night...
/. source, and create a filtering option so that each user could filter out comments by various criteria (i.e. AC posters)? If that would take too much time on the server then why not just create a second /. site which has AC postings filterd out. We could call it
/. so they should be banned.
You're not an AC but most of your recent comments have been garbage, maybe we should ask CmdrTaco to ban comments from your account. I think I'll do just that.
And while I'm at it, there are a few other non-AC's about who've said things I don't agree with...I'll have them kicked off
After that's finished I'll create a group of moderators who will read all comments before they're posted to make sure that only comments that raise the standards of discussion on
Instead, why doesn't one of you communist anti-AC posters grab the
www.commie-slashdot.org.
(Lay on sarcasm extra thick)
Better yet, why not ban non-AC posters. I like laughing at the flames in AC posting, all of the non-AC posters bring down the level of homour on
posterbreath>> You annoy me even more than RMS,...
Anyone who is annoyed by RMS is a loser beyond description. This statement convinces me that Jon Katz should consider your criticism a compliment. Actually JK is now, because of his writing, a great part of this movement, but you are just a donkeydick, because of yours.
What the other poster means by 'national ID' is more like a serial number tattooed on your forearm.
Anyone for a round of Sieg Heil?
--
You don't like AC's? Too damn bad. Feel free to scream and yap about us all you want, tho. We'll be laughing at you either way. Just remember, since you gave up your right to privacy, we will always know more about you than you will about us. Think about that next time you start belching out insults...
please in the future use the apropriate forum for you questions.
just delete them. if you dont want to do it manualy then use M-x replace-string and replace them with an empty string.
uhh. hold on a second I gotta go find a lighter... /.er? /. article. Oooh let's read his article and see if he says anything new this time. Nope! You'd think that someone with a background in writing could come up with something at least a little controversial. /. more to my personal tastes?
Here we go.
All right who wants some?
Hey posterkid. Maybe you should be barfed out that lame excuse for a flame as an AC that way people wouldn't know that your bass ackards mail server hasn't updated their links since Netscape 3.0 was a hot new item. BTW what kind of wuss uses someone elses mail server when the could just run their own? I know, a clueless wuss who doesn't know how to administer a linux box. I feel dirty for not using my own domain but seesh! you call yourself a
Hold on Jon I'm not done yet, Mr. "Gee I'm a geek now so I'm cool. The problem isn't that you don't belong here, it's that you fit in perfectly. Ho hum yet another techno friendly
And while I'm at it. Rob you punk, don't you have anything better to do with your time than wasting mine? I mean look at this site! The features section haven't been updated in over a month. Why can't you tailor
Yeah and Elvis sucks too!
And the Care Bears are cute!
Oop ran out of ammo...
I agree on the flaming problem, it's one of the things that put me off posting to forums and NGs in the first place. That said, Slashdot is no worse than any other place (though the AC tag gets me pigeon-holed with various rude male teenagers)
:)
An AC filter would get rid of the immature flamers, yes, but also the shy posters, some of whom might have something very worthwhile to add. I'm not arrogant enough to include myself in their number, but at least the AC tag lets me post within the limits of my own quiet nature
Fine, show me a couple of responses that had something in them that a) would get someone fired, b) had some actual factual content that wasn't otherwise available and was c) posed as an AC.
People keep bringing up this straw man, but there aren't any postings that fulfill this requirement.
with friends like you jon who really needs enemys? if this article is what you call defense of us AC's i think i would rather just stick to the nick users openly calling us names instead of you trying to hide it!
I'm posting as an AC because I don't care to have a multi-culti ATF/ZOG goon squad show up at my door and "accidentally" shoot me, or at best lock me away for a long, long time.
It's obvious to any one why the AC exists: When we can't see these people (AC's), we can't tell who they are, or what they are. We can't look into their eyes and hear the tone of their voices. They could be anyone. They probably are. No white man needs to hide behind the AC.
And that's the truth. We built up Linux and OSS with our bare hands, through hard work and technical excellence, and now they want us to give it all away to a bunch of mendicant, third-world kangaroos from shitty little countries that live on US foreign aid and can't even build a school.
I say enough is enough. I'm not declaring a Culture War, I'm fighting the one that was already declared, many years ago. No more Anonymous Cowards. Never again!
Tink then tipe? Hes n idiott! Fare and simple. Doh.
If AC's are truly valued on /. (and they have proven to be valuable on times) then Rob should stop insulting anyone posting anonymously by calling them a coward.
/. as an AC I thought it was funny -- I got my own login shortly thereafter (for one thing, it allows me to track reesponses to my posts easily). It's also, as Jon says, a subtle reminder not to take the occasional flame too seriously.
Heh. The first time I posted on
I wonder if subliminally this causes some people to act even more immature than they normally would.
Oh please. This is as bad as "I couldn't help it, I was drunk at the time." If a silly nickname is going to cause you to lose your grasp on your maturity, then you don't need to be posting.
On the other hand, for people who do feel strongly about the term, maybe there can be an option in the user's Preferences to change what nickname is seen -- from "Anonymous Coward" to "Irritating 3l33t Hax0r d00d" or whatever you feel is dignified enough.
Jay (=
(aka TrentC without a cookie)
Your HTTP browser sends the IP as part of the request for a URL. BWAHAHHAAHA!!! Trust me, it will.
If I wanted to manually "just delete" over 200 instances of ^M, why would I need a powerful editor like emacs? I'm trying to find an automated solution to avoid a manual chore.
well then why did you bother even making a reference to emacs? if you didnt want an emacs specific response then you should have said so!
try the "tr" command or the "dos2unix" command if you have it.
As for replace-string, it won't work because the ^M is a representative for an eol/cr, but not an actual ascii string (or so it seems). Try it sometime, you'll see.
actuall it works quite well, i use it when ever i open up a file in emacs that has ^M at the end of each line. see the thing you need to realize is that ^M is not two seperate characters it is one character. it is the symbolic representation of a carrige return. if you tell emacs to replace the string containing the single character ^M with nothing it will very happily do so! to insert a ^M you can eithor cut and paste it or use C-q to insert control charaters.
The point of my post (aside from trying to figure a genuine problem) is that by being AC my newbie question is not archived in dejanews with my name, as well as your incorrect answer. (though I appreciate your effort)
well nothing here is archived in dejanews anyways, that is only for usenet. my answer was correct, for the question you origonally asked, maybe you need to reread it. next time dont be such an ass to somebody who tries to help you or you will become part of the problem not part of the solution!
HAHA this thread almost makes me wanna create a database of AC's that only AC's can access so they can laugh amongst themselves but then we'd have to verify that AC's are really ACs and not pretending to be AC's like candy, not that candy would pretend to be an AC but ya never know..
president@whitehouse.gov --- in 13 years, tellem to hold my mail
ROTFL
personally, i think that post raised the tone of this discussion from "escaped mental patients foaming at the mouth and biting dogs" to "escaped mental patient who at least remembered to bring his medication along".
:)
on the whole, people who hate AC's are those who feel that a discussion is a personal issue between them and somebody else, rather than an exchange of ideas -- in short, people whose emotional and intellectual development has been brought up tragically short for some reason. of course, such unfortunate people have as much right to speak as all the other escaped mental patients, even the ones so far over the edge that they take pat buchanan seriously.
That's the nickname I've gone by now for the past 50 years ever since UNIVAC. The other techs thought it was cute.
So please cease and desist using the term and nickname "Anonymous Coward".
Other nicknames you can use in it's place:
Nameless Chicken
Unacknowledged Recreant
Undesignated Renegade
Unknown Dastard
Of course, please check with everyone on the world to see if they use these nicknames to avoid a lawsuit.
P.S. For the humor challenged of you out there, I was being sarcastic and drunk.
"other web sites where you pissed at the corner".. hehe.
/. a Linux only site, but that effort seems dead now. And whats ETSI? Sounds interesting to me.
About "not in the US..", hell slashdot barely recognizes anything other than Linux news. In the beginning I remember there was an effort to not make
The only reason people hate anonymous posters (other than the fact that many flames come from them.. even though as many "registered" people flame just as much, with anonymous nicknames and no email address) is because they tell the exact truth, which can hurt someone's beliefs. Many times I have seen a post which says Linux is poor in such and such area (hardware usually). This person will get flamed even though what he said is true. Example: "Linux hardware support is lacking". Notice how its not a flame or rude disrespectful comment. Also notice how ontarget it really is. People will flame all day on a post like that.
I personally remember several postings in response to the topic that an SAIC subsidiary is assisting in the development of the RIAA's replacement for MP3 and that since SAIC has had dealings with the defense industry that there must be some conspiracy involved. Many people with inside knowledge of SAIC, including myself, responded by describing the internals of this huge beauracratic consultancy explaining how unlikely it would be for the conspiracy theory to be true.
Actually I was much appreciative for the help, and your second post clarified a few things from the first. Thanks again.
/. under userinfo and provide a "profile" or "audit trail" which I wish to avoid. That's why I prefer AC.
Getting back to the AC issue, maybe these questions aren't archived in dejanews, but usernames (and psuedonyms) are archived here on
dammit, i thought i cancelled the above post, because i tried nine different tags and none of 'em preserved the indentation and the angle brackets. which explains how mangled it is. like, [leftanglebracket] stdio.h [rightanglebracket] translates into an unknown tag and netscape just ignores the whole thing . . . dammit. i really thought i'd cancelled it.
sorry about that. dumbass move on my part.
he's absolutely right. i agree with him. enough AC bullshit, time to get a nick.
This really struck a chord with me. We owe each other at least this much. I'll be getting a nick now; thank you for your insight.
unkle joe fuckhead
bob@bob.com
bob.com is registered by MICROSOFT!
Watch and learn, kids. There's a man who knows his flames. Great work, a piece of art!
The reason I usually post as AC is 'cuz I'm too lazy to remember a name and password for every forum on the web...
This is probably why half your posts are from ACs.
Making people attach their name to their rants does *not* stop the adolescent(sp?) noise. Just get used to it, ignore it, skip it, or nose through it to see if any of it is even funny.
Thank you, slashdot, for providing me with a mechanism for spouting my $.02 *without* having to have an account, credit card number, Adult Check, or other nonsense!
mikebat@nospam.inficad.com
And, Katz, you "really" need to look a little harder for the clues. They *are* out there. Or are you deliberately staying clue-free for the purpose of entertaining us? This is truly unclear.
I initially approached Katz with an open mind, but after reading some of his recent columns, I really do wonder how much of a geek he is. Of course geek is a relative term. He maight be more geeky than the average JoeBlow, but I don't think he is slashdot-quality geek material.
1. He got someone else to install Linux because he couldn't. IMHO, the install is the easiest part, and if you can't do that, forget about any configuartion/customization.
2. He said he rarely had seen the insides of a computer.
3. Instead of putting the parts back together himself (NOT hard at all for any 'geek') he thinks about sending the box back before deciding to go to COMP USA!?!?!?
The more I read, the more he sounds like any other computer illiterate part of the population.
For all I know it could be one or two people just being really annoying.
It's hard for me to imagine anybody actually doing that.
Joe Dzugashvili
steel@intern.com
Fine, show me a couple of responses that had something in them that a) would get someone fired, b) had some actual factual content that wasn't otherwise available and was c) posed as an AC. People keep bringing up this straw man, but there aren't any postings that fulfill this requirement.
For some of us working in corporate droidland, just posting at all, even mostly innocuous posts might be punishable. I've posted things as an AC that could get a person fired under certain circumstances. At a previous job I was threatened with being fired for posting on a local newsgroup some complaints about NT. One of the pointy haired bosses who was a major Microsoft worshiper blew a gasket. You never know what little things might set off a PHB, so it is often better to be safe than sorry. For others the _timing_ of when they read/post on a forum like Slashdot might be sensitive.
I don't buy your 'b' clause, since I often value opinions as part of a debate as well as just 'factual content'.
I don't buy that this argument is a straw man, you may think someone else is setting up a straw man and you are knocking it over, but that isn't how that tactic works, and I don't think you are knocking it over anyway.
the fact that i'm a moron doesn't make you any less of a moron. in fact, it makes you MORE of a moron, because you're moronic enough to bother belaboring the obvious.
yah, yah, yah, so's your mother.
Thanks in advance.
-- unkle joe fuckhead
-- bob@bob.com
i think it's an instance of one idiot posting repeatedly and flaming himself, just to be annoying
Heh. If so, why shouldn't we assume that you're him, too, just trying to muddy the waters? You know, the purloined letter and all that. Or was that the scarlet pumpernickel? Of course, once we're resorting to that kind of thing, why not drag P. K. Dick into it and start suspecting that I'm you, too, just as I'm all of the others.
Well?
Well, once you go there, there's not much of anywhere else left to go but just where PKD went: Down the oubliette, one way or another, hard on the heels of Dr. Hilarius. I refuse to assume that all these posts are by the same person (especially because then I'd have to explain to myself why I'm wasting all this time at the office
John, I think the _real_ problem we're seeing here is the nearly universal decline in manners and good behaviour, especially amongst the younger readers.
It never ceases to amaze me at how little respect people give each other these days. It seems sometimes that intolerable behaviour is fast becoming the norm, not the exception.
Even the flame has fallen victim to the seemingly unstoppable decline in manners. Of a time, if someone posted (to USENET, there was nowhere else) a particularly vacuous or silly opinion and got flamed, it meant that someone had rebutted their argument in a particularly creative, intelligent, and (most importantly) decicive way. A flame was the Argument That Could Not Be Rebutted.
Flames were rarely personal attacks - although if they were, they also were delivered in a creative - and decisive - manner.
(For a good example of the latter, do a Deja News search on "Sunscreamer" and "Netrek")
"You suck! Go away" - that's not flaming, that's mindless noise. It takes the mental acuity of a chimpanzee flinging his own excrement at a passing tourist - and has the same effect. Disgust.
I agree that the AC has a place - I'm one of them. But I decry those that abuse the priviledge granted them by using it as a safe place to demonstrate their total and complete lack of civillity.
Sometimes, in my darker moments, I wish that dueling hadn't been outlawed. Perhaps if one could still be called out for insults, the gatutious personal attacks would cease.
Do you bite your thumb at me, Sir?
DG
quit wasting everybody's time telling yourself how clever you are.
If you're me, then that means that all you're doing in that post is just congratulating yourself on a more subtle -- and therefore more pretentious -- level. "One feels at one with one who once . .
Give it a rest.
- orangutang
Hi,
For the record, I agree with Jon that anonymous ids/posting is intrinsic to the net. However, I wish to bring up a completely unrelated topic - Jon, I'm curious how you make money at all. I know that you're published in PCWeek, but that can't support you fully. Why are you writing for Slashdot for free? You get an lot of aggravation in return, for sure, but I'm don't understand why you would publish to this forum............
those that abuse anonymous status should have their network's address banned from anonymous posting. its a very simple addition to the posting script and quite effective at squelching the disruptors.
this requires moderation on part of the sysops, but that much should be expected. a public forum does not run itself without moderation for very long.
as far as implementing such a system, may i suggest creating a dbm file with the first three bytes of the offender's address (say 192.168.42) as the key and the data an 'expiration date' followed by a comment or additional bookkeeping. a nightly cron would step through the dbm and delete any ban records that have expired (it's usually only necessary to ban an address for a short while).
in the posting script, check for the address in the dbm, if found print a friendly little message stating that someone on the network abused AC so it has been disabled & the poster must use an account.
this system has worked very well on my site for quite some time. of course this does assume there is a post log or something to associate ips with posts (fairly easy to implement if not already.)
Hey Man! You're a poor geek. Ever heard of UUCP?
Or even fetchmail? The latter is for luusers of course.
i post as an annoymous coward - NOT because i want to remain annoymous, but because i just find it a pain to have to keep track of one more password which i may or may not ever have to use again.
it'd be a lot more useful if they just let you sign your name/email somewhere instead of REQUIRING you to log-in, create an account, and keep track of another @#$$% password.
Flame away
Hey, have you seen Katz's new email address. If we use email addresses as status symbols (and hell, why not?), I would say that Katz has reached the pinnacle of geek culture by attaining one of the most sought after addresses on the net.
What's more impressive? @redhat.com? @debian.org? @transmetta.com? Maybe transmetta, but maybe not.
@psnw.com - Blech.
I don't know what I did to anger you people, but please stop. I've received so much nasty email my computer blew up, and I've gotten death threats and even letterbombs! And a black van with tinted windows keeps driving around my block.
Mr. Anon Hemos Cohward
413 Shady Crunch Lane
San Jose, CA
Sorry man...
One of my favorite sayings is
"Broad sweeping generalizations tend to be incorrect"
Yeah, it is supposed to be funny.
Absolutely. If you invite people to respond why insult them in the process? There are already enough attacks on human dignity in everyday life. Look at all the postings by A/C, indicating most people want to remain anonymous. It may seem amusing at first to call them cowards, but ultimately it is degrading. Is this the sort of association people should make with Linux users?
...I'll open an e-mail account on HotMail.
/. kind of a moot point? I can always hide my identity on a web site. Maybe the anti-AC people here can convince Rob that he needs to get a copy of everyone's drivers licenses before they're allowed to post. Or possibly he could only allow people to post that have their Pentium III ID's enabled for verification? Can you think of anything else? I doubt you can think of a verification method that nearly everyone couldn't bypass within a couple of minutes.
Isn't the argument about banning AC posters on
I think Katz is right about AC posters. I don't find his writing about technical things incredibly impressive, but he does spark ideas and help me to look at things from another perspective. This ability, of course, is very offensive to the close-minded. They hate it when everyone else gets it and they don't.
KN
Well since you own a copy go back and read it! It is a excellent book containing much wisdom and deep hackery. a good read.
matt
As Lincoln said :" Better to keep your mouth shut and be thought stupid than to open your mouth and prove them right". Seems like the younger generation is a bunch of self righteous computer wizards wannabes. When we started out building those monstrous machines, we had nothing to copy from. We built it from scratch. You kids just copied and build on our foundation and called it yours...what a bunch of losers. US will be destroyed by your hands. The number of missiles Russia and China aimed at our cities doesn't worry you? I predict you guys will die at your desk trying to compile a new s/w or playing QUAKE!
Big red bleeding vagina! Go wax your gay friends up the ass!
im too dumb to come up with a login name and to lazy to remember a password.
it has nothing to do with shyness or anonymity
If I see a non-AC gimp making a nuisance of himself, I'll know to ignore his posts in the future. End of story.
for example, whenever anybody barks "End of story" as if that phrase proved something, a little red flag flips up somewhere deep in the musty recesses of my medulla oblongata, and i never read another post by that person again. i've seen worthwhile posts from you in the past, but i won't bother next time. if you did yr barking as an AC and then wrenched yrself back into nick mode when you had something sensible to say, i'd be a lot more likely to hear the latter, eh hoser?
If people don't WANT to see AC postings, they shouldn't have to, right?
netscape has a little box at the top with funny little squigglies in it; they probably look a lot like this: "http://www.slashdot.org/yadda/yadda" what you can do, is you can point the little pointy thing there and click the clicky and then pound yer little opposable thumbs on the little square poundy things and make AC go bye-bye. unfortunately, there's no way Rob can help you with that, other than by moving the site to a new URL -- and i doubt that he'll bother.
Third, your speech is never being interfered with. The scoring system simply provides a way for the *listeners* to tune out what they don't want to hear. The default threshold is 0, which means they see everything.
oh, you're no fun any more. now you're being reasonable, thoughtful, and well-informed. what a waste of bandwidth.
:)
...is baring the insult of being called a coward. It's a small price to pay.
What you say can and will be used against you in a court of law - not to mention the court of public opinion. Thank God for anonymity. Privacy is a good thing.
I'm glad you found the time to share.
Get stuffed. RMS, admittedly, has tons to do with
where we are now. But he _is_ an annoyance at
this point.
RMS is a hinderance to the free software movement.
You just don't think like a journalist. They tend to think in terms of subscribers and ad dollars.
more feedback = more readers
more readers = happy advertisers
happy advertisers = brownie points w/boss
So, a journalist *may* decide to stir up controversy in order to make himself appear more popular. I'm not saying everyone does it and I'm not saying that it's right. But it happens. Come to think of it, that's Howard Stern's MO to a T...
So don't presume to speak for "geek culture", you little snotweed.
* Has anyone considered the fact that Jon's getting more attention for this than when the 2.2 kernel was released? I'm all for good conversation, folks, but what I'm mostly seeing consists of deliberation of points that are literary device, not major ideas. Don't know about you guys, but I'm downloading while I read.
* Personally, I disagree with Katz. I think that accountability is important - why? Because it makes you think twice, or a third time. Thinking is a good thing. Thinking made Linus create the big daddy a few years ago... But to the point. There've been some good pro and con arguments, but regrettably, I'm seeing a lot of personal attacks against Katz that people think are reason enough to destroy a perfectly valid statement of opinion.
In philosophy and debate, this is called "ad homineum" - for those who don't speak Latin (such as myself), "to the man". If you expect to make a solid, strong counter-argument, try not to attack the person, and attack the argument only.
* Jon's level of proficiency with Linux has nothing to do with the argument at hand. His argument is about ACs like myself on newsgroups, discussion forums, and the like. The OS is completely irrelevant.
And a personal note: Whether we like to admit it or not, we all had to start somewhere. And I don't want to hear anyone complaining about it - if you believe you know everything about Linux, you are either:
a) Linus Torvalds
b) Nowhere even close to rational thought.
* Another bit of ad homineum here... I saw an early post attacking Katz's so-called attempt to enter "geek culture". Are some of you so truly assured of your omniscience that you believe in your ability to define without error an entire culture, and to ostracize/degrade those who do not conform to your definition? One of the strengths of the Internet is that it allows people to communicate freely while removing their ability to judge based on physical appearance, social level, or mental capacity. Hell, I've watched a person on an IRC channel chat with an ELIZA bot a coworker wrote. What bearing does Katz's "culture", if we dare to even use such a term, have to do with the validity of his opinions?
* Ooh, so people don't like the name "Anonymous Coward" to describe them. If you aren't willing to take responsibility for your beliefs, don't follow them. For fuck's sake, even Adolf Hitler believed in what he preached to the end.
* Hmm... "Better anonymous cowards than visible idiots" was a thought-provoking post... but if the history of Slashdot is any indicator, those who are interested in rational discussion will ignore a visible idiot with the same ease that they ignore an invisible idiot. That, or we read the flame war chains for a good laugh.
* A good number of the posts, while pointing a small finger at Katz's inability, raise the idea of not wanting to bring Linux into the mainstream. Do you have such little faith in software developers (both open AND closed source!) that you believe that mainstreaming an idea reduces it? Just because people know of something doesn't mean it will change. And if you're still afraid of it, it's already happening. How many web servers out there run Apache? And how many people still believe NT 5 *cough* err Windows 2000 will be the be-all end-all of server platforms?
While I may not agree with Jon's opinions, I think the flame wars and continuous display of disrespect for opinion boils down to a few things. People, please think a bit before you post to your next favorite Slashdot topic:
1) Who cares who writes it. Therein lies the strength of Anonymous Coward - nobody knows who writes it. Go by the opinions expressed.
2) Extrapolating the opinions to the person and attacking the writer makes no headway. If you feel so offended by the existence of a thought contrary to your brain patterns that you feel the urge to shoot it down, think about it a bit first, do your research, and use solid constructive arguments. For those of you still in high school, when you get to college, take a philosophy or debate or speech class and learn the principles of counter-arguments, it'll go a LONG way in life...
Although I may not have an account on Slashdot - it's taken me long enough to think out and write this post that I need to actually get some WORK done - I freely put my name to the opinions above.
Disagree with me? Flame away. Agree with me? Flame away. I love a good mental battle.
- Ryan Myers
- flame_dropbox@hotmail.com (Like I'm crazy enough to use my real addy, I know you script kiddies are out there)
Can't say you fall into the interesting category. I think you got flamed for that "mailman dropped a box" story precisely because it was not interesting. Don't beleive there were any strong opinions, exactly, in there either.
i think that jon's postings as he makes the TRANSITION between illiterate media moron to 'geek' status are the general idea. anoyone who expects him to be coming out with his own shell next week is a bit confused by the point.
personally i think he adds a human / non-geek touch to things, and helps slashdot and it readers come together with th e rest of the world a bit better.
robo-kitty learns to eat jello or something.
some of us sound like robots so much as it is, i think the book review is almost on target. machines don't become us; we become machines when we lose our abillity to let jon jizz a little sunshine and innocence our way.
that, and the majority of his (although a bit long winded...didn't he ever learn active voice in college?) columns generate TONS of posts......
the fact that he can envoke such frenzied discussion is right off the bat a major argument for keeping him around.
-adam
(not annonymous, just
don't have my passwords
here at gf's dorm [and damn the smith ethernet is slow.])
The Term "Anonymous Coward" is meant to be tongue
in cheek, and at this point, I'm to fond of the term to let it go. I don't mean it as an insult. If it actually bothers someone, they're probably taking themselves to seriously anyway.
Rob "CmdrTaco" Malda
Pants are Optional
Pants are still optional, but recommended for you.
If I wanted to be really careful, I could create an account using a nickname and email address that would be virtually impossible to trace to my real persona... but I'm not that paranoid.
Meanwhile... my friends know that I am Pasc and can still call me on the phone or email me and tell me how insightful/stupid/smart/lame/cool (as the situation warrants) I am.
THE JON KATZ DRINKING GAME!
FUN FOR THE WHOLE FAMILY!
Here are the rules:
1) Every time Jon mentions all the publications he's written for, take one drink.
2) Every time Jon uses a buzzword, like "cypherpunks", "hacker", or "code junkie (?!)", take one drink.
2a) Corollary to 2): Do NOT take a drink every time Jon uses the word "geek", as you will die.
3) Take three drinks every time Jon paints a rosy picture of the 'Net. Add another drink if he mentions only the Web specifically.
4) Take two drinks every time Jon mentions how often he gets flamed. Add another two if he mentions how much he enjoys it.
--------------------------------------
Anyone care to add rules?
- A.P. (who actually enjoys JK, and did this for fun)
--
"One World, One Web, One Program" - Microsoft Promotional Ad
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
- A.P.
--
"One World, One Web, One Program" - Microsoft Promotional Ad
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
Witness what's happened with /. lately.
Can anyone bear to read through the terrible signal to noise ratio that has evolved here lately? For every worthwhile post, you see at least ten "Aw, that's bullshit, you suck" or "I obviously didn't read the article, but here's my opinion anyway" posts.
The reason for this ought to be obvious: the real idiots out there can post with impunity; they can use anonymity as an excuse. Realistically, AC's rarely contribute anything of substance. They have no motivation to say anything important or even related to the article.
There ought to at least be a way to filter out all AC comments so you have a better chance of getting some value out of a discussion. Katz can deal with their crap, I don't want to anymore.
----
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
Many of the most interesting posts have been from Anonymous Cowards. Particularly when there's news involving large corporations, insiders with lots of information tend to post as Anonymous Cowards, for obvious reasons. That alone is a good enough reason to keep AC posting around.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
Ok, so you say that Jon Katz isn't part of "our" culture, then say that he annoys you "more than RMS." If RMS is not part of the hacker culture, then I don't know who is.
I'd rather than Jon Katz than pretentious, elitist idiots like you.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
I seem to recall some Anonymous Coward posts from IBM employees in the various articles on IBM open-sourcing things, or helping out Open Source projects. They posted anonymously for obvious reasons.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
If AC's are truly valued on /. (and they have proven to be valuable on times) then Rob should stop insulting anyone posting anonymously by calling them a coward.
I wonder if subliminally this causes some people to act even more immature than they normally would.
The more you know, the less you understand.
See subject.
Posted by HolyMackeralAndy:
No sweat Jon. Keep up the good work. Linux does have a bit of a learning curve which we have and will all deal with. Most struggle in private and comiserate with their friends, colleagues, whatever. Reading about someone struggling with it is another matter, and Geeks, AC's, real people etc., etc., who don't want to hear about will do what they have to do to justify their own feelings. Drive on, Jon....
Posted by korto:
oki...
all you said (at the least what i read)was very beautiful...
but you can't really expect people to fell as free as you write about if you call them "cowards".
calling people that serve under the big-faceless-fascist-greedy-corporations are probably not really happy about beeing called "cowards" everytime they try to express their opinion.
by the way, not all teens use anonimous posting for fun purpose only!!
A DEEP-ROOTED INTEREST? What are you SMOKING? The only "deep-rooted interest" Katz and lusers like him have in Linux is to look k3wl, just like the only "deep-rooted interest" scriptkidd13z have is the ability to run a nuke program that requires root to create raw TCP packets.
You don't get a deep-rooted ANYTHING until you contribute a WHOLE LOT, aight? This may be the eera of instant-gratification, but not in a meritocracy, you're nobody unless you're good.
Posted by posterkid:
*grumble* need to get that "spawn $EDITOR for textfield" patch into Lynx...
Bruce, first off, while I agree with you about the meritocracy, it's a little bit different. If more people get the idea from what you said as the idea that I got, we're going to have people putting "I program on (foo)" in their sigs here, and I see that as nothing more than mindless dick-waving. I've tried not to mention the program I hack on, and if someone were to look for it they would find it under my real name with this as my email address. I see Slashdot as more a simple news discussion site, not a policy-making area for the entire open source community.
I avoid posting my real name to Slashdot and Usenet because of the large amount of people who have a habit of taking things personally and bringing things into real life and off the net (harassing phone calls, etc). I freely use my real name when I hack on code, and I'm credited as such.
Anyways, what I'm saying in a roundabout way, is that the meritocracy in a discussion group comes from having coherent arguments, not from being Somebody in the community, and that those who feel the need to prove their worth in the community lose a lot of merit in here, at least to me.
Wow, I guess you know me. *shrug*
I'm honored, that's the first time I've ever been called a 'hipster'.
No, I don't think one has an instinctual knowledge of an operating system, I think one should dig around and try to figure things out without bitching about them.
I don't claim to have anything to do with any culture Slashdot represents, if there is indeed one. That's not the one I was referring to. I was referring more to the generic geek culture.
Posted by lnc:
Please excuse me if this is a repeated suggestion. Simply insert a waiting period of 4 to 12 hours for AC posts. It will cut down on the immediate random traffic and "I'm the first poster" nonsense.
Posted by posterkid:
Actually, it's not my patch, but there is one in progress. Check the lynx-dev archives at flora.org and skim the subjects, it should stick out. You'll need the most recent dev version to apply it. If you find bugs, do report them! (It's pretty recent, so will be under January 1999 posts)
What he's trying to say is, click the "Up One" link ;>
Please alter my pants as fashion dictates.
A solution to your problem: use a web based hotmail like email service (try Postmark.net)
HTH.
Please alter my pants as fashion dictates.
I was going to suggest that too, but I think the last time I tested it, it also removed non-AC responses to AC posts, so you sometimes lose large parts of a thread, not just the AC posts.
The term "Anonymous Coward" is the biggest hypocritical aspect of slashdot. I've even asked Rob on IRC why he doesn't just change it to something less insulting. His answer was "it was tongue and cheek originally and not even my idea" so basically he passes the buck on making any decision. He always claims "this is my site, I'll do what I want" but when an issue comes up that he doesn't want to deal with, he pawns it off on others. That's integrity if I ever saw it. What's next, "PGP Pussies" and "Crypto Cocksuckers"? You defend anonymity then abuse anyone who agrees with you buy practicing it.
If you can read this message, your threshold is too low.
If you don't have the time to fill out a form, read an automated response, and click "login" just once (ever), you don't have the time to speak.
On the other hand, I don't care if Rob lets the Anonymous Idiots of the word have their try at trolling, inciting, or baiting his readership. I can simply ignore them, right? Through an easy-to-use scoring threshold, right?
Wrong.
It doesn't work... or certain administrators are marking up replies from specific Anonymous Idiots. Often these replies will appear with a score of 1, resting between replies from the legitimate contributors (those who have already learned how to operate a web browser and an e-mail client). And it's not like these promoted posts are anything other than the average anonymous content (flame bait or senseless garbage). These are no gems of insight.
Rob, if you want to keep the Anonymous Idiots around, fix the filtering system. And it'd be great if I didn't have to click "up one" every time I viewed a new article (the top-level page rendering completely disregards the threshold setting in my user preferences for all articles).
When I read "Anonymous Coward" I don't think of it like "A coward who is posting anonymously". I've gotten to the point where "Anonymous Coward" is just a name, a label, and I don't think "coward" when I see it. It's the same way with actors' names, like, say, Mel Gibson. I don't break it up and say "Mel". Mel? What an uncommon name. Most people don't think that. The name is the whole phrase and most people, once they get past the novelty, never break it apart again.
If AC's are really that self-conscious about the name they're given, perhaps they should create an account? It really is a pretty quick process, and they don't have to give ANY information out that they don't want to...
You may or may not notice that posts are being moderated... Not quickly, but they're being moderated.
You should find a lot of good AC posts have scores now.
It doesn't take a large percentage of people to abuse something in order to make it go away... While I'm not a big proponent of banning AC posts, she does have some valid points.
Take a look at the last thread. Count the number of AC posts that have lowered themselves to using personal attacks, name-calling, foul language and generally abusive text. Then count the number of non-AC posts guilty of the same.
Do you honestly think you're helping "your side" of the issue by posting this drivel?
Now before you start frothing at the mouth, let me say that I am also against banning AC posts. There are uses for it and the amount of crap should be (and is, to an extent) filtered by the moderators. Like it or not, SHE HAS A POINT.
There is a tendency for people to "hide" behind the veil of anonymity for the sole purpose of allowing them to vent, flame, and generally be an abusive nuisance on slashdot without anybody finding out who they are. Her point is that if we required all posts to post from an account (even if that account is JUST as anonymous as the extremely-easy-to-use AC route), the poster would be ACCOUNTABLE. You could look and see that poster XYZ is an annoying twit and could then ignore them. This also makes the idea of using "killfiles" or ignore lists worthy of serious attention.
Now I'm not saying I totally agree with her, but it just doesn't seem like you're understanding what it is she's trying to say.
Lay off the coffee and pills and try to write some constructive comments.
Ok, so let me see if I got this straight. AC's are so people can post anonymously. Suppose someone posts with the handle of flim-flam-man. I know who they are and I can hassle them because I know what their handle is? I still don't know what their Email/Web address is. I don't know what their real name/address is. How exactly is flim-flam-man not anonymous? I try to follow these long threads between an UNKNOWN number of AC's and I have to give up because I have no idea who is replying to who or even how many people are talking. For all I know it could be one or two people just being really annoying.
asinus sum et eo superbio
asinus sum et eo superbio
in omnibus veritas
That was also back when Rob was considering upgrading to an ISDN. There weren't enough /.ers for too much hostility.
How many posts of any type by anyone should you take seriously? Start with zero.
The benefit of having unique, "owned" identifiers is that readers _can_ take you seriously if you regularly demonstrate credibility. ACs can't do this(demonstrate previous credibility), so you can only evaluate their posts in a local context.
When you see a post that makes you go "Huh?", if it's identified you can at least check the history and see what else that person has posted. If the past indicates responsibility and credibility, you can look at the latest post, notice that it came in at 0130 and realize, "Oh, he's drunk" and pay no mind. If his history indicates that he's a loon, you can comfortably ignore him without any further consideration.
Good judgement comes from experience, and experience comes from bad judgement.
- W. Wriston, former Citibank CEO
...but only to a point. I don't have a problem with AC's so much as I have a problem with the verbal (textual?) diareha that spews forth from some readers. It makes the whole site seem amaturish, and reflects poorly on the open source/geek/linux/whatever community, but it is definitely NOT only AC's. Its trivial to log in and be an asshole.
Its my personal opinion that the moderators should be a little more heavy handed in downgrading posts. Lately slashdot has felt like some teen channel on IRC, and it gets old. I wonder how many readers read the headlines and completely skip the comments. I certainly wouldn't mind missing some of the "choice" comments that have little or nothing to do with the article, and I could especially do without grammar/spelling nazis, but if I or anyone else felt masochistic its simple to adjust one's threshold.
Anonymous Cowards are 1) idiots, 2) cowards, and 3) only worth ignoring. If you can't be bothered to fill out a form, I won't bother to listen to you. If you're too afraid to stand behind your opinions, your opinions are worthless to me. Get a backbone, creep.
Anonymous Cowards have no reputation to protect, therefore they can say anything they want. On the other hand, they have no reputation to protect, therefore anything they say is of no value. I wish Rob had a way to permanently filter out AC postings -- I've never seen one worth reading.
-russ
so what if he knows/doesn't know about the Dragon Book... Knowing about the existance of the Dragon Book, and what it is about, is of itself nothing. Actually reading and grokking the book is another matter entirely, and not one that is for "hAck3rz" only...
cripes
AC usually post useless crap. With their posts they draw the whole discussion into a piece of emotional useless mess. There are too many guys out here who get trapped by dumb AC's posting as they try to argue on their comments. /. account.
And most important:The existence of AC's can not be justified by anonymousity. Thanks to many free of charge email services it is still possible to stay anonymous *AND* to have a real
So,
Turn off AC Postings and lets go to real reasonable discussion
No content.
No brain
Think about nobody wants to read your crap.
Who in hell could trace back an anonymous email account.
Such cowards like you should definitly *NOT* beeing allowed to poison senseful discussions. Always hiding behind curtain of total Anonymousity. BAH.
If you have something to say: Step forward if. If not Shut up.
The logic behind this is. Creating am email & /. account would be the first barrier for many AC's. /. acc, others will afraid from the afford it creates to get anonymous email. /. accounts over and over again. :-]]]
Some of the AC's are just 2 lazy to create an
But the BEST thing is. You could easily identify these guys who tend to post crap and therefore ignore their postings. If these guys would like to stay totally anonymous they will have to create new email and
Sounds good doesnt it?
According to your statement about my masturbation skill.
I admit my masturbation skills are poor.
I dont have to. There are enough chicks who love to the job.
Go and get a girl friend. If you try this since the mid 80's, try to buy a bitch. If even the bitch doesnt want ya.... (sigh)
Id would like to fully respect your total anonymousity IF:
/. passwd.
- There would be that much AC's who misuse their anonymousity to post crap, FUD, or even worse direct discussion into emotional driven mud war.
Here my suggestion. Create anonymous Email acc and forward everything to billy after reading your initial
I am sure turning off AC posting would raise discussion quality dramatically.
Best Regards
This is what I mean if I say: People get trapped - AC postings direct discussion into emotional mess.
I am *not* always immune to this.
if you truely believe that this is caused by anonymous cowards than i truely feel sorry for your misguided beliefs
If a nick user posts crap, I will read his stuff once. But *only* once. Thats the big deal.
You seem to be suffering from the common misconception that all nick users are good and all AC's are bad. the real problem though is your lazynes
Uhh whats your age? If you would have read carefully: I *never* said all AC's are bad. And how the heck do you conclude "I am lazy"?? Sorry perhaps it is me to be too dumb to follow your args.
so why do you seem to think that baning AC's will make you immune to it
Simple question, simple answer. It wont.
But I am convinced it will lower "junk/trap rate" in discussions by holding back more people from posting junk. The second time a nick posts trash nobody will read his stuff.
Ok, in future AC *only* comments should be allowed, as my predecessor has proven that this will dramatically boost comment quality. (Yawn...)
So I create a hotmail account, create a /. account from that, and then ignore the hotmail account forever more. I'm still anonymous, I just don't have 'Anonymous Coward' on all my posts. The benefit of this is..? No, I didn't think there was one
Pls refer to this link
They get flamed by someone and their immediate response is to ban anonymity, even though it will do NOTHING to prevent flames. Do you even think for a second before you post this crap
Argh. Warning FUD LEVEL RAISING
As an advice: I never got flamed.
On what are your arguments based? A crystal ball?
anonymous idiots will stop posting anonymously and start mailbombing those they disagree with instead. Your ban will make your situation WORSE
WARNING FUD LEVEL CRITICAL!
Where do you take you knowlegde from????? Are you working for a wheather forecast company or something like that or are you a traveller from outer space?? No matter what, you loose. "Period"
About mailbombs:I dont care if you mailbomb the given account all day and night. Feel free to do so.........
yes but you are advocating the banning of all AC's, how is that really any different than blaming them all?
The problem that as long as AC exist, there will always be some dorks to mess up discussions. I see no other solution than banning AC postings. I am absolutely open to any suggestion to solve the problems AC cause!
and lazyness because you want all AC's banned, if you dont like them, then ignore them. dont try to get other ppl to do your work for you
How could I ignore it, as I am directly affected. A messed up discussion is worthless, no matter whether I ignore or not.
I rarely read the /. posts because of the high noise to signal ratio. It is not worth my time to sift through unintelligent rants to mine a couple of gems.
It is the content of the posts, not the sender's id that bothers me. How many of slashdot's readers have ever gone to their boss or boss's boss and said, "You need to read this thread on Slashdot."?
Darn few, if any, is my guess. I feel comfortable forwarding many of the links to information that I find in Slashdot to managers in my company. And I often do. I have never -- and under the present system, will never -- suggest that anyone read the posts. They should be called Slashdot's Wasteland.
And that is a shame. I value the experience and intelligence and wit of the slashdot gang -- but finding that beyond the home page is difficult, if not impossible.
BTW, to an new reader or to your boss that looks at Slashdot at your urgings, CmdrTaco is as anonymous as Anonymous Coward.
Perhaps the answer is two sites:
Slashdot, Sr. moderated for the Serious
Slashdot, Jr. unsupervised recess for the immature
DC Stultz
DC Stultz
Is Jon Katz uncool, a poser, a wannabe? Possibly, but he also is more mainstream than most of us. Have you, an AC, been discriminated so much by the mainstream that you now feel it's your turn? I admit that Mr. Katz is probably not the most techiest guy around but he does represent the majority in regards to tech - THEY HAVEN'T A CLUE - but since I braves coming out here with the rest of us to find out; to question the culture of geeks; to try and make some mainstream sense.
So his writing isn't what you like but considering he does make a living at writing then he's obviously doing something right and it's probably the mainstream people that enjoy more than you do.
Arrogant?!? Maybe but he doesn't at least sound half as arrogant then you do. You have an opinion and I respect that but why is it some geeks can't respect others opinions and take a holier than thou attitude...so you've been programming and tinkering since birth - BIG DEAL! What are you doing to educate the masses?
If anything if we could teach Mr. Katz what tech-culture is all about than possibly he'd be able to write better and more factual and maybe more mainstream people will understand as well and have the same take on tech-culture that you do.
Or like the bigots of yester-year do you actually crave segregation - just in doing so remember we geeks are not the majority anymore on the net.
Save Pangaea!! Stop Continental Drift!!
Is it me or is this article similar to the "lurkers" article that Jon Katz did not so long ago?!?!?!
===
===
Old Fart!!! Of tha SENIOR DADS!!!!!
http://surf.to/seniordads/
The problem is those who must deride others with sophmoric comments. How about a little respect for your fellow man? I've noticed that the ratio of informative and insightful comments to posts that basically say "you suck" or "i don't know what i'm talking about but i like to type" has gotten horribly low.
I work behind two firewalls, on a restricted military network. I am not allowed Java or anything fancy. Most log-ons now use Java or even, dare I mention it's existence, ActiveX. If such a log on is involved I cannot log on but I can usually be an Anonymous Coward.
So it is not always through choice that someone is Anon.
Zemran
I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
I'm impressed. You have the worldly, seen-it-all-at-21 hipster patter right on the mark, even down to that 'sexual climax as metaphor' thing. You don't CARE about other people's experiences. Anyone worth their silicon knows how to run every OS on pure instinct, just like you do, you manly hacker god. And YOU know better than using any commercial software, ever. Only lusers use commercial software. When "Space Invaders" first hit arcades, you were screaming "Free the Source" at Taito. Hell, you were born with the Dragon Book stuffed up your ass, weren't you? You don't even need FREE software! You wrote the browser you're using. You wrote the OS! YOU WROTE IT ALL! And you'd share if only people were WORTHY! Yes, you're definitely a part of whatever culture you think Slashdot represents. Or you're a character in a Bret Easton Ellis novel. Hard to tell these days, you know.
Pseudonyms would work better, as they'd give you a chance to learn something about the character of a poster.
If it were my choice, I'd have it be a meritocracy, at least as far as conversations about Linux and free software. Free software is all about a quid-pro-quo: you return the value you get by making more free software, or contributing to our community in some other way. I'm much more willing to listen to someone talk about where we should be heading when I know they've made a contribution to it, like writing a program or documenting something. That kind of person has paid their dues, and generally wants to be heard using their real identity because they are proud of their contribution. The kind who can't contribute and just wants us to give them stuff, who doesn't really understand the ethos of our community, makes up a good portion of the AC commenters.
It's not even an ability thing. Most people can document even if they can't program. It's more a willingness to contribute rather than just snipe at others from the protection of anonymity.
Bruce Perens
Bruce Perens.
Yes, synthetic-nickname folks can me-too their own postings as well.
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
Wow. "This is not a flame." Right.
;). Not nearly as hostile as some I've seen, but not exactly calm, cool, and collected either.
That exactly fits with Katz little theory. I actually thought they were kidding, but never found the
I think people like this are just blowing off steam, not being able to confront the REAL cause of their frustration, be it their boss, the IRS, or their inability to get it up, or even all the above.
Flaming actually strikes me as fairly healthy. So bring it, baby.
--Mark
It is a great suggestion!! Hope you read this rob!
StickBoy
--- "The problem is not that the world is full of fools, it's that lightning isn't being distributed correctly." -- Mar
Ever notice the Anonymous Cowards talking about how they can't be bothered to fill out "another form", but they always have time to tell us that?
I say people should be held accountable for what they say, the Internet allows too much anonymity. If you don't like being called a Coward, register! Oh no, Rob is going to use that cookie to hijack my credit card!
The Law School at the University I went to has a free speech wall that they call, creatively, The Wall. There are only two rules: you must sign (and date) anything you post or write on a post; you cannot remove anyone else's post. Anything can be posted -- newspaper articles, essays, invective letters, anything. It just has to be signed.
You might think that it gets reduced to personal mudslinging, but it doesn't. Since each poster much take ownership of their post, people think about what they write. It works because there is responsiblity, and the community is fairly honorable; I have not heard of any false signatures.
That said, I waver about whether I would want to keep or ban Anonynous Cowards. A large percentage of the AC posts are off topic or poorly thought our or just insulting. Then there are some posts which really shine. Some of the best posts I have seen here are from ACs. And some of the worst are from those with a login. You don't need to be an AC to write a "First Post!" comment, and firsties are often not ACs. It is also a simple matter to get a login without giving any real information about yourself (only giving a @yahoo or @hotmail or @dejanews e-mail address).
I believe in being responsible for my posts. I try to put my name on every post, and certainly my URL and e-mail address work. There are some to whom responsibility is not an issue. As long as ACs are allowed, there can be no limit on them, and they should be allowed to post whatever drivel or gems they care to, just as those with a login can.
I say keep ACs. Thresholds exist so that you can ignore them if you like; I prefer just to ignore those posts which deserve ignoring.
Russell Ahrens
It is Yale. I haven't looked at the wall since I graduated in '96 (and although I was an undergraduate, I did spend a fair amount of time in the law school library), but I don't remember too much "hyper adolescent" postings. Maybe it has changed.
Increase the Threshold to 1, which will filter out all AC posts, except those which have been moderated upwards. I do this whenever there are more than 100 comments, to reduce the amount I have to wade through.
-- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
Bollocks. No change there, then.
I would like to be able to rapidly filter out most AC comments. If there were an option I could set to sort AC's last (in both tree and flat modes) then I would be happier.
Of course, as evidenced by the frequency of "first comment" posts, I'm sure others would like to be able to sort their comments first.
So Rob, why not make everyone happier and just add a sort-preference option?
Enough Said,
Cimarron Taylor
I don't disagree completely with the concept of ACs on /. and other sites, but I do disagree with JK's assesment. ACs usually take the 'no consequence for their actions' stance. They can anonymously interject anything into a reasonable discussion and derail or degrade it into a flamewar and not have to share a bit of identity or responsibility. Does he really think that there is a segment of society that shouldn't be held responsible for their actions in a public forum?
JK seems to want to celebrate and worship some of the worst of humanity ( the behaviour, not ACs) which leads me to wonder just what kind of guy he really is. He likes to stir things up, dosen't know hardly anything about computers, gets paid to write articles that generate tremendous response... Hmmmm.. do you suppose that he may post many of the AC comments that he is defending here?? Makes me wonder.
Kindness is the language which the deaf can hear and the blind can see. - Mark Twain
This has got to be the most surreal Slashdot threads ever.
Personally, I don't have a problem that people like him are there. Just confine them somewhere outside the Internet. How can someone like him, who doesn't even know the difference between the Internet and the Web, dare to talk down on Anonymous Cowards? At least those guys don't have to leave their name on every corner like dogs and graffitti "artists"!
And Slashdot will continue to suck, even more so that it sucks now. CmdrTaco does not post earthshattering international events like the ETSI documentation being released on the web, because of some chauvinistic "it's not in the US, so it's not important" attitude, and he does not add the "I don't want to see Ask Slashdot" or "killfile Jon Katz" features. It's time to abandon Slashdot. Now.
And Jon, it really disgusts me how you always make sure that you mention your incredible credentials, there other web sites where you pissed at the corner. If you had any actual competence, you wouldn't need that.
Perhaps you didn't notice that you can post with just a name and nothing else.
So what if you get flamed on slashdot? There's nothing coming into your mailbox, so who cares? Personally, I feel that most of the "controversial" stuff that's posted by ACs isn't worth reading because the ACs often don't care about putting enough thought into their posts to avoid sounding like idiots.
Be an adult. Back up what you say with a name. Make the signal-to-noise ratio better.
(I do realize that there are uses for AC posting, such as insider tips and the like. Good ol' paranoia works as a reason, too, I guess.)
A host is a host from coast to coast...
Unless it's down, or slow, or fails to POST!
All you have to do is set your threshold to 1 and all of those nasty AC posts will magically disappear.
Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater!
A host is a host from coast to coast...
Unless it's down, or slow, or fails to POST!
Is it really too difficult to remember one username/password for all 'net accounts? If someone hax0rs my nytimes account and is somehow able to post as me on infoworld electric and slashdot, I'm not going to have my world crumble around me.
Besides, there are plenty of well-known public accounts for those sites (cypherpunks, for one). I don't usually bother to create a personal account if I'm just reading stuff. I get enough spam as it is.
I get annoyed with people who make dumb excuses. Don't bother. Just say that you don't want to do something and be done with it.
A host is a host from coast to coast...
Unless it's down, or slow, or fails to POST!
Hey buster, who you calling uncool? I did get flamed in an e-mail this morning, but somebody who told me my e-mail organizing skills are poor. This is true. But if I get any less cool, I'd boil over.
jonkatz@slashdot.org
I know it came from Eric Raymond,but didn't some person at MS send it out? It seems that the personal insults are the problem for people, not the anonymity. On the Well, people who get nasty just get temorarily removed from posting privileges, till they settle down. But who would want to police that?
jonkatz@slashdot.org
Another piece of feelgood USA today style fluff from Katz.
How much longer are you going to let this continue CmdrTaco? Isn't slashdot your livelyhood now? Shouldn't you be worried?
--- I do not moderate.
Well put! It seems to be almost universally true that those who are most vociferous in their use of free speech, are also those who are most likely to deny others the right to express themselves. Jon does an excellent job expressing himself, and has certainly proven that he does have a thick skin. Many of the flames directed at Jon complain about the length of his articles. Many of the flamers don't seem to be able to rise above petty, one line insults in their attacks, so it is not surprising that they object to a lengthy, thought out essay.
Keep it up, Jon!
Jim Wildman jim@rossberry.com
$#@)($Sieg Heil)(#@$
:gasp: I just posted this message. Its so amazing, wait.. now I click "submit" right? WOooooOo
$#@)($Sieg Heil)(#@$
$#@)($Sieg Heil)(#@$
Wow, look, I have a nick and..
And, back on topic for a moment.. good luck convincing people to ban AC postings. Why don't you try making an argument instead of random useless threats? What a concept!
It's a lot easier to flame than it is to understand. There's a lot out there on the Net that isn't worth the rise in blood pressure and the degradation of finger tendons in banging away a reply, because someone has to believe you to change their thinking, and that takes choice on their part. /rational_response :) I get indignent at a lot, including posts from both sides. I think the key here is with the AC posts is....does it really matter who is posting? You're reading a stream of ideas, and unless it truly matters to you to know the name, background, SSN, OS of the person behind the ideas, then it's moot. Someone you disagree with strongly about Linux may have an opinion on music you agree with. The attachment of a name sometimes grants instant and unmerited bias to anything posted by that person. I really believe an Anonymous poster has the benefit of escaping the preconceived notions some may attach to a solid identity otherwise. :) Katz has a knack for fluidity of perspective without compromising his own opinions, I think. If more people had flexibility, -then- the rational_response I cited above would play a bigger part in posting.
Truth is, it doesn't really stop me or anyone else, of course.
Anyway, this is getting long.
Cheers,
Pym
They do nothing but decrease the signal to noise ratio. As a previous Slashdot article proved, their behaviour keep more than 90% of people from posting.
:)
If people must flame they should have the guts to do it under their own names.
IMHO.
Being bitter is drinking poison and hoping someone else will die
Right on, Jon. The AC posts are a vital part of slashdot discussions. Forcing everyone to log in to post on /. would be a mistake. The idea of the internet is that it allows many-to-many distribution of ideas and news, as opposed to the few-to-many architecture of newspapers or broadcast TV/radio. If you don't like inane, off-topic, or offensive posts, set your threshold to 1 (or 2 if you have a very short attention span). If you want to hear what EVERYONE has to say (like I do), set your threshold to -2. Banning AC posts will not boost the signal-noise ratio on /. Everyone on IRC has a name, and that hasn't forced it to become a civilized forum. Why would forcing everyone here to take a pseudonym change anything?
0 1 - just my two bits
I'd love to see anonymous cowards axed. They are incredibly bad for the PR image of this site and MUST have a negative impact on site attendance from new visitors.
Pseudos I'm ok with.
Macka
Zathras was once anonymous but still a coward.
... sometimes correct.
Zathras fear no response, very humiliating.
Alas, Zathras mostly lurk.
Enjoy AC posting's. You may learn something.
AC's are always certain
---
--- "Zathras talks to dirt, sometimes talks to ceiling and walls, but dirt is closer."
I thought interpersonal problems were a known problem with RMS, and that upgrading to ESR went some way towards fixing them...? ;>
if AC's were removed, we'd see pseudo-AC accounts with no actual information on them, false email addresses and url's, and handles that don't refer to the real person. I suppose people in big corporations who want to be anonymous would use those instead of AC if there was no AC. Which is the main practical reason why I think AC is good.
exactly, that's why /. is a really free site. if it went down the "need to police posts" road, it'd have to start requiring registration and a valid email address to post at all. then people would use throwaway email addresses just for that (hotmail anyone?), and you'd have the usual race between the ones banning handles and the ones registering new thorwaway ones to flame from. since this is 1) a lost battle, and 2) a sure way to bring sourness to the site, I'm very happy that /. is NOT going down this route, and just letting people post as AC's.
Back before ./ had a normal login feature, I posted serveral pro-MS/anti-Linux notes and got flamed when doing so. After I started posting with by nick, people stopped flaming.
Unfortunatly I find that most Slashdotters are 15-yeard olds that think they are cool because they run Linux.
Before you flame me about this read the first paragraph at:
http://www.acm.org/cacm/AUG96/antimac.htm
--weenie NT4 user: bite me!
"Computers are nothing but a perfect illusion of order" -- Iggy Pop
better than those who flame you openly.
They are both hiding behind a mask. Afraid to come out in the community.
The reason you get burned here so much is because your "articles" have nothing to do with news, which is what this page is about. Worse, your articles have spelling errors, grammar errors, and worse you have a tendency to drop a word in mid-sentence... leaving us to figure it out.
I have yet to one newsworthy item from you, all I see is drivel that explains why you don't write for the other guys anymore.
It would be best if Slashdot had a special John Katz editorial page. That way the news page would not be cluttered with all the noise. That way we could just forget you exist.
.
. * Did aliens forget to remove your anal probe?
The suggestion of using the replace-string command with C-Q C-M as the string to replace and an empty string as the replacement string will, in fact, work. I've used it many times with success.
One automated way that you might not be aware of is to do the original transfer of the files from your DOS/Windows machine to a Unix box using the Internet. Use "ascii" mode in FTP, and your text files will be automatically converted.
D
If signing your name to something is enough to make you not post it it, then that's your own shortcoming -- but also a sign to yourself realizing that it probably doesn't deserve to be posted in the first place. Anonymity removes this barrier, and allows the person to post w/o making them rationally think about the consequences of their statements. It's the whole case of freedom and responsibility, they go hand in hand.
If I have something to say, I'll say it, without fearing the impending outcome of my decision. Jon said, "Anyone willing to venture a strong idea or opinion online should expect to be flamed", and I agree. So what? Put on the asbestos pants and post away... but use your name.
I do not always feel like loging in. I think its
nice sometimes but there should not be any negative
incentives to logging in.
I have no problem with the AC name except that
it does make it harder to see a commenter you
can quickly pick out and read, while still not
having the hassle of logging in. Other than
that AC is fine IMHO.
It's Aho, Sethi & Ullman, Compilers : Principles, Techniques and Tools published by Addison-Wesley and the Amazon URL is8 6/qid%3D917415425/002-2583591-9682245
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/02011008
I usually do not give a damn and post with my real name but I understand people who hide behind AC because of their employment... (I have to remind some of the posters that there are US corporations where even the email is considered to be CORPORATE property).
There is just one minor note on flamers. They are mostly not adolescent mailes, but badly educated people who do not agree with anybody who thinks differently. They also cannot argue for their opinion so they have to shout over anybody who thinks different.
The discussion around operation " Desert Blow Job... " was a good example of that...
And what about AC ;-), AC is just a term, let it stay...
Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
http://www.sigsegv.cx/
... And "Git who can't be bothered to get a Nick" would be too long.
/. It sure seems to be working.....
I wish the flamers who jump on Jon everytime he posts to slashdot would get a life and go somewhere else. We all know Jon, If you don't like his style then don't read his articals!! Noone is compelled to do so. If people can't make constructive critisism then they should say nothing. Personally I wouldn't be at all surprised if Jon is deliberately stringing out his account of his "adventure" just to wind up the testosterone crazed infants on
*--BigMan--- Time flies like an arrow.. but personally I prefer a nice glass of wine!
I'm not interested in chasing any of the anonymous folks off; I am, in fact, interested in what some of them have to say. But Slashdot really needs edited discussion threads. Quite often (as is the case with this one) I don't read any of the responses, because there are just too many of them.
cjs
The world's most portable OS: http://www.netbsd.org.
...was right on target. congrats, katz!
one comment, though - you write:
"AC's are a unique sub-species of the Net and the Web, like hackers or cypherpunks.
hmm. and i thought hackers (as in 'linux hackers', and not as in 'c00l hackerz') were the prototypical netizens, rather than a 'unique subspecies'...
My other car is a cons.
I agree with good old CmdrTaco. It's a joke, it's funny, laugh. It really isn't that difficult to create an account, if you don't like being called a coward, get yourself an account. If you don't make an account, deal with it. People are way too serious about themselves anyway.
-matt
It IS tounge and cheek, and it is rob's site. If you don't like it make an account, oh wait, you did already. What exactly is your problem? I got sick of seeing "Anonymous Coward" over my posts so i created an account, i never felt insulted though, or felt a lack of respect or anything like that. Deal with it.
-matt
I think allowing ACs post is wonderful. Having to read them isn't. Registered user accounts should have the option to not read them - only seeing other registered accounts as an option to seeing every Tom, Dick, and -uh; I mean every AC, AC, and AC post. A technical solution that provides an answer without detracting, bitching, or berating anyone.
but WOOO HOOO HOOO HAA HAA HAA HAA HAA OH MY I'm wetting my self while trying to imagine just how much starch gets put in your under-things. As for being uber-fiend/you-think-you-are-right, whatever.
... wow yet another pointless ellipsis! Let's start a dotdotdot war! Except that you'd win; being correct and all.
Oh... something else... it needs to be said... I guess I out use-of-hyphenated-word'ed you...
PS:
Some people here are a strange lot. They don't want big brother glancing over their shoulders, but when someone else's anonimity bothers them, they forget their own desires for privacy and call for the heads of those they can not identify.
I posted once or twice as a "coward" before I finally registered as a user here. It wasn't even a desire for anonymity so much as not wanting yet another account somewhere to deal with.
I know I wouldn't want any of my future employers reading some of what I write. They might consider some of my personal views contrary to their own and not hire me.
My current employer... well, I can tell you now that you should Never Again Volunteer Yourself.
But I do know that not everyone shares my "don't give a damn what you think of me" attitude. And still others may be contradicting an ideology pushed by their employer (which may have superiors reading these posts if they are a tech oriented company).
Anonimity shouldn't be optional, it should be a right.
So "Anonymous Coward" is a joke, eh? "Coward" is supposed to make us laugh, ma Taco belle?
Sure, assholes post using "Anonymous Coward". Assholes often (sometimes more often) post using a "real name", which is usually some stupid made up name (like this one). "Yeah, I'm a responsible macho man cuz I post with my real name and I don't care who flames me; I am a badd-ass mofo."
A couple of points:
Our Taco-mac-daddy may think the "Cowards" part is "funny" or a "joke". And maybe other anonymous posters agree. Well hey, let's make it totally hilarious and call them "Anonymous Niggarz", that'll be a hoot. All in jest, you know, and that term hardly offends anybody these days.
Use of the term "Cowards" implies and perpetuates a certain bias against anonymous posters. Need more proof of this bias? It turns out, apparently, that posts by "real people" are automatically given a score of one, whereas the "Anonymous Cowards" get a score of zero. I never noticed this before setting up an account.
In the US, anonymous speech is protected by the first amendment. In particuarly, political speech, such as anonymous pamphleteering, has recently been reaffirmed by the courts as protected speech. It is usually the only protection against the tyranny of the majority. This is not to say Rob MUST allow anonymous posting; it's his server, and he can pretty much do what he wants with it.
What what IS he doing with it? For one, he is recording your IP number every time you post, anonymously or not. (Use the source, Luke.) Why? The better to track you with, my dear, just in case you say something really unpopular, I suppose. You'd have to ask Rob why he'd want to be a target for some sue-happy bozo who decides they've got to know who wrote something uncomplementary about them. I guess if you're really paranoid, you could figure maybe the Feds (FBI, CIA, NSA, MiB) requested that he did do it for "legitimate law enforcement purposes". Hey, what better place to mine for crackers and other new talent?
So, here is how to really be anonymous on SlashDot:
First, you can avoid coughing up your IP by using an anonymizing web proxy that strips out your personal info.
Second, don't create a Slashdot account. Just stick it out with "Anonymous Coward"; It's less work, and you won't stand out. But if you want a name:
When you create your Slashdot account, you're required to give an e-mail address, obstensively to mail you your initial password. Now it could just tell you right there, or let you pick your own. The real purpose here is to provide another means for Rob to track you down. So, you have a couple of options:
Third, when using your proxy, use it from a separate account (you have a Linux box, right? just make a new one). It's easier to maintain the settings you need in your browser that way. Otherwise, you need to make sure you refuse cookies from Slashdot. If you don't, the cookie Slashdot sends you when you post will reveal you once you turn the proxy back off (they tend to be too slow to leave on all the time). (Use the "Warn me before accepting a cookie" setting to see what I mean.)
So, remember this in case Rob has a change of heart and decides to ban anonymous postings all together, and you can still be anonymous.
Oh, and it wouldn't shock me in the least if this post disappeared, along with my account. If so, you can finger stupid at redneck dot efga dot org for my PGP key. My Slashdot account could disappear, but I won't.
Katz, I think you earned back a little respect, although the article seems like faint praise to me.
-- Blame any errors on your own stupidity. All wrongs reserved.
Now all we need is an Anonymous Coward filter. I wouldn't use it myself, but its very existance would strengthen the drive towards accepting responsibility for ones opinions, without prohibiting anyone from posting anonymously.
How about a limited menu of choices for anonymous user names, e.g.:
Anonymous Coward
Corporate Coward (for posters of sensitive info)
Anonymous OS Bigot (or *nix Bigot, Windows Bigot, Mac Bigot)
Anonymous Foul-Mouthed Jerk
Anonymous Troll
All intended tongue in cheek, of course, hopefully you get the idea. Who knows, some posters might actually choose appropriate categories.
hm. i always thought it a little tongue in cheek. i hope that it doesn't change. even tho' i finally bothered to fill out a form i couldn't be bothered to sign in or whatever you're supposed to do. i'm too lazy to sent this, i'll have someone else press the button.
I recently had a discussion of similar content with some friends of mine, but it was more concerned with starting in the gaming arena. The idea was that you would have a unique signature that would identify you and that could not be spoofed. Therefore if you did something in a game that people didn't like, the admin could permanently block you from playing, rather than just blocking your IP which many people can get around by just reconnecting. This led to other stuff such as something which recorded everything you did so you could prove yourself innocent should you be accussed of doing something bad. This bothered me and the more ideas he presented the less I liked it. I do believe people should be responsible for their actions, but I don't really think an elaborate mechanism for enforcing it is the way to go.
/. account is more likely to cause you not to post at all, at least anon gives you a quicker way to post. But, assuming that everyone who wanted to post had an ID already, if you are going to say something you should be willing to identify yourself. Not that most of the discussions are anything more than flame wars with people bickering about the topic rather than discussing it. I guess what I'm saying is, if you don't like anonymous coward, then skip the posts by them. As people are ignored and their flame posts are not responded to, they may find that when they really have something to say they will stop being cowards and post it with their name on it.
As for the anonymous coward thing, I think I can see why people might be tempted to use it, the extra time to sign up for a
We all know there's good and bad sides to having ACs. I think the good sides outweigh the bad ones.
But that doesn't mean I submit this opinion of mine as a headline. What's interesting about it ? Theres no information whatsoever in your story Katz. All there is is a repeating of one of your favourite themes, the one about how much nicer people are in email than in public forums.
we've heard it before. It wasn't news the first time, and it's not getting fresher.
I personally find that I tend to skip over posts by Anonymous Cowards (of whose secret society I was a member until a short while ago--hurray for laziness) based on past observations of the quality of their posts. Malda can use the label of his choice when referring to them, but as long as the posts come from the people that they currently do, I'll keep skipping them.
/do/ judge posts by content, rather than by the name I see at the top, I would be perfectly willing to accept anonymous insiders, cowardly or otherwise, based on the quality of their arguments. I think their goals would be better met if they didn't hide behind the monolithic AC collective, given the flexibility of Slashdot's registration requirements. It's no more difficult to create an email account that can't be traced to you than it is to make anonymous postings to a web site...
(Understand that I don't favor eliminating the privilege; I simply don't personally have time to weed through all comments, and AC posts are among the first to go.)
However, since I
The problem with anonymous cowards is that you don't have a identity. To have a productive conversation people should have a identity, even if they remain anonymous. It's easy to create a false identity in Internet. You can get a new web based email (i.e. hotmail) and access it through an anonymizer proxy. If everybody has the same identity - AC - then you are appealing to the lowest common denominator (at least among your audience). If everybody is the same, you are turning the beauty and diversity of Internet in the stupidness and sameness of the mass communication media. The anonymous re-mailers allow you to discuss without people knowing who you are, but you still have a identity. People could even have different alter egos. Why not I can have a anger and a nice personality? Discussions should be more schizophrenic :-), but in a higher lever. It's easy to be hated, it's easy to be popular. You just have to be with or without the lowest common denominator of your audience. You can insult them, or you can hail them (like you are doing now). It's the same thing that the hosts of TV auditorium people do. Measuring how good your message is by the number of replies you get makes you no different than Geraldo. It also should be easy to create an account. The interface to do it is terrible. The greatest coward is the programmer who did this poor interface :-).
It's not a confession it's a fact, AC's never read or reasearch before they post.It's a fascinating phenomenon