> they'll force some kind of "real name" online
All of this is terrible, obviously, but this one has a silver lining. The web will be such a nicer place when people can't hide behind anonymity.
All of this is terrible, obviously, but this one has a silver lining. The web will be such a nicer place when people can't hide behind anonymity.
That's one of the depressing things about sites with "real" (whatever that even means) name policies: turns out people will happily be virulently nasty trolls just as readily without pseudonymity
Yes, most people don't say what they think in person.
But on the internet, you can say that your boss is an idiot, that the company produces crap products, that you eat before visining a friend, that the government worker at XY office is incompetent and lazy, that peopl playing loud music in public are idiots, that men should have legalized paper abortions, and that the professor has no idea what he's teaching, because his knowledge was outdated in the 80s when he got his tenure. All of that because you can be ghusto here and not "John Smith" with your real name and anyone being able to google you. Or more realistically, even if you're alloed to use nicknames but have to register with your real name, you'll never be able to safely critique the government, because they'll always be able to get your data.
For example:
> If there's a group of young men playing loud music on a bus, do you tell them that they're idiots
Why would you tell them they're idiots? How would that help anything. If you do that online anonymously, are you trying to better the situation, or vent your own anger and thus making the world that much more negative?
Yay! /s
If you had to anonymously describe your workplace, your bosses, your company, their products, etc., would you really say the same thing anonymously online and in person or with your real name attached to the text?