It's interesting that a group of people that is so in favor of free information (the "Internet" type of person) would also be almost equally in favor of control over information that pertains to them (privacy). Don't get me wrong; if a person wants to be private, I'm all for them getting their wish, but, to me, it seems to go against the ideas of open source information and a more transparent structure of communication.
As far as Anonymity goes, I believe that being anonymous gives people the freedom to complete their own desires more easily, and puts the pressure on the person and the system to being about good behavior rather than simple peer pressure.
It's about power inequality. To some extent, knowledge is power. Even more so when you already have leverage (the police for instance, uses its monopoly on civil violence to act on information about criminals —catch them). If you want a just and fair society, you probably don't want too much differences of power. So, you'd redistribute power in a way similar to the way taxes (are supposed to) redistribute wealth.
Information can be used to redistribute power: give some to the powerless, and deny some to the powerful. Open Big-Corps and governments, and keep the private citizens' privacy.
[+] [-] Omegalisk|14 years ago|reply
As far as Anonymity goes, I believe that being anonymous gives people the freedom to complete their own desires more easily, and puts the pressure on the person and the system to being about good behavior rather than simple peer pressure.
[+] [-] loup-vaillant|14 years ago|reply
Information can be used to redistribute power: give some to the powerless, and deny some to the powerful. Open Big-Corps and governments, and keep the private citizens' privacy.
[+] [-] ignoreme|14 years ago|reply