My next chapter
chrishateswriting.com
chrishateswriting.com
Moot is not community. You cannot credit him with the inventions that his community came up with. His site was the catalyst, of course, but how much credit should he personally get for it?
Maybe you could judge him by the success (or the lack of it) of DrawQuest and Canv.as.. the two projects that he spearheaded and got VC funding for.
Moot has very different position than Mark Zuckerberg when it comes to identity online: http://venturebeat.com/2011/03/13/4chan-moot-christopher-poo...
He supported anonymity for publicity and did a lot on his site to dissuade its use. When he gave interviews on 4chan, he used to tell everyone that "4chan is not anonymous".
About the only thing that's left on 4chan that's "anonymous" is the default username: which is still "Anonymous".
You have more anonymity on HN with a throwaway account than you have on 4chan.
People also give him too much credit when it comes to community organizing as well. He got lucky with 4chan when he copied 2chan and catered it to english-speaking audience. When he tried to actually create something from scratch, both of his apps failed miserably.
Besides, i'm pretty sure HN can track people across accounts as well, and if it hasn't banned proxies yet, then only because they haven't been abused enough.
It's just that "Anonymous" username is EXTREMELY DECEPTIVE since you're NOT ANONYMOUS at all!
Also note that anonymity is a sliding scale, not a binary switch.
Yes, throwaway accounts offer some anonymity. But they are decidedly less so than posting on most 4chan boards in default operation mode, since the default way of posting on those leaves no way for one user to identify another user. Meanwhile throwaway accounts require a non-trivial amount of effort for every single post made; which is much more than the zero amount of effort required on 4chan to have the same benefit.
You, on the other hand, are not using a throwaway account, so I can tell that you seem to have a rather violent dislike of moot. If this were 4chan, I would have no idea that you made 3 separate posts trying to tear him down.
The cost of registering – even if it's just 3-4 clicks away – is not negligible, and it gives a very different situation by default. I won't discuss the merits of a reputation & voting system, but when everyone has an account, the actual result is that few people are anonymous in practice. And maybe that's not so bad.
But on imageboards like 4chan, you will find very few people using names or even so-called "tripcodes" (the closest thing to an account), which means that by default to anyone that isn't a moderator, everyone is Anonymous in a sea of Anonymity.
Of course every Internet forum keeps logs of what IP posted what, but as long as it's kept private, that's entirely besides the point.
It's been a while since I've visited 4chan, but didn't they add some sort of user ID to comments at some point? Like, they could still generically be 'Anonymous', but there was some sort of ID or hash you could ctrl+f to find other comments by that person within that thread.
Something that isn't very well known is that 4chan is actually a lot of smaller communities with only partial overlap, and the culture can differ a lot depending on what board you are.
A strangely effective rule of thumb is that the smaller the community is, the friendlier it acts. IDs are only enabled in the bigger and most controversial boards of the site, where people otherwise don't hesitate to abuse their anonymity.
>He’s working on a new community site called Canv.as, which actually integrates with Facebook Connect, although users can still post anonymously. Poole said the fact that “you know that we know” the user’s real identity, even if other users can’t see it, discourages people from indulging in the most obnoxious behavior.
This is perfectly in-line with the banning of VPNs and Tor.
> > A: Because delivering news without taking any risk is very important to us. There is a lot of information disclosure or secret news gathered on Channel 2. Few people would post that kind of information by taking a risk. Moreover, people can only truly discuss something when they don't know each other. If there is a user ID attached to a user, a discussion tends to become a criticizing game. On the other hand, under the anonymous system, even though your opinion/information is criticized, you don't know with whom to be upset. Also with a user ID, those who participate in the site for a long time tend to have authority, and it becomes difficult for a user to disagree with them. Under a perfectly anonymous system, you can say, "it's boring," if it is actually boring. All information is treated equally; only an accurate argument will work.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRC@2ch
...and it was a disaster because pathological arseholes.
The most I've ever learned about reverse engineering software I learned from a guy on /g/ who's dayjob was reverse engineering malware. I even made a "callsign" (a Reversi game board). If he was around, he'd post in the thread and answer questions. This kept up for several months until public interest in a weekly RE thread died out.
It's very similar to Reddit in that regard - but without certain individuals becoming "popular/unpopular" based on their username and history.
The anonymity becomes more important when an individual holds a minority opinion. As continually evidenced by the increasing number of people losing their jobs for wrongthinking or making politically incorrect jokes like "dongle forking".
I wouldn't expect any meaningful new product or anything to come out of this - if I had to guess, he was probably hired as an IC. Don't expect him to become some sort of new figurehead at Google for anonymity or identity on the Internet.
Have fun Chris.
One of my favorite comments was actually by James Spader about Stargate. You can find the direct quote online, but he basically said it was an awful script but he took the job for the money, and doesn't think there's any shame in that.
Please expand uncommon abbreviations.
(http://www.buzzfeed.com/reyhan/inside-googles-internal-meme-...)
> Give a man a search result, and you help him for a day. Teach a man to google, and you help him for a lifetime.
Don't dismiss it out of hand as exclusively negative.
While moot did, eventually, push GamerGate discussion off 4chan, he took forever to do so, and walked away from the site not long after. By not taking a stance on harassment and abuse earlier on, however, he created conditions for such a culture to flourish on 4chan.
Is there interesting and positive stuff on 4chan? Almost certainly. Would it still exist had moot taken a stronger stance on dealing with toxic posters? I'll go out on a limb and say yes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamergate_controversy
> Quinn's former boyfriend, published the "Zoe Post", [...] The post was linked on 4chan,
That is not the case in 4chan. There are a large number, if not a majority, of boards which have healthy, constructive cultures and are extremely helpful for hobbyists and enthusiasts.
i had great discussions on /sp/ when the world cup was on. same with nfl games.
While I disagree that 4chan is "toxic" in many ways it is representative of society in the way that twitter represents a fleeting incomplete thought.
What you have said maps near perfectly to the state of America. While politicians have totally fucked up the country, it is somewhat bleeakly obvious that these same dynamics are at play here.
So if you are American consider that you are in a physical community where the loudest, and most controversial members are making it a terrible experience for people and that they have chosen leaders that mirror their own desire to * refuse to deal with it, which unfortunately leaves us with the unpleasant assessment is that the community is toxic
He also didn't, "walk away when it became too toxic for anyone to deal with." That sentence is literally too hard to parse, given what's publicly available information about Moot and 4chan.
Does GamerGate mean anything to you? And that's just one example.