I will be most interested to find out what it is that requires a sockpuppet but doesn’t require it to be secret that it’s a sockpuppet or even whose sockpuppet.
What is your credence that the google of five years in the future won’t find things written under pseudonyms when you search for the author’s real name? 10 years?
I agree that will likely be available as a subscription service in 5 years or so, but I think it would be somewhat uncharacteristic for Google to launch that for everyone. (As I recall, they had rather good face recognition software ~5 years ago but decided to kill potential features built on that instead of rolling them out, because of privacy and PR concerns.)
Can’t he still replace it with [deleted] or something? (If so, and if it is helpful, I will happily amend what I wrote to leak less information about what happened.) Anyway: of course it was not my intention to deanonymize anyone, and I regret it if I have.
I think from the context of your post the meaning would still have been clear. Apart from that I don’t think he can do it after he retracked the post. (the strikethrough)
Thank you.
You’re welcome.
I will be most interested to find out what it is that requires a sockpuppet but doesn’t require it to be secret that it’s a sockpuppet or even whose sockpuppet.
I think the point is that when googling his name, the post does not show up, but if LWers know it’s the same person, there’s no harm.
Yup, he has confirmed essentially this by PM.
What is your credence that the google of five years in the future won’t find things written under pseudonyms when you search for the author’s real name? 10 years?
I agree that will likely be available as a subscription service in 5 years or so, but I think it would be somewhat uncharacteristic for Google to launch that for everyone. (As I recall, they had rather good face recognition software ~5 years ago but decided to kill potential features built on that instead of rolling them out, because of privacy and PR concerns.)
By replying you eliminated his ability to delete the post and thus maybe the point of the effort.
Can’t he still replace it with [deleted] or something? (If so, and if it is helpful, I will happily amend what I wrote to leak less information about what happened.) Anyway: of course it was not my intention to deanonymize anyone, and I regret it if I have.
I think that’s only happens when he would delete his own account.
I don’t think that’s the case but if he wants to create a annonymous account he likely should start over with a new one.
I meant replacing the content with “[deleted]”, not the account name.
I think from the context of your post the meaning would still have been clear. Apart from that I don’t think he can do it after he retracked the post. (the strikethrough)
Nope, I can still edit it.