Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

You're falling into the "if you've got nothing to hide, then you have nothing to fear" camp even if you aren't directly saying it. You're alluding to the fact that anyone that 'really' needs anonymity has something to hide from powerful people.

In reality, there are a lot more reasons that someone might want anonymity. Someone hosting a forum for battered women might not want to get contacted by violent ex-husbands/ex-boyfriends looking to find the woman that left them (and went into hiding).




> anyone that 'really' needs anonymity has something to hide from powerful people

I'm on your side in this discussion, anonymity is a foundation of free speech. But I want to say that with battered women and people protesting powerful corporations and governments both, the person does have something to hide from powerful people - their identity - and that is perfectly reasonable. Wanting to hide my identity from powerful people who have the ability to harm me and whose crimes I am criticizing is common sense. I feel this idea that hiding something is intrinsically bad has become really widespread and has been accepted as axiomatic rather than being properly critiqued. I, and many others, definitely have something to hide from powerful people who can harm us because they don't want their dark deeds known and they will kill or hurt who they have to to make sure that happens.


My point was that at the extreme end of the power scale (governments, corporations), they can probably find you if you are paying for a server somewhere. But at the lower end of the scale (angry, violent ex-husbands) it's less likely that they will track you down through your server's ISP.

I felt that the idea that requiring identification for DNS registration was ok because 'you can just post anonymous comments on blogs somewhere' is dismissing perfectly valid use-cases for 'anonymous' DNS.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: