consensus
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [GNU/consensus] A GNU Consensus for the GNU Year!


From: Hugo Roy
Subject: Re: [GNU/consensus] A GNU Consensus for the GNU Year!
Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2013 09:41:33 +0100

Le lundi 31 décembre 2012 à 21:05 -0500, Richard Stallman a écrit :
>     > Thus, I'd urge you to change the section
>     > title to something more like "Right to Pseudonymity".
>     >
>     *** You make an excellent point. Richard, do you have any objection to
>     that renaming, as you wrote this section?
> 
> Could someone show me that section, and explain the issue again?
> 

The section from the current manifesto:

        Anonymity
        
        With interoperating free software social networking systems, no
        user will be compelled to provide any particular kind of
        information, whether it be her name, her age, or what country
        she lives in. It will be up to those she communicates with to
        judge what information she chooses to provide or withhold.
        
And Christian's comment:

> This is not _quite_ what I believe to be commonly understood by
> 'anonymity' by most users or the research community.  What I think you
> mean is more like a 'right to use pseudonyms'.  The possibility to
> postcontent anonymously is a separate issue (and somewhat incompatible
> with mapping social relationships).  Furthermore, the idea of making
> your online identities unlinkable to real-world identities (which does
> relate more to 'anonymity') is again a bit different (and much harder
> to achieve, as having access to things like language, time and social
> relationships can enable some adversaries to link pseudonyms to
> real-world identities).
> 
> Given this, _strong_ pseudonymity (as in, user's pseudonyms being
> fundamentally unlinkable to real-world identities) or _strong_
> anonymity are things we may strive for (at least for some
> applications), but should not claim as major features (at this point)
> or fundamental properties of GNU consensus.  Thus, I'd urge you to
> change the section title to something more like "Right to
> Pseudonymity".
> 

I think the problem is the title of the section: "Anonymity."
Christian proposes ``Right to Pseudonymity''

-- 
Hugo Roy 
  French Coordinator, FSFE      chat: address@hidden
  Support the FSFE, sign up ↓    mobile: +336 08 74 13 41
  https://www.fsfe.org/support 




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]