# Last edited on 2014-05-03 01:19:28 by stolfilocal # Not posted [quote author=AnonyMint link=topic=557732.msg6328441#msg6328441 date=1398114547] [quote author=JorgeStolfi link=topic=557732.msg6317488#msg6317488 date=1398052308] I might buy a hot dog from a seller in a stadium, even if I never saw the guy before; but not from a stranger in a run-down street who wears a ninja costume and a ski hood... [/quote] That is why this new anonymity coming will be superior as it won't be differentiated and stand out negatively that way. [/quote] I can't imagine how that could be possible. Will everybody be [i]forced[/i] to be anonymous? Will the 'new anonymity' allow people to impersonate others? [quote author=AnonyMint link=topic=557732.msg6328441#msg6328441 date=1398114547] [quote author=JorgeStolfi link=topic=557732.msg6317488#msg6317488 date=1398052308] In the political context: anonimity may be a valuable "tactical weapon" when fighting an oppressive illegitimate government. However, by the time it is necessary, it will be very difficult to obtain. Moreover, it is not very effective -- because anonimity is essentially act of cowardice, an admission of weakness and defeat. It is fleeing rather than fighting, the way of the rat rather than of the badger. [/quote] You sure proclaim a lot without knowing all the technical details. [... ] Fighting by blending in is the most successful war strategy in history, guerrilla war fare. Not weak at all. It has never been defeated. Because the State can never figured out if they've killed the last guerrilla. [/quote] I stand by my claim. Anonymous activism is inherently weak because it limits the activist to acts that won't reveal his identity. If you wish to remain anonymous, you cannot * post photos of riots on the internet * speak out your ideas at political events * speak out your ideas on TV * testify in court against corrupt officials * run for a political office on your real platform * offer shelter or other material help to other activists and a zillion other things. Undercover activists may provide important support, but they cannot make a revolution alone. Take those demonstrators in Ukraine who were allegedly scared off by personal SMS warnings: that scare worked only if and because the protesters had assumed, consciously or unconsciously, that they enjoyed anonimity in the crowd. Had they been aware that they were there standing as persons, not as anonymous bodies, those SMSs would have had no effect. The role of the internet in the recent "internet revolutions" (Arab Spring, Turkey, etc.) has been much exaggerated. The real actors there where the people who went out in the streets, faces ncovered, to brave the regime's thugs; not those who stayed home tweeting. The photos, videos, and tweets of the latter served mostly to give us outsiders a voyeuristic experience, the illusion of knowing what was happening (when in fact they misinformed more than informed, even when they were not intentionally misleading). The internet can be handy to coordinate an attack by scattered actors, but not to recruit soldiers for a revolution - whether it is civil war, guerrilla war, or mere civil disobedience. For a revolution you need people who are sufficiently motivated to risk their jobs, properties, freedom, or life. It takes severe or persistent abuse -- unemployment, famine, loss of land, death of family members, etc -- to do that. Methinks you overestimate the attachment of people to mere money. For most people, even a 50% inflation, or a fat haircut on their life savings may not be sufficient to convince them to join a revolt that could result on them losing their jobs, careers, and social niches. A thousand anonymous tweets and posts will certainly not do it. The current system is the result of the masses being duped to believe that they would be better off if big banks and finance were unregulated and untaxed. To change the current system, one must convince the majority of the people that it is bad for them, and give them a better alternative. That can only be done openly, through the political process, major media, and person-to-person debate. It will be a hard and long battle, against powerful enemies -- but it won't be won by running away from it.