Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Do you know where your variables are?
 
PerlMonks  

to distinguish between [Anonymous Monk]s in a thread, brand 'em

by Anonymous Monk
on Sep 08, 2011 at 12:50 UTC ( #924794=monkdiscuss: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??

Branding Anonymous Monk sounds like a good simple idea, I suggest

crypt( $sessionid.$ip , '66' );
and append
<p><div class="pmbrandAM">Anonymous Monk zNQ5vDqYgAk</div>

Yours in perl,
Brother Marius of inappropriate Perlism

My computer smokes when I jam my file in it

Anonymous Monk zNQ5vDqYgAk

Comment on to distinguish between [Anonymous Monk]s in a thread, brand 'em
Select or Download Code
Re: to distinguish between [Anonymous Monk]s in a thread, brand 'em
by CountZero (Bishop) on Sep 08, 2011 at 13:16 UTC
    Why have people such problems with the "anonymity" of Anonymous Monks?

    All it takes to remove the "branding" is to clear your cache of cookies, so this measure is too easily defeated by those who for their own reasons do not want to be associated with a previously posted node.

    CountZero

    A program should be light and agile, its subroutines connected like a string of pearls. The spirit and intent of the program should be retained throughout. There should be neither too little or too much, neither needless loops nor useless variables, neither lack of structure nor overwhelming rigidity." - The Tao of Programming, 4.1 - Geoffrey James

      Why have people such problems with the "anonymity" of Anonymous Monks?

      I don't have a problem with it :)

      But the anonymity of Anonymous Monks isn't compromised by branding, and the short life is a feature

      The idea is for this 'visual hint' to help distinguish Anonymous Monks in a thread

      Yours in perl,
      Brother Marius of inappropriate Perlism

      My computer smokes when I jam my file in it

      Anonymous Monk zNQ5vDqYgAk
        So you want to de-anonymize them within the thread, which --in my book-- is taking away part of their anonymous robes.

        In a certain way, I am already anonymous by the use of my "handle" CountZero. If I should want to be really anonymous I simply do not log in and become the Anonymous Monk. It is unlikely that I then would want to be almost-but-not-entirely anonymous.

        This whole Anonymous Monk thing is like free speech: any restrictions just kill it.

        CountZero

        A program should be light and agile, its subroutines connected like a string of pearls. The spirit and intent of the program should be retained throughout. There should be neither too little or too much, neither needless loops nor useless variables, neither lack of structure nor overwhelming rigidity." - The Tao of Programming, 4.1 - Geoffrey James

        And by signing it (or choosing not to) as you have done, anonymonks can brand themselves for as long as they choose to. Sock puppetry usually gets noticed quite quickly, so I don't see the extra code needed solving any major problem.

        Regards,

        John Davies

Re: to distinguish between [Anonymous Monk]s in a thread, brand 'em
by Anonymous Monk on Sep 08, 2011 at 14:05 UTC

    I've changed my mind. This isn't a good idea.

      I haven't changed my mind. This isn't me!!!!
        It is me. Disregard that.
      Brand me please. i'm anonymous monk too
Re: to distinguish between [Anonymous Monk]s in a thread, brand 'em
by ww (Bishop) on Sep 09, 2011 at 02:50 UTC
    If the proposal is, as it seems to me, intended to disambiguate AnonyMonks when multiple AMs are posting in a single thread, I actually like the idea because it's often very hard (or impossible) for this reader to distinguish between 1 AM contradicting him/herself and 2 AM disagreeing with one another.

    OTOH, if this compromises personal anonymity -- lets us tie a particular AM post to a specific individual -- then I have to agree with CountZero. It's unfortunate the some may use AM status to utter libel, insults or just-plain-falsehoods, but that's a price of allowing free speech... and none of those rise to the level of "shouting fire in a crowded theater."

      OTOH, if this compromises personal anonymity -- lets us tie a particular AM post to a specific individual

      How could it compromise personal anonymity?

        Damned if I know, but that seems to be the chief objection thus far (as of writing this node, 20110909 05:41 EDT (US)).

      As we really only care about the different AnonyMonks within a thread, the hash should be generated by something more like crypt( $sessionid.$ip.$nodeid , '42' );

      And I do think it would be nice to have this.

      Jenda
      Enoch was right!
      Enjoy the last years of Rome.

        I'd take IP out of it. Having the node ID, the session ID could only be a certain number of things that would hash properly from a valid IP. This would give a motivated person a fair chance at getting a network and possibly a geographic fix on a person. That's not very anonymous. The session and the node ID should be enough, as the session ID should be unique.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: monkdiscuss [id://924794]
Approved by Corion
Front-paged by ww
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others avoiding work at the Monastery: (5)
As of 2014-09-18 00:09 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    How do you remember the number of days in each month?











    Results (101 votes), past polls