But... who are they?

April 24, 2003 9:24 PM

Anonymous weblogging could be the next big thing for those who want total anonymity online. Using the mixmaster remailer and GPG encryption you can have a truly impersonal weblog. (my thoughts inside)
posted by j.edwards (9 comments total)

A part of me thinks that the real appeal of weblogging is the personal contact, but would it still be personal if you *knew* you could never find out about the person unless they let something slip? Could you avoid letting something slip? Seems like this would mostly be beneficial to those who want to avoid scrutiny from their governments, employers, or significant others.
posted by j.edwards at 9:24 PM on April 24, 2003

I don't know - weblogging could do with a little mystery. Guaranteed anonymity sometimes brings out the best in people who would otherwise remain silent.

Big shout-out to j.edwards, welcoming him back to the posting parade! :)
posted by MiguelCardoso at 9:28 PM on April 24, 2003

(my thoughts inside)

Mine are in a bubble floating above my head.

(Now if only I could have posted that invisiblogably on mefi.)
posted by srboisvert at 9:29 PM on April 24, 2003

On the other hand, I'd rather people use PGP to sign their comments like you can at onfocus.com, to prevent identity theft.
posted by riffola at 9:35 PM on April 24, 2003

It almost seems redundant considering the previous FPP, but if you want to do this kind of thing, why not user freenet? Granted, mixmaster is a bit more tried-and-tested, but depending on how many gateways you're using it's a bit less secure than freenet, and this definately doesn't have the same level of resistance against being shut down. (Of course this doesn't require people to run special software, which is a pro)
posted by fvw at 9:43 PM on April 24, 2003

PGP for authentication is a great idea, but anonymous weblogging sounds like a trainwreck right from the start. I also don't believe that "total anonymity" is actually possible.
I will reconsider when something like this becomes a bit more usable.
posted by anathema at 9:52 PM on April 24, 2003

That is my big objection to freenet -- it requires software, and as the objection in the prior Front Page Post noted, the distribution of the network places the legal burden on the users. Invisiblog states pretty clearly in their FAQ that they have to comply with disclosure requests, but my using a proxy and appropriate re-mailer settings, you can pretty much stay incognito.

I agree with riffola -- signing comments is a good idea, and that's also a benefit of invisiblog -- since you post with your GPG key, people also know (to the extent that they trust the invisiblog admins) that it's only you posting. You could feel free in revealing your identity but use invisiblogs as a way of ensuring that only you post.
posted by j.edwards at 9:54 PM on April 24, 2003

It might have helped this guy.
posted by transona5 at 11:29 PM on April 24, 2003

Well...anonymous blogging seems to fly in the face of many of the new states-level DMCAs.

But did we really want all those Washington whistleblowers and individual voices of dissentfrom behind the FilterCurtain in totalitarian countries able to report the truth as they saw it without fear of recrimination?
posted by Dunvegan at 3:15 PM on April 25, 2003