Anonymity and Peaceful Science


#46

I support free speech and I am against banning, Just not here.


(Jon Garvey) #47

Credit checking for a blog! Well, as long as we can trust Joshua and any others in charge to be absolutely trustworthy (as compared to the people you’re credit checking…).

But just to note that when I set up the God’s Good Earth Blog recently (with no responsive features), there were two enormous bursts of activity from multiple sites in China, one after 1 week, and 1 a fortnight later. Nothing for them to find - but might have been quite useful to hack a database of academics and religious people.


(Dr. Patrick Trischitta) #48

Come on, Tim. You are a very knowledgeable intelligent person who speaks out against false claims. Why don’t you have the courage to speak out as YOURSELF? We don’t want a video of your most recent colonoscopy. But telling a PS administration app your real name, DOB, affiliation, and state/country that you live in won’t invade your privacy any more that you give away freely at Starbucks. PS will keep it private/confidential and you can be listed as Tim the Great, if you’d like.


(Dr. Patrick Trischitta) #49

It is not Credit checking, it is Identity verification. It is an automatic verification service that takes someone’s name, DOB, city/state, and checks to see if that person exists in any Credit Bureaus, Government, or Public record files. If they do, Identity is verified, if they don’t it is not verified. @swamidass nor any PS person can’t get into those files. The only thing that PS keeps is the verified names, DOB, country, of every registered person.


(Dr. Patrick Trischitta) #50

That is why PS should use a reputable identity verification service. The service would keep the database encrypted and secure. By using a identity verification service, @swamidass won’t get sued for a data breech and the harm to people that could result if the word gets out that most of those here are really “in-the-closet” skeptics.


(Timothy Horton) #51

I suppose you’ve never heard of SWATTING?

There was at least one death when police responders shot and killed the homeowner whose address had been “SWATTED” by an angry Internet gamer. Here are a few dozen other high profile cases in the last five years

Injuries and deaths, other notable cases of SWATTING

Can you guarantee a nutter like Joe G won’t try something like that? He’s already made threats of physical violence against myself and others. That’s one more reason why I don’t post my personal info online.


(Dr. Patrick Trischitta) #52

Of course, I heard of swatting. I have worked on systems and procedures to prevent swatting from happening. e911 systems in my county in New Jersey has eliminated the treat from Swatting. Note that these systems use the same identity verification systems to quickly make sure that the call recieved by the e911 is credible and the caller is IDed, located and recorded. Note that it is a crime to give a false report to a 911 operator.

A nut like Joe G would be arrested within 10 minutes if he tried Swatting anywhere in Monmouth County NJ.

If Joe G has made threats of physical violence against you and others, this is a matter for law enforcement. I can help you file a criminal complaint. If there are any others out there who have been threatened by Joe G, please report it to your local law enforcement. If you are afraid or want my help, please contact me privately and confidentially. Your local law enforcement will report it to the cyber crime unit of the FBI for investigation.


(Timothy Horton) #53

Sorry but the personal safety of myself and my family is more important than your creepy desire to know everyone’s personal information. Deal with it.


(S. Joshua Swamidass) #55

Give us an example of a service like this @patrick? Provide a link to a service provider?

One possibility is to have a tiered system where people who verify have more privlesges, but others can still post.


(S. Joshua Swamidass) split this topic #59

2 posts were merged into an existing topic: Introducing Sharon


(John Harshman) #60

How does revealing your name, and nothing else, on PS expose you to swatting?


(Timothy Horton) #61

You already have a name. Might as well kwityerbitchin. :slightly_smiling_face:


(John Harshman) #62

Yes, and you know what it is, without any damage to me. Isn’t that instructive?


(Timothy Horton) #63

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


(S. Joshua Swamidass) #64

Most likely we will not require real ID from everyone. However, we may require it for participating on some parts of the forum.


(Dr. Patrick Trischitta) #65

You are missing the fact that by trying to do DIY ID security by trying to be anonymous, you are actually making yourself more vulnerable to cyber hacking and cyber crime.


(John Harshman) #66

Was it stolen because you told somebody your real name? Permit me to doubt. Just your name does nothing for a thief.


(Timothy Horton) #67

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


(Dr. Patrick Trischitta) #68

I am not advocating that everyone must use their real name as their handle. Mung can still be Mung and Tim Horton can still be Tim Horton (and Joe Gilliam can still be Sharon here) but PS knows and has verified the real identity of those registering to post frequently (more than 5 times) on the forum.
This is important for both PS and the person posting. The person posting knows that PS knows and has verified the ID of every person posting. This actually protects both PS and its members. Note that this is a one time registration process. All of us do this all the time all over the place, banks, restaurants, Starbucks


(Ann Gauger) #69

@Swamidass

Wouldn’t it be great if we all could do that? We’d all be Nobel Prize winners!