Is this the path the western world will take eventually? Anonymity is a very powerful tool for the masses to get their point across, it's pretty troublesome if you're the one in power.
Not sure why people are downvoting this, but it's a worthwhile discussion to be had. Given the way the U.K. is going by trying to ban encryption, if that goes ahead I wouldn't be surprised to see this as the next step.
Direct quote: "According to the new regulations, Internet companies and service providers are responsible for requesting and verifying real names from users when they register and must immediately report illegal content to the authorities."
That would mean that they must use real names when signing up with an ISP, no? The title implied that they must also use real names when registering to a website.
It's 'Internet companies and service providers' service providers = ISP, Internet companies = Facebook
"the country’s top Internet censor announced a new set of regulations (link via Google Translate) meant to eliminate posts by anonymous users on Internet forums and other platforms." Just click on the link for a reasonable translation of the rule.
> Last Friday, the country’s top Internet censor announced a new set of regulations (link via Google Translate) meant to eliminate posts by anonymous users on Internet forums and other platforms.
I had to cut down the title because of 80 characters limit (tried using the full title but got an error), so chose this phrase from the headline. Sorry if it felt like a click-bait.
Also, the post is all about how China is eliminating posts by anonymous users on Internet. Not sure what you mean by "its not in the content"?
These Provisions shall apply to the Internet forums within the territory of the People 's Republic of China. The term "Internet forum community service" as mentioned in these Provisions refers to the provision of interactive information publishing community platform in the form of forums, postings, communities and so on.
then
Article 8 Internet forum community service providers shall, in accordance with the principle of "backstage real name and front desk voluntarily", require the user to register the account through the authentication of the authenticity information and carry out the verification of the true identity information of the sponsor and the manager. Users do not provide real identity information, Internet forum community service providers shall not provide information dissemination services.
So yes, this does seem to require real name verification for forums.
> The CAC also specified what content is forbidden from being published online (link and translation via Google Translate), citing a list from a 2000 bill regulating Internet information services in China. The list is so broad that it can cover almost anything:
Article 15 of the Measures for the Administration of Internet Information Services stipulates that Internet information service providers shall not make, reproduce, publish or disseminate information containing the following: (1) opposing the basic principles as defined in the Constitution; (2) endangering national security (3) to damage national honor and interests; (4) to incite national hatred, ethnic discrimination and undermine national unity; (v) to undermine national religious policies and to promote cults and (6) spreading rumors, disrupting social order and destroying social stability; (7) spreading pornography, pornography, gambling, violence, murder, terror or abetting a crime; (8) insulting or slandering others and infringing upon others (9) Any other content that is prohibited by laws and administrative regulations.
What's with pornography in China? I understand they make face that they oppose it, but I imagine it's quite impossible to make 1G people not try to push this envelope. How does it work?
They don't block anything with ssl, an apparent oversight, and the new administration seems uninterested. Apparently, viewing is not illegal. South Korea also used to have ID verification laws in place for commenting online, but they've been relaxed.
Things have changed a lot since then. There's been a big official backlash, largely because it was getting so blatant and hard to ignore.
Recently the government banned online social media video posts in which young women sensually and provocatively ate bananas. I'll leave the details to your imagination. It was getting to be quite a trend, so the authorities stamped on it. Soon after that the government started requiring he big upload services to manually vet video posts, and put heavy restrictions on broadcast live streams.
Wait, are you saying that taking away the freedom to express opinions anonymously for fear of persecution is a good thing for the society?
Can you possibly be saying that China should be used as the model nation for human rights? Anyone who hasn't been living under a rock would find that hard to do.
I'm responding specifically to the porn ban which the person I was responding to was talking about.
And no, I'm not saying that China is a model for human rights. But maxing out your human rights stat doesn't necessarily mean you will develop the best society, or a society that lasts.
For some people, a governement is better at deciding what is best for them. But personally, no governement is better at deciding what is best for me.
So it basically depends how your governement treats you. Either as a bunch of children that need to be managed, or as responsible adults that need to take care of themselves.
As I understand it, this only applies to services hosted within China; if you can get past the Great Firewall and into the "greater Internet", then you're free to post as anonymously as you want.
As far as I'm aware, bypassing the firewall is not illegal, just highly discouraged.
We openly bypassed the firewall to access Google Analytics data through VPN and nobody batted an eye. China can't afford to crack down on that without scaring off pretty much every foreign company looking to do business on the mainland.
Is your point that S.Korea does it, so it's OK? Or that we're all a bunch of hypocrites and shouldn't comment?
This sounds like whataboutism - if you follow the link and read the wikipedia page, it seems like lots of people made lots of fuss about it, including the United Nations, EFF, S.Korean press etc.
If you read it careful enough you will notice the criticism cited there includes things like blog posts and UN speeches, nothing comparable to TC articles in terms of range of influence. Now what's so special about this incident so it's worth a whole precious TC headline to make everyone aware of it?
Please, search for yourself. There are many articles critizing South Korea censorship, back then and now.
It feels like you feel you have to defend the Chinese government. That's your good right, just don't use a strawman. It doesn't make your point stronger.
I wonder why nobody made a fuss about that when they did it many years ago.
SK and a bunch of other countries have censored Internet, but China has the largest population of them all. Anything the world's largest country does, is likely to raise far more scrutiny.
Imagine how much better the discussion would be on sites like Reddit if the default was Real Identity and some sections were anonymous. How much better Amazon reviews would be. The return of commment sections on major news articles (the shit show or sexist racist trolls would stop almost immediately if you faced real life consequences).
I wonder if there is a market for a verified Online Real Identity service that could be used to solve some of these cancerous corners of the internet that comes with anonymity.
I'm not sure. Some subreddits cover pretty private stuff, like coping with disorders, or recreational drugs. These wouldn't exist without anonymous posting.
Fair point. The counter argument is there is no work around when Bob gets banned from CNN for constant racism. He can't create another account and start up again.
The service could have cleaned itself up instead of being removed.
On a bit of a tangent, I wonder if it'd help things if it was easy to view all the comments a person has made using their FB identity? There'd be a much stronger sense in which their comments are associated with them, and potentially a greater disincentive on being a dick.
I would love for this to be true, but unfortunately the migrant crisis showed that on one side some people are perfectly fine with posting hateful comments under their real name, and on the other they usually don't face any real consequences for that.
I'm of the believe that anonymity is a requirement for having truthful discussions. I sometimes hear people say "if you believe in what you're saying, you shouldn't do it anonymously". But there are plenty of topics that we can't discuss without risking our jobs, families and personal reputations.
I've long ago stopped commenting under my real name. I no longer sign up to services that require google / twitter / other account linking. And I have now stopped discussing any sensitive topics even when I'm writing under a pseudonym. The risk of blow back is simply too big.
Black Mirror, season 3, episode 1... anyone? -- Everyone can rank each other, which yields to a publicly visible score. Interactions then become about creating "meaningful" and kind experiences. Counter-opinion, argumentative/confrontation, and (sometimes) truthiness are mostly shunned.
"exaggerated morality play about the dangers of conformity and the small pleasures of individuality". - The Verge
> Imagine how much better the discussion would be on sites like Reddit if the default was Real Identity and some sections were anonymous.
You mean how uninteresting, fake and boring reddit would have been and is starting to become because of censorship? Do you think lgbt or atheist or porn subs or joke subs any other subreddits would exist without anonymity?
> The return of commment sections on major news articles (the shit show or sexist racist trolls would stop almost immediately if you faced real life consequences).
Perhaps sexist or racist comments may decline - I highly doubt it. But so would every other type of comments - including lgbt, atheism, anti-drugs, anti-corruption, etc.
Sexism and racism existed long before reddit and the internet and will exist long after reddit.
> I wonder if there is a market for a verified Online Real Identity service that could be used to solve some of these cancerous corners of the internet that comes with anonymity.
If you don't like, then don't visit it?
Who decides what's cancerous? You? The chinese government?
You think only things you dislike will be censored. More than likely, it won't but the things you agree with will be censored.
Honestly, what's next? Lets start burning books and get rid of libraries because they have bad words?
If you don't like anonymous forums, why don't you just make one of your own with verified identities? See how interesting that is?
"In practice, the forced revelation of information makes individual privilege and power more important. When everyone has to play with their cards on the table, so to speak, then people who feel like they can be themselves without consequence do so freely -- these generally being people with support groups of like-minded people, and who are neither economically nor physically vulnerable. People who are more vulnerable to consequences use concealment as a method of protection: it makes it possible to speak freely about controversial subjects, or even about any subjects, without fear of harassment."
-- Yonatan Zunger, former chief architect, Google+
And then every single comment section becomes a circle jerk just like reddit, where people are discouraged to post their honest opinions for fear of getting downvoted/banned.
In anonymous places like 4chan you can say whatever you want, and from my personal experience, it does tend to generate a lot more diversity and honest discussion than reddit.
Of course, you get a bunch of shitpost and racism, but then again, those are pretty much the pillars of internet discussions nowadays.
>> Imagine how much better the discussion would be on sites like Reddit if the default was Real Identity and some sections were anonymous.
Almost everyone who talks about "real identity" confuses it with "legal identity" and uses government documentation for verification. This would keep basically everyone except the most privileged out of public conversations.
Today we will say "Oh what an authoritarian, horrible regime China is, this will never happen here."
Tomorrow we will say "Well, our government just passed a law that all websites with accounts must identify the user with an ID or a passport. I guess we have to live with it. It has some upsides, you know, there are less trolls."
66 comments
[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 119 ms ] threadClickbait title. The article doesn't even say that.
> China doubles down on real-name registration laws, forbidding anonymous online posts
"anonymous online posts"
"the country’s top Internet censor announced a new set of regulations (link via Google Translate) meant to eliminate posts by anonymous users on Internet forums and other platforms." Just click on the link for a reasonable translation of the rule.
Also, the post is all about how China is eliminating posts by anonymous users on Internet. Not sure what you mean by "its not in the content"?
First, It's not new. Second, it's the same things in the USA and EU since as long as there were ISP.
There is really nothing about forbidding anonymous posts on the internet.
BUT, if you translate the regulation itself (http://www.cac.gov.cn/2017-08/25/c_1121541921.htm) it does appear that it outlaws forum posts by anonymous users:
These Provisions shall apply to the Internet forums within the territory of the People 's Republic of China. The term "Internet forum community service" as mentioned in these Provisions refers to the provision of interactive information publishing community platform in the form of forums, postings, communities and so on.
then
Article 8 Internet forum community service providers shall, in accordance with the principle of "backstage real name and front desk voluntarily", require the user to register the account through the authentication of the authenticity information and carry out the verification of the true identity information of the sponsor and the manager. Users do not provide real identity information, Internet forum community service providers shall not provide information dissemination services.
So yes, this does seem to require real name verification for forums.
(Also, Google Translate is a miracle of the age)
Article 15 of the Measures for the Administration of Internet Information Services stipulates that Internet information service providers shall not make, reproduce, publish or disseminate information containing the following: (1) opposing the basic principles as defined in the Constitution; (2) endangering national security (3) to damage national honor and interests; (4) to incite national hatred, ethnic discrimination and undermine national unity; (v) to undermine national religious policies and to promote cults and (6) spreading rumors, disrupting social order and destroying social stability; (7) spreading pornography, pornography, gambling, violence, murder, terror or abetting a crime; (8) insulting or slandering others and infringing upon others (9) Any other content that is prohibited by laws and administrative regulations.
What's with pornography in China? I understand they make face that they oppose it, but I imagine it's quite impossible to make 1G people not try to push this envelope. How does it work?
Are there any articles about state of things?
Recently the government banned online social media video posts in which young women sensually and provocatively ate bananas. I'll leave the details to your imagination. It was getting to be quite a trend, so the authorities stamped on it. Soon after that the government started requiring he big upload services to manually vet video posts, and put heavy restrictions on broadcast live streams.
Simon Hibbs
Can you possibly be saying that China should be used as the model nation for human rights? Anyone who hasn't been living under a rock would find that hard to do.
And no, I'm not saying that China is a model for human rights. But maxing out your human rights stat doesn't necessarily mean you will develop the best society, or a society that lasts.
So it basically depends how your governement treats you. Either as a bunch of children that need to be managed, or as responsible adults that need to take care of themselves.
The ideal is somewhere in the middle.
Even if you really want to sleep with your neighbors wife, it doesn't mean society needs to accept or encourage that action.
This is a private affair, between the wife, the husband and you.
It can be a concern for the community but it has nothing to do with the government !!!
We openly bypassed the firewall to access Google Analytics data through VPN and nobody batted an eye. China can't afford to crack down on that without scaring off pretty much every foreign company looking to do business on the mainland.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship_in_South...
This sounds like whataboutism - if you follow the link and read the wikipedia page, it seems like lots of people made lots of fuss about it, including the United Nations, EFF, S.Korean press etc.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2011/08/what-south-korea...
https://thenextweb.com/asia/2012/08/23/south-korea-scraps-la...
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2011/09/05/technology/naming-name...
https://techcrunch.com/2012/07/29/surprisingly-good-evidence...
It feels like you feel you have to defend the Chinese government. That's your good right, just don't use a strawman. It doesn't make your point stronger.
SK and a bunch of other countries have censored Internet, but China has the largest population of them all. Anything the world's largest country does, is likely to raise far more scrutiny.
I wonder if there is a market for a verified Online Real Identity service that could be used to solve some of these cancerous corners of the internet that comes with anonymity.
Facebook comments don't seem to stop these. I'm shocked at what people post under their real name with a social media link handy.
The service could have cleaned itself up instead of being removed.
The problem is that social reprisals depend on social status; part of privilege is being able to post abuse without adverse consequences.
I've long ago stopped commenting under my real name. I no longer sign up to services that require google / twitter / other account linking. And I have now stopped discussing any sensitive topics even when I'm writing under a pseudonym. The risk of blow back is simply too big.
"exaggerated morality play about the dangers of conformity and the small pleasures of individuality". - The Verge
You mean how uninteresting, fake and boring reddit would have been and is starting to become because of censorship? Do you think lgbt or atheist or porn subs or joke subs any other subreddits would exist without anonymity?
> The return of commment sections on major news articles (the shit show or sexist racist trolls would stop almost immediately if you faced real life consequences).
Perhaps sexist or racist comments may decline - I highly doubt it. But so would every other type of comments - including lgbt, atheism, anti-drugs, anti-corruption, etc.
Sexism and racism existed long before reddit and the internet and will exist long after reddit.
> I wonder if there is a market for a verified Online Real Identity service that could be used to solve some of these cancerous corners of the internet that comes with anonymity.
If you don't like, then don't visit it?
Who decides what's cancerous? You? The chinese government?
You think only things you dislike will be censored. More than likely, it won't but the things you agree with will be censored.
Honestly, what's next? Lets start burning books and get rid of libraries because they have bad words?
If you don't like anonymous forums, why don't you just make one of your own with verified identities? See how interesting that is?
-- Yonatan Zunger, former chief architect, Google+
https://plus.google.com/+YonatanZunger/posts/WegYVNkZQqq
In anonymous places like 4chan you can say whatever you want, and from my personal experience, it does tend to generate a lot more diversity and honest discussion than reddit. Of course, you get a bunch of shitpost and racism, but then again, those are pretty much the pillars of internet discussions nowadays.
Almost everyone who talks about "real identity" confuses it with "legal identity" and uses government documentation for verification. This would keep basically everyone except the most privileged out of public conversations.
Tomorrow we will say "Well, our government just passed a law that all websites with accounts must identify the user with an ID or a passport. I guess we have to live with it. It has some upsides, you know, there are less trolls."