Is the internet’s anonymity beneficial?
The internet has given everyone new freedoms, whether it is making shopping easier, planning journeys or looking for information. It has also made giving our opinions to a potentially wide audience much easier. Everyone on the internet is anonymity and this seems to be having negative effects on how we treat others online. Instead of respecting others views we have flame wars, many people engage in hate campaigns without considering how it affects the person at the other end. In normal society our norms and the knowledge that everyone would know that it was you acts as a break on such campaigns but on the internet there are very few such norms. Is it damaging?
Please cast your vote after you've read the arguments.
You can also add to the debate by leaving a comment at the end of the page.
scientific results have vetted that people with better-looking avatars
Online role-playing games have made it easier for people to make money from their computer terminals without having to show/expose themselves to other people. It serves as something of a purdah with benefits.
Netiquette and laws in cyberspace
The problem with web-bureaucracy being, that the process of finding and hiring
Cyber-lawyers is presently obscure and leans/borders on silliness.
Consequences for breaking rules on the Internet are not necessarily legal. Banning someone from the forum they are violating rules on, giving them a widespread bad reputation on the Internet, deleting their data hampers them just as much as a legal punishment. Moderators can find out when people immediately create new accounts after being banned because they usually act the same.
And when they do it makes for a laughable news item or a strange tragic but disconnected anomaly, can a women really be blamed for a teenagers' suicide because she bullied her on msn/the-net?
Internet bullying is disturbingly common as is underage/child/juvenile porn; the internet has replaced the role cable as an arena for anything goes.
The internet will become better
Counter: second para not necessarily true. Awareness that privacy is hampered with does not automatically make the one who is aware/informed/exposed, a culprit.
nobody can honestly state that s/he had/has never written an angry email, which unlike an angry phone call becomes a permanent record.
people who violate other people's privacy are the most concerned about their own. They keep track of privacy setting news updates and pry into other people's lives.
New systems can be tried out.
Calling a person and leaving angry messages on an answering machine more than a number of times can warrant a brief arrest, and then the angry ex/stalker is liable if that person goes missing(most missing persons are just lone travelers)
Cyber-stalkers can easily get away with it since people are not expected to arrest them and are expected to take responsibility, report these emails as spam, delete these emails and/or alter their privacy settings.
Despite books being written on the subject; it's never given the seriousness that it deserves.
cyber-bullying ubiquitously leads to child solicitation,murder,identity theft and all sorts of other crimes & misdemeanors
Statistical studies reveal that most children have bullied someone or have been bullied on the internet at some point in time.
identity theft is easy as pie over a connection that is not entirely secure, hackers are crawling all over the internet universe and nobody's really safe.
What do you think?