Again, if people want to argue that what he's done is so terrible that he deserves de-anonymization, that's totally different. That's not the NYT claim or position. Other than that, yeah, one's right to a pen name should not depend on quality of prior opsec.
-
-
I don’t know. Maybe I’m not sensitive enough to this stuff. I sign my name to what I write, and have spent a career assuming what I say will get pastebinned, as has happened several times.
-
I’ve also left a paper trail almost as long as S.A.’s on HN, all under my own name, all available to the NYT. I’d like to believe what I say there is consistent with what I’d say privately to you, and with my own convictions.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
If you talk loudly in a bar and someone overhears you, I'm not sure your desires override the recipient's right to their own perspective. And that's a better metaphor than yours, because Scott is literally publishing to an audience of tens of thousands.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.