What does it add to the story vs. the career consequences for his psychotherapy career?
-
-
Replying to @WatsonLadd @zeynep and
What does JK Rowling's real name add to a book review about a series of detective novels clearly different from her fiction published under JK Rowling? In fact, JK Rowling did not want to be known as Robert Galbraith at that time.pic.twitter.com/ZdfYbiSMuW
1 reply 1 retweet 3 likes -
Replying to @KardOnIce @WatsonLadd and
Unlike Rowling however, Scott Alexander published his own name and linked his identities. Any claim that he wants his pseudonym to remain separate from his public identity is therefore nonsensical.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @KardOnIce @WatsonLadd and
Maybe if Scott Alexander didn't want his psychiatry career to be linked to his pseudonym "Scott Alexander", he shouldn't have published material linking the two.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @KardOnIce @WatsonLadd and
I'm sorry but this is petty tyranny. You should not have some perfect standard people should adhere to before their pen name gets respect by the outlet that has the power to dominate their Google searches for the rest of their lives.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @zeynep @WatsonLadd and
How is this "petty tyranny". If I want to respect a pseudonym, I don't publish material directly stating the two of them are the same. The Grugq is a well known pseudonym and speaks at conferences, but he doesn't publish his name, so people respect the pseudonym.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @KardOnIce @WatsonLadd and
Almost everyone who does pseudonyms but writes enough has slipups and are potentially de-anonymizable with a varying amount effort. I know this because I sometimes do it for people who think they've hidden their tracks very well (they ask me to). Doesn't remove anyone's rights.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @zeynep @KardOnIce and
They petty tyranny is here's a person who says this is my blog name. That's it. We shouldn't be in a position to sit in judgement of the quality of their opsec, lousy or not, and decide that one big corporation can change their rank in other big corporations giant search engine.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @zeynep @KardOnIce and
I mean, that is part of the mission of journalism though. Maybe there is a case this guy wasn't newsworthy, or that his cult of rationalists weren't driving opinions in Silicon Valley, but what happened after sure makes it seems like the story made sense.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
I mean, the entire argument seems to be: newsworthy guy is suddenly not newsworthy, and his published identity is not relevant. I honestly don't get it.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
Newsworthy people are not suddenly deprived of the right to a pen name. That would be a terrible standard for all of us to live under.
-
-
But he has published his identity under his pen name? He deprived himself of his own pen name, and he's newsworthy? And he is newsworthy. The only one who deprived him of this right is himself.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @KardOnIce @zeynep and
Also, his pseudonym was his first and middle name, and it was automcompleted to his full name just by Google for his professional identity. Does that really count as "depriving him" of his pseudonym?
0 replies 0 retweets 1 like
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.