As to heresies…hmmm, I feel a little heretical by worrying about ignoring privacy on sconets…I think its a time will tell thingy unfortunately.

btw, I assume you know that every cynic is an idealist who has been mugged

Amen squire. Frankness of this ilk is unspoken on the other side of the pond.

Incidentally Stateside it”s all about traffic.

This side I’m interested in comrades, not celebrity.

Good post – I have one brewing in my head for a few minutes time about why privacy/identity is an issue and you hit on some of the points I will make.

best
Nic

Hi Alan. Privacy and transparency are on the same axis. Just more towards transparency recently. No big deal except for those who wish harm.

Older people are often disposed towards this cynical framing.

They have more to lose.

Some might say this is greed. But I’ll be old too one day

To be clear if you check out my post, I do explicitly say that the cold war vis a vis post cold-war examination is more environmental than generational.

I guess I’m saying there’s no need to for Socnets in this case. One can easily just click on the link.

Or even better just ask via email.

Unless the question is as dangerous as the answer in terms of heresy.

Does that make sense?

The reason for the privacy thing is not so much due to an unwillingness to “let it all hang out” as a (fairly easily provable) view that there are a % of people who are very keen to exploit Socnets for their own ends, and I am not satisfied that online Socnets have the nuanced gradations that allow one to screen them from one’s own identity, never mind that of friends.

The “Cold War” allusion is – I assume – an attempt at a generational marking, but I expect its more an idealism of youth v experience of age thingy – we are all far more trusting when young.