How anonymous?

[Anonymous]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Ian Sparkes wrote:
>If all anonymous posters make a concerted effort to write like Mr.
>Nakatuji, not only will anonymity be assured, but the list will be a *lot*
>funnier.

"You know Mixmaster?  Send me 50 dollar, I show you how use."

But seriously, there is something to be said for adopting a style of writing 
specific to a nym or group of nyms.  Anyone who has read The Economist 
magazine on various occasions knows how its language and tone are 
consistent, as if one author writes every article, issue after issue.  
Having the writings of a nym "edited" by others as a way of foiling 
Stylometry -- the statistical analysis of literary style -- may prove to be 
a lucrative business if nyms ever gain wide use, especially if they are used 
in ecommerce where anonymity of the nym holder is paramount to avoid the 
wrath of the tax man in his physical jurisdiction.

Much of our writing style is unconscious.  We habitually use certain 
vocabulary, sentence structure, punctuation.  Our writings are like a 
fingerprint.  The more we write, the greater the detail of that fingerprint. 
 We can try to alter the style.  Write shorter or longer sentences.  Choose 
our words capriciously.

But on some occasions (think ecommerce) it may be necessary to have a second 
party rewrite the original text.  Enter the "nym editor" to remove the 
stylometric clues from a nym's writings.  Correspondence between the nym 
owner and editor could be achieved anonymously using remailers, nym servers 
and "throw away" email accounts (Hotmail and Mailexcite).  

When the nym owner locates an editor and they agree on the terms of 
engagement, the owner submits his text to the editor.  The editor reworks 
it, and sends it back to the owner.  The owner may then make a few small 
changes or even submit it to another nym editor before posting the text 
under his nym.  A nym owner may prefer a certain editor's style and continue 
to use him.  Thus the nym will offer stylometric clues of the editor, not 
the owner.

The nym owner can pay the editor using ecash, preferably of the 
fully-anonymous flavor.  If the nym owner stiffs the editor on a payment, he 
can then broadcast it through the relevant channels.  The nym suffers loss 
of reputation capital.  It seems reasonable to assume that the likelihood of 
fraud by the nym holder is slim, especially if the editor tends to deal with 
persistent nyms.

Fraud by the nym editor is also unlikely.  The worst he could do is publish 
the unedited text, giving stylometric clues about the nym holder.  The 
prudent nym holder who uses more than one editor can better avoid such a 
situation, though that risk is never entirely eliminated.  However if the 
nym editor is uncertain of the author of the text he is reworking, there is 
little incentive to blackmail the nym holder since all he may be doing is 
passing on stylometric clues about another nym editor.

Amad3us wrote elsewhere:
>What do people think this nym is for?  Only nyms can trade with
>impunity in the tax free cypherspace.

But only as long as the nym holder remains anonymous.  Digital mixes are 
superb, but what good are they when we give away clues about who we are with 
every keystroke we embed in our digitally-signed messages?

Nerthus

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQEVAwUBNHElEuFWwZe05jcJAQFSpwf6A63ba2/dSjXMJgdc4s5PvxbX+p4+J0Yw
Hs+0unBnW+ULINMzyWyAs/q0oMVkXFHwD14t3VGQb+ofuhxXyC1c/tmuzKadgM5d
OUAj1lmthAJncv9nJWulWAVJuksei4/xgGfAq18wSL4l9bt9L7UTY4m0zSnvlvDf
KR3F+koKreO4dn9C0AcIMeClHWwpepUpxZflJwSszaPnCciuOHJ1ga/lKz+NCvmp
CXPXzGW2PpfwhRBt0AkkX4WfnYNiFupalSx6pxgrHDiMHAMEr4G0W8fZlAUW8dSB
X+1DSTMdCZLDMTsfSozUXDMiZB2Jgxwlu5vxcvY+kODBcCy9RGZBPw==
=H2qx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----