>>512718584
>How does your name being attached make that different in any way?
>You're still just as pathetic and impotent, it's just that people can see it.
It does make all the difference. The relative anonymity that the internet gave us until now was as revolutionary as the printing press or the birth control pill in it's implications for social change. By "relative anonymity" I mean that you're safe from the judgement of your primary social group - your parents, teachers, siblings, peers, extended family, your village or town. Only anonymity is true freedom, as this makes it possible to name and reveal social injustices and lies, that would otherwise be covered up. It allows millions of people - who otherwise would not have a voice - to speak up, without having to fear the consequences. Think of it as whistleblowers - we're all whistleblowers. The main reason 4chan, other websites and the internet in general had such a huge cultural impact (to the point of helping electing an American underdog presidential candidate - twice!) is that we had this relative anonymity. If the government strips the web of this protective privacy, the internet becomes basically useless in it's main form, that is a communication medium. If people are forced to comment under their real identity, we will never see any true radical comments ever again. The conversations would be as stimulating as the Yahoo weather forecast. Revolutionary thoughts, or even just everything that is truly offensive, would be banned to the lost corners of the dark web, or to tiny groups of private real world locations - where it would no longer have any impact on society whatsoever. We'd be back in the 1980s where the narratives would again be solely composed and conducted by governments, NGOs and the big media companies.