The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Announcements
Books, Book Comments, and Other Website Enhancements
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

After a considerable delay, I’m now pleased to announce the full release of my HTML Book presentation system, oriented toward the display of very long-form content, including scholarly books, in convenient web format. This system initially contains some 200 million words of mostly copyright-expired books, but I hope to grow it considerably over time. Here’s the link to the main page:

http://www.unz.com/book/

Since all these books are presented in HTML format, copy/pasting portions of the text are extremely easy, and the body of the material should soon become incorporated into Google and the other major search engines. Furthermore, I’ve implemented several powerful software technologies for making such long-form text easier to work with, including Sections and Chapters that open dynamically, and “deep linking” to particular paragraphs or phrases by double-clicking your mouse or highlighting some selected text.

Most recently, I’ve enabled full commenting on these books, using the same powerful technology used elsewhere on this website. However, since books generally represent permanent, serious content material, the standards for displayed comments will be much stricter than applied elsewhere. Comments that are substantive, highly topical, and respectfully written will be displayed by default, while all other comments—including those that crudely trace the boundaries of acceptable taste—are displayed in the adjacent “Total Chatter” tab. So if you want your comments on books to be seen by substantial numbers of readers and not cast uselessly into the ether, focus carefully on your quality and grammar.

Furthermore, the very extensive PDF Print archives have now been fully integrated into the system parts of the system, so that both regular website authors and HTML Books now have the complete archives of the writer in question displayed towards the top of the Sidebar in cloud form, which better allows readers to access the quality and history of that writer.

For example, here’s the page for Albert Jay Nock, an important early libertarian writer, containing two of his HTML Books, the first expounding some of his strong “anti-Statist” views, and the second providing a “Revisionist” treatment of the origins of World War I.

http://www.unz.com/book/author/albert_jay_nock/

Until about about a dozen years ago, I’d never heard of Nock, or at any rate regarded him as a totally obscure fringe figure of his era, known to Libertarians but almost no one else. Yet his print archives show some 150 of his articles in all the influential opinion publications of the early 20th century, clearly ranking him as one of the leading public intellectuals of that period, which greatly adds to the weight and credibility with which his books and other writings should be regarded.

I’ll probably be soon adding a revolving “Featured Book” on the Sidebar, focusing attention on a particular HTML Book and the system in general.

 

On a different issue, there have been regular complaints that the “Anonymous” and “Anon” commenter options hinder dialogue and greatly increase confusion by obscuring which anonymous commenter is which. As an attempt to thread the needle of this problem by reducing confusion while maintaining strong anonymity, a three-digit numerical identifier, based on the IP address, will be listed after every “Anonymous.”

Otherwise, please use this comment thread to inform me of any recent problems or make additional suggestions.

 
Hide 69 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Benjaminl says:

    Thank you, Mr. Unz, for this amazing work. Excellent idea — the three-digit ID for Anonymouses.

    Incidentally, I’ve noticed that the “Followed Commenters” page, as well as individual commenters’ pages such as:

    http://www.unz.com/comments/all/?commenterfilter=Whiskey

    have been taking quite a while to load, recently — at least a couple of minutes or so for such a page to load. Not sure if it’s just me, but it happens on two different laptops that I have.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  2. As one whose columns get a lot of abusive comments, I would appreciate a very simple way of adding commenters to the Ignore list, such as maybe tripe or double clicking on the name.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ron Unz

    As one whose columns get a lot of abusive comments, I would appreciate a very simple way of adding commenters to the Ignore list, such as maybe tripe or double clicking on the name.
     
    Actually, it already exists. Just click the "Agree/Disagree/Etc." button to open a popup window, then click the "Ignore Commenter" button on that window.

    Regarding the extreme slowness of the Commenter Archive pages, that's very odd. I just tested half a dozen of them, and they all opened pretty quickly, in just a few seconds each. Have other people been experiencing the same problems?
    , @anonymous
    Mr. Reed, your columns also receive good faith criticism that you choose to ignore. (It appears that this is your tenth comment on this website, and that the only one under your own columns was in response to Mr. Unz.) For example, several commenters under the current "Civil Insurrection" have addressed your fallacious equivalence of state laws concerning marijuana and immigration. I believe that they're correct. But you should either concede or argue the point, especially if you've time here to criticize the forum.*

    *There's also the safe space option made available to Mr. Roberts.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. roo_ster says:

    Nifty. I don;t read long-format on a PC, but I bet it will come in handy for active research and the like.

    Still think you should package up your comment system and sell it. Beats the heck out of any other I’ve used.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dieter Kief
    Not sure wether selling it is a good idea. I have recommended it a few times to other side-hosts as - awesome & jaw-droppingly perfect though, so I think I get what you mean!

    Why not turn it into a free software package, like "linux", for example?

    Oh - the books-software is just great - thank you Ron Unz!

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. “This system initial contains some . . .”

    Probably meant “initially.”

    “Comments will are substantive, . . .”

    should be “Comments which are substantive . . .”

    Two typos out of 2 million words — not bad.

    Thanks a million, Ron.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  5. Ron Unz says:
    @Frederick V. Reed
    As one whose columns get a lot of abusive comments, I would appreciate a very simple way of adding commenters to the Ignore list, such as maybe tripe or double clicking on the name.

    As one whose columns get a lot of abusive comments, I would appreciate a very simple way of adding commenters to the Ignore list, such as maybe tripe or double clicking on the name.

    Actually, it already exists. Just click the “Agree/Disagree/Etc.” button to open a popup window, then click the “Ignore Commenter” button on that window.

    Regarding the extreme slowness of the Commenter Archive pages, that’s very odd. I just tested half a dozen of them, and they all opened pretty quickly, in just a few seconds each. Have other people been experiencing the same problems?

    Read More
    • Replies: @res

    Regarding the extreme slowness of the Commenter Archive pages, that’s very odd. I just tested half a dozen of them, and they all opened pretty quickly, in just a few seconds each. Have other people been experiencing the same problems?
     
    Does it depend on the commenter? Lot is a prolific commenter so I just tried opening his commenter page and it took about 15 seconds on my new and fairly well specced desktop with a fast connection.
    , @Anon

    Have other people been experiencing the same problems?
     
    Yes. res's comment page took c. 15 sec to load and yours took c. 20 seconds. I'm using firefox on ubuntu.
    , @Astuteobservor II
    it opens really fast, took only 2-3 secs on my computer. it could be a problem on his end.

    anon + ### is godly. now we know which anon we are talking to.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. RobinG says:

    (1) Anonymous ID indicators

    Thank You, Thank You, Thank You!!!

    Read More
    • Replies: @David
    Almost Missouri has an interesting thought about anon-id's:

    What would particularly irk me were I anonymous is the retroactive tagging of my comments. Ron’s Rules countenanced anonymous comments so long as you did them his way, which I believe anonymous commenters did, but the rules didn’t mention that after leaving a string of anonymous comments, they could be retroactively strung together in a potentially revealing way.
     
    Not sure how much it maters, but he has a point.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. Lot says:

    After clicking on the agree/disagree button and causing the box to open, clicking on cancel does not cause the box to close, or appear to do anything at all. The window that pops up can only be closed by clicking on agree/disagree again.

    Seems to be a bug, if not what is the function of the cancel button?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ron Unz

    After clicking on the agree/disagree button and causing the box to open, clicking on cancel does not cause the box to close
     
    It's now fixed.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. Anonymous[270] • Disclaimer says:

    Testing Anonymous ID indicators…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  9. res says:
    @Ron Unz

    As one whose columns get a lot of abusive comments, I would appreciate a very simple way of adding commenters to the Ignore list, such as maybe tripe or double clicking on the name.
     
    Actually, it already exists. Just click the "Agree/Disagree/Etc." button to open a popup window, then click the "Ignore Commenter" button on that window.

    Regarding the extreme slowness of the Commenter Archive pages, that's very odd. I just tested half a dozen of them, and they all opened pretty quickly, in just a few seconds each. Have other people been experiencing the same problems?

    Regarding the extreme slowness of the Commenter Archive pages, that’s very odd. I just tested half a dozen of them, and they all opened pretty quickly, in just a few seconds each. Have other people been experiencing the same problems?

    Does it depend on the commenter? Lot is a prolific commenter so I just tried opening his commenter page and it took about 15 seconds on my new and fairly well specced desktop with a fast connection.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lot
    "a prolific commenter"

    Your kind choice of words when so many synonyms were available is noted and appreciated.

    I have also noticed the load page has slowed down compared to a few months ago, but is such a minor issue I wouldn't complain.

    It might have something to do with responses to comments being part of the comments archive too. If the average comment has .5 responses, this would increase the amount of text loaded by about half.

    This is a very nice new feature and worth an extra few seconds wait.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. Ron Unz says:
    @Lot
    After clicking on the agree/disagree button and causing the box to open, clicking on cancel does not cause the box to close, or appear to do anything at all. The window that pops up can only be closed by clicking on agree/disagree again.

    Seems to be a bug, if not what is the function of the cancel button?

    After clicking on the agree/disagree button and causing the box to open, clicking on cancel does not cause the box to close

    It’s now fixed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lot
    Thanks. Noticed this a few weeks ago btw.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. Lot says:
    @Ron Unz

    After clicking on the agree/disagree button and causing the box to open, clicking on cancel does not cause the box to close
     
    It's now fixed.

    Thanks. Noticed this a few weeks ago btw.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. JackOH says:

    Ron, thanks for all your good work.

    Thanks, also, for talking about “anonymous” as a commenting name. I know some folks have offered reasons why they wish to comment under “anonymous”. I’ve replied once in a great while to an “anonymous” comment.

    I try to imagine what I would think if all the comments on UR were under the “anonymous” name. Can’t say for sure, but I’d be inclined to think not so well of that commentariat. Example: when I read a particularly sharp observation or analysis, I sometimes turn to the commenting history to place that observation or analysis in context and “get” the nuances. Comments under “anonymous” have a mischievous one-off quality that’s off-putting, and have me wary of responding.

    Is there any way of encouraging commenters to choose a name? (BTW-the numerical identifier seems a good idea.)

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous
    I'm likely one of those folks.

    One of the downsides of "real handles," and which is still concerning under this new regime where I am now henceforth #340,* is the inevitable falloff in quality. Those with little of value to say, but who love seeing their "name" in print or feel compelled to share their view or repeat their obsession, are more likely to clog up a thread. They also are enabled to revive and prolong feuds that started elsewhere, and to call out and abuse each other. Have a peek at Taki's or ZeroHedge to see where this can lead.

    In light of the new system, I'm considering whether to become "Xxxxxx" and even asking for my entire history to be rebranded as such.

    I do appreciate your comments, by the way.

    -------

    *Back in 2015, I was one (not the best) of the commenters who logged in as "guest." I now see some of my "anonymous" comments with a different three-digit figure under an Ilana Mercer column that year; perhaps my email service was different that recently, or I used a different device.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. David says:
    @RobinG

    (1) Anonymous ID indicators
     
    Thank You, Thank You, Thank You!!!

    Almost Missouri has an interesting thought about anon-id’s:

    What would particularly irk me were I anonymous is the retroactive tagging of my comments. Ron’s Rules countenanced anonymous comments so long as you did them his way, which I believe anonymous commenters did, but the rules didn’t mention that after leaving a string of anonymous comments, they could be retroactively strung together in a potentially revealing way.

    Not sure how much it maters, but he has a point.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ron Unz

    What would particularly irk me were I anonymous is the retroactive tagging of my comments.
     
    Okay, that's a reasonable complaint. I just changed the system so that it only tags anonymous comments made after 3/22/18 GMT. Anyway, if you change your IP, the tag would also change.

    But, frankly, the paranoia of such commenters seems ridiculous to me. Can anyone think of the last time a non-high-profile individual has gotten into trouble for the un-PC comments he made under a website pseudonym, let alone under "Anonymous"?

    As far as I can tell, 99% of the people who get into trouble do so because of the comments they make on their Facebook page or Twitter feed or maybe because they get photographed carrying a banner at a violent Alt-Right rally.

    Why would anyone care what some random person said anonymously on a website?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. Anon[418] • Disclaimer says:

    Thank you again for your amazing efforts, and clearly intellect. Never realized my Anon handle was annoying, I only do it because my original title stopped being accepted.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ron Unz
    Well, you must have changed your IP or your Email. If you want to provide your old Handle, I'll merge your Anon comments into it, and also make sure you can use it again with your current IP or Email.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:
    @JackOH
    Ron, thanks for all your good work.

    Thanks, also, for talking about "anonymous" as a commenting name. I know some folks have offered reasons why they wish to comment under "anonymous". I've replied once in a great while to an "anonymous" comment.

    I try to imagine what I would think if all the comments on UR were under the "anonymous" name. Can't say for sure, but I'd be inclined to think not so well of that commentariat. Example: when I read a particularly sharp observation or analysis, I sometimes turn to the commenting history to place that observation or analysis in context and "get" the nuances. Comments under "anonymous" have a mischievous one-off quality that's off-putting, and have me wary of responding.

    Is there any way of encouraging commenters to choose a name? (BTW-the numerical identifier seems a good idea.)

    I’m likely one of those folks.

    One of the downsides of “real handles,” and which is still concerning under this new regime where I am now henceforth #340,* is the inevitable falloff in quality. Those with little of value to say, but who love seeing their “name” in print or feel compelled to share their view or repeat their obsession, are more likely to clog up a thread. They also are enabled to revive and prolong feuds that started elsewhere, and to call out and abuse each other. Have a peek at Taki’s or ZeroHedge to see where this can lead.

    In light of the new system, I’m considering whether to become “Xxxxxx” and even asking for my entire history to be rebranded as such.

    I do appreciate your comments, by the way.

    ——-

    *Back in 2015, I was one (not the best) of the commenters who logged in as “guest.” I now see some of my “anonymous” comments with a different three-digit figure under an Ilana Mercer column that year; perhaps my email service was different that recently, or I used a different device.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JackOH
    #340, thanks, and, trust me, my comments regarding the "anonymous" commenting name amount to a very minor quibble regarding this very good site and its commentariat.
    , @anonymous
    I realize that no one may ever read this late comment, but it seems worthwhile to note that Taki's apparently has abandoned commenting other than through old school letters to the editor.

    If he wants to maintain the current, high level of comments here, Mr. Unz may need to consider banning and/or screening commenters who, I repeat, otherwise inevitably degrade any website.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. Ron Unz says:
    @David
    Almost Missouri has an interesting thought about anon-id's:

    What would particularly irk me were I anonymous is the retroactive tagging of my comments. Ron’s Rules countenanced anonymous comments so long as you did them his way, which I believe anonymous commenters did, but the rules didn’t mention that after leaving a string of anonymous comments, they could be retroactively strung together in a potentially revealing way.
     
    Not sure how much it maters, but he has a point.

    What would particularly irk me were I anonymous is the retroactive tagging of my comments.

    Okay, that’s a reasonable complaint. I just changed the system so that it only tags anonymous comments made after 3/22/18 GMT. Anyway, if you change your IP, the tag would also change.

    But, frankly, the paranoia of such commenters seems ridiculous to me. Can anyone think of the last time a non-high-profile individual has gotten into trouble for the un-PC comments he made under a website pseudonym, let alone under “Anonymous”?

    As far as I can tell, 99% of the people who get into trouble do so because of the comments they make on their Facebook page or Twitter feed or maybe because they get photographed carrying a banner at a violent Alt-Right rally.

    Why would anyone care what some random person said anonymously on a website?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon

    As far as I can tell, 99% of the people who get into trouble do so because of the comments they make on their Facebook page or Twitter feed or maybe because they get photographed carrying a banner at a violent Alt-Right rally.
     
    My personal point of view on that is that, frankly, I'm not aware of 99% of the people who get in trouble. It does seem that "doxxing" has posed a real annoyance to real people on a number of occasions, and your "Anon" tag was a pretty good method of avoiding such, though it obviously had its drawbacks.

    Why would anyone care what some random person said anonymously on a website?
     
    Well, you wouldn't care of course, which is why it never bothered me that you had records of my IP and so on and could probably identify me if you did care. Your current system is not a bad one and so long as it isn't applied retroactively no one should mind very much.
    , @Anonymous
    With all due respect, I think you have a significant blindspot here.
    Problems can arise if one has an identifiable public persona (even if one is not a celebrity or in any way an overt member of some intellectual or any sort of elite) that can potentially be linked to an anonymous persona. Anyone offering serious and thoughtful comments on a site like this is going to progressively reveal personal information, information that can cumulatively enable individual identification by someone familiar with the public persona.

    indignor quandoque bonus dormitat Homerus
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. Ron Unz says:
    @Anon
    Thank you again for your amazing efforts, and clearly intellect. Never realized my Anon handle was annoying, I only do it because my original title stopped being accepted.

    Well, you must have changed your IP or your Email. If you want to provide your old Handle, I’ll merge your Anon comments into it, and also make sure you can use it again with your current IP or Email.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:
    @Frederick V. Reed
    As one whose columns get a lot of abusive comments, I would appreciate a very simple way of adding commenters to the Ignore list, such as maybe tripe or double clicking on the name.

    Mr. Reed, your columns also receive good faith criticism that you choose to ignore. (It appears that this is your tenth comment on this website, and that the only one under your own columns was in response to Mr. Unz.) For example, several commenters under the current “Civil Insurrection” have addressed your fallacious equivalence of state laws concerning marijuana and immigration. I believe that they’re correct. But you should either concede or argue the point, especially if you’ve time here to criticize the forum.*

    *There’s also the safe space option made available to Mr. Roberts.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RobinG
    Get real. Commenters are given the privilege of expressing their opinions. There's no obligation for anyone to respond.
    , @Anon

    Mr. Reed, your columns also receive good faith criticism that you choose to ignore.
     
    The ego's shorthand for that is "abusive comments". He didn't say anything unlike what you say.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. Anon[291] • Disclaimer says:
    @Ron Unz

    As one whose columns get a lot of abusive comments, I would appreciate a very simple way of adding commenters to the Ignore list, such as maybe tripe or double clicking on the name.
     
    Actually, it already exists. Just click the "Agree/Disagree/Etc." button to open a popup window, then click the "Ignore Commenter" button on that window.

    Regarding the extreme slowness of the Commenter Archive pages, that's very odd. I just tested half a dozen of them, and they all opened pretty quickly, in just a few seconds each. Have other people been experiencing the same problems?

    Have other people been experiencing the same problems?

    Yes. res’s comment page took c. 15 sec to load and yours took c. 20 seconds. I’m using firefox on ubuntu.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. Anon[291] • Disclaimer says:
    @Ron Unz

    What would particularly irk me were I anonymous is the retroactive tagging of my comments.
     
    Okay, that's a reasonable complaint. I just changed the system so that it only tags anonymous comments made after 3/22/18 GMT. Anyway, if you change your IP, the tag would also change.

    But, frankly, the paranoia of such commenters seems ridiculous to me. Can anyone think of the last time a non-high-profile individual has gotten into trouble for the un-PC comments he made under a website pseudonym, let alone under "Anonymous"?

    As far as I can tell, 99% of the people who get into trouble do so because of the comments they make on their Facebook page or Twitter feed or maybe because they get photographed carrying a banner at a violent Alt-Right rally.

    Why would anyone care what some random person said anonymously on a website?

    As far as I can tell, 99% of the people who get into trouble do so because of the comments they make on their Facebook page or Twitter feed or maybe because they get photographed carrying a banner at a violent Alt-Right rally.

    My personal point of view on that is that, frankly, I’m not aware of 99% of the people who get in trouble. It does seem that “doxxing” has posed a real annoyance to real people on a number of occasions, and your “Anon” tag was a pretty good method of avoiding such, though it obviously had its drawbacks.

    Why would anyone care what some random person said anonymously on a website?

    Well, you wouldn’t care of course, which is why it never bothered me that you had records of my IP and so on and could probably identify me if you did care. Your current system is not a bad one and so long as it isn’t applied retroactively no one should mind very much.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. @Ron Unz

    As one whose columns get a lot of abusive comments, I would appreciate a very simple way of adding commenters to the Ignore list, such as maybe tripe or double clicking on the name.
     
    Actually, it already exists. Just click the "Agree/Disagree/Etc." button to open a popup window, then click the "Ignore Commenter" button on that window.

    Regarding the extreme slowness of the Commenter Archive pages, that's very odd. I just tested half a dozen of them, and they all opened pretty quickly, in just a few seconds each. Have other people been experiencing the same problems?

    it opens really fast, took only 2-3 secs on my computer. it could be a problem on his end.

    anon + ### is godly. now we know which anon we are talking to.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    Interesting. I wonder where the bottleneck is. I don't see how it is my machine (though I do have many Chrome tabs open) and my internet connection is theoretically fast. One possibility is that my ISP is throttling unz.com. Any other ideas?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. RobinG says:
    @anonymous
    Mr. Reed, your columns also receive good faith criticism that you choose to ignore. (It appears that this is your tenth comment on this website, and that the only one under your own columns was in response to Mr. Unz.) For example, several commenters under the current "Civil Insurrection" have addressed your fallacious equivalence of state laws concerning marijuana and immigration. I believe that they're correct. But you should either concede or argue the point, especially if you've time here to criticize the forum.*

    *There's also the safe space option made available to Mr. Roberts.

    Get real. Commenters are given the privilege of expressing their opinions. There’s no obligation for anyone to respond.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. res says:
    @Astuteobservor II
    it opens really fast, took only 2-3 secs on my computer. it could be a problem on his end.

    anon + ### is godly. now we know which anon we are talking to.

    Interesting. I wonder where the bottleneck is. I don’t see how it is my machine (though I do have many Chrome tabs open) and my internet connection is theoretically fast. One possibility is that my ISP is throttling unz.com. Any other ideas?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ron Unz

    Interesting. I wonder where the bottleneck is.
     
    Actually, I don't think 15 sec is unreasonable at all. The pages are very large and complex, and the interwoven/crosslinked comments require a great deal of software processing to generate, which can be slower based on server load issues. The pages I tested generally took 3-12 seconds each.

    My reference was to an earlier commenter, who said that they were taking a couple of *minutes* on his computer, which seemed pretty strange to me.
    , @Astuteobservor II
    I am using vivaldi. a version of chrome with no memory leak issues. I stopped using firefox n chrome because after a certain amount of time, the ram usage would go to 4-8 GB.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. JackOH says:
    @anonymous
    I'm likely one of those folks.

    One of the downsides of "real handles," and which is still concerning under this new regime where I am now henceforth #340,* is the inevitable falloff in quality. Those with little of value to say, but who love seeing their "name" in print or feel compelled to share their view or repeat their obsession, are more likely to clog up a thread. They also are enabled to revive and prolong feuds that started elsewhere, and to call out and abuse each other. Have a peek at Taki's or ZeroHedge to see where this can lead.

    In light of the new system, I'm considering whether to become "Xxxxxx" and even asking for my entire history to be rebranded as such.

    I do appreciate your comments, by the way.

    -------

    *Back in 2015, I was one (not the best) of the commenters who logged in as "guest." I now see some of my "anonymous" comments with a different three-digit figure under an Ilana Mercer column that year; perhaps my email service was different that recently, or I used a different device.

    #340, thanks, and, trust me, my comments regarding the “anonymous” commenting name amount to a very minor quibble regarding this very good site and its commentariat.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. Ron Unz says:
    @res
    Interesting. I wonder where the bottleneck is. I don't see how it is my machine (though I do have many Chrome tabs open) and my internet connection is theoretically fast. One possibility is that my ISP is throttling unz.com. Any other ideas?

    Interesting. I wonder where the bottleneck is.

    Actually, I don’t think 15 sec is unreasonable at all. The pages are very large and complex, and the interwoven/crosslinked comments require a great deal of software processing to generate, which can be slower based on server load issues. The pages I tested generally took 3-12 seconds each.

    My reference was to an earlier commenter, who said that they were taking a couple of *minutes* on his computer, which seemed pretty strange to me.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    That sounds reasonable. Thanks for your reply!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. @res
    Interesting. I wonder where the bottleneck is. I don't see how it is my machine (though I do have many Chrome tabs open) and my internet connection is theoretically fast. One possibility is that my ISP is throttling unz.com. Any other ideas?

    I am using vivaldi. a version of chrome with no memory leak issues. I stopped using firefox n chrome because after a certain amount of time, the ram usage would go to 4-8 GB.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    I just downloaded and installed Vivaldi. My commenter page just loaded in 3 seconds in a fresh Vivaldi window. Thanks!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. res says:
    @Ron Unz

    Interesting. I wonder where the bottleneck is.
     
    Actually, I don't think 15 sec is unreasonable at all. The pages are very large and complex, and the interwoven/crosslinked comments require a great deal of software processing to generate, which can be slower based on server load issues. The pages I tested generally took 3-12 seconds each.

    My reference was to an earlier commenter, who said that they were taking a couple of *minutes* on his computer, which seemed pretty strange to me.

    That sounds reasonable. Thanks for your reply!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. res says:
    @Astuteobservor II
    I am using vivaldi. a version of chrome with no memory leak issues. I stopped using firefox n chrome because after a certain amount of time, the ram usage would go to 4-8 GB.

    I just downloaded and installed Vivaldi. My commenter page just loaded in 3 seconds in a fresh Vivaldi window. Thanks!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Astuteobservor II
    glad it works for you.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. @res
    I just downloaded and installed Vivaldi. My commenter page just loaded in 3 seconds in a fresh Vivaldi window. Thanks!

    glad it works for you.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. JackOH says:

    Are there any other readers who view Unz Review as something of a springboard to substantive political action?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal
    Robin G and a few others appear to be discussing political action a fair bit on this thread;

    Hawks Resurgent in Washington
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. Anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:

    Your definition of “absolutely anonymous” and “totally anonymous” seems to differ from the conventional understanding of those terms, given your past and ongoing recording of IP addresses. It may be worthwhile to clarify this in your site info. (BTW I’m not the same 340 as the other 340)

    However, any commenter may also freely leave comments under the Anonymous/Anon handles, which are absolutely anonymous. But such totally anonymous comments may easily be misused for back-biting or malicious, unfair attacks on others, and should be taken much less seriously than comments that come “have a return address,” perhaps coming from individuals with established credibility.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Astuteobservor II
    you know you can get a named handle without giving out any real info right? a handle just allows better conversation as the other party would know who they are talking to.

    and imo, everyone is already on a list, so who cares? :)
    , @Anon

    It may be worthwhile to clarify this in your site info. (BTW I’m not the same 340 as the other 340)
     
    Perhaps an alternate approach would be to provide the anons with thread*-specific IDs? So that instead of #291 for instance I would be, say, Anon[4], being the fourth (or so, I haven't counted) anonymous commenter on the thread.

    If the hashing problem is resolved that makes the three-digit identifiers not unique (if this is even viewed as a problem) it makes the "disclaimer" somewhat unnecessary, I should think.


    *thread: I mean, this comment page. Maybe "article" would be a better word.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. @Anonymous
    Your definition of "absolutely anonymous" and "totally anonymous" seems to differ from the conventional understanding of those terms, given your past and ongoing recording of IP addresses. It may be worthwhile to clarify this in your site info. (BTW I'm not the same 340 as the other 340)

    However, any commenter may also freely leave comments under the Anonymous/Anon handles, which are absolutely anonymous. But such totally anonymous comments may easily be misused for back-biting or malicious, unfair attacks on others, and should be taken much less seriously than comments that come “have a return address,” perhaps coming from individuals with established credibility.
     

    you know you can get a named handle without giving out any real info right? a handle just allows better conversation as the other party would know who they are talking to.

    and imo, everyone is already on a list, so who cares? :)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. iffen says:

    Is it feasible to use the anon with IP digits to set the ignore function?

    I have anon on my ignore list, but with the new rules I could set ignore for the IP identified anon rather than a blanket ignore for all anons.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  34. Anon[578] • Disclaimer says:
    @anonymous
    Mr. Reed, your columns also receive good faith criticism that you choose to ignore. (It appears that this is your tenth comment on this website, and that the only one under your own columns was in response to Mr. Unz.) For example, several commenters under the current "Civil Insurrection" have addressed your fallacious equivalence of state laws concerning marijuana and immigration. I believe that they're correct. But you should either concede or argue the point, especially if you've time here to criticize the forum.*

    *There's also the safe space option made available to Mr. Roberts.

    Mr. Reed, your columns also receive good faith criticism that you choose to ignore.

    The ego’s shorthand for that is “abusive comments”. He didn’t say anything unlike what you say.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. Mishra says:

    Your efforts to “thread the needle” are careful and much appreciated.

    The only thing I’d add is that you ask “when was the last time” that any putatively anonymous commenter was exposed to danger. I’m not concerned so much about the last time as I am about the next time. We’re not able to foresee every possible risk or exposure that constantly evolving technology may throw our way.

    I’m not personally too worried but I can easily imagine your site attracting some high-profile readers who have a lot to lose from being exposed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  36. @roo_ster
    Nifty. I don;t read long-format on a PC, but I bet it will come in handy for active research and the like.

    Still think you should package up your comment system and sell it. Beats the heck out of any other I've used.

    Not sure wether selling it is a good idea. I have recommended it a few times to other side-hosts as – awesome & jaw-droppingly perfect though, so I think I get what you mean!

    Why not turn it into a free software package, like “linux”, for example?

    Oh – the books-software is just great – thank you Ron Unz!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. Lot says:
    @res

    Regarding the extreme slowness of the Commenter Archive pages, that’s very odd. I just tested half a dozen of them, and they all opened pretty quickly, in just a few seconds each. Have other people been experiencing the same problems?
     
    Does it depend on the commenter? Lot is a prolific commenter so I just tried opening his commenter page and it took about 15 seconds on my new and fairly well specced desktop with a fast connection.

    “a prolific commenter”

    Your kind choice of words when so many synonyms were available is noted and appreciated.

    I have also noticed the load page has slowed down compared to a few months ago, but is such a minor issue I wouldn’t complain.

    It might have something to do with responses to comments being part of the comments archive too. If the average comment has .5 responses, this would increase the amount of text loaded by about half.

    This is a very nice new feature and worth an extra few seconds wait.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. Randal says:
    @JackOH
    Are there any other readers who view Unz Review as something of a springboard to substantive political action?

    Robin G and a few others appear to be discussing political action a fair bit on this thread;

    Hawks Resurgent in Washington

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. Anon[291] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous
    Your definition of "absolutely anonymous" and "totally anonymous" seems to differ from the conventional understanding of those terms, given your past and ongoing recording of IP addresses. It may be worthwhile to clarify this in your site info. (BTW I'm not the same 340 as the other 340)

    However, any commenter may also freely leave comments under the Anonymous/Anon handles, which are absolutely anonymous. But such totally anonymous comments may easily be misused for back-biting or malicious, unfair attacks on others, and should be taken much less seriously than comments that come “have a return address,” perhaps coming from individuals with established credibility.
     

    It may be worthwhile to clarify this in your site info. (BTW I’m not the same 340 as the other 340)

    Perhaps an alternate approach would be to provide the anons with thread*-specific IDs? So that instead of #291 for instance I would be, say, Anon[4], being the fourth (or so, I haven’t counted) anonymous commenter on the thread.

    If the hashing problem is resolved that makes the three-digit identifiers not unique (if this is even viewed as a problem) it makes the “disclaimer” somewhat unnecessary, I should think.

    *thread: I mean, this comment page. Maybe “article” would be a better word.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RobinG
    Here's hoping Ron ignores your bleating.
    , @Elsewhere
    This would be my preferred solution.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. RobinG says:
    @Anon

    It may be worthwhile to clarify this in your site info. (BTW I’m not the same 340 as the other 340)
     
    Perhaps an alternate approach would be to provide the anons with thread*-specific IDs? So that instead of #291 for instance I would be, say, Anon[4], being the fourth (or so, I haven't counted) anonymous commenter on the thread.

    If the hashing problem is resolved that makes the three-digit identifiers not unique (if this is even viewed as a problem) it makes the "disclaimer" somewhat unnecessary, I should think.


    *thread: I mean, this comment page. Maybe "article" would be a better word.

    Here’s hoping Ron ignores your bleating.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Bleating in what sense? I discussed a problem pointed out by another commenter (three-digit identifiers are apparently not unique) and put forward another idea for discussion.

    I don't see that anything I said, or anything in my tone, merits this sort of vitriol. If you think I am wrong, perhaps you could disagree in a civil manner.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. Anon[291] • Disclaimer says:
    @RobinG
    Here's hoping Ron ignores your bleating.

    Bleating in what sense? I discussed a problem pointed out by another commenter (three-digit identifiers are apparently not unique) and put forward another idea for discussion.

    I don’t see that anything I said, or anything in my tone, merits this sort of vitriol. If you think I am wrong, perhaps you could disagree in a civil manner.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RobinG
    Sorry if I've misread.

    Other anons are chafing and grumbling. My assumption from 340's post was that more than one person wrote from that IP address. [This happens, such as when Sam Shama's computer was used by his nephew.] You're saying the fault is with Ron's software? Seems less likely to me.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. RobinG says:
    @Anon
    Bleating in what sense? I discussed a problem pointed out by another commenter (three-digit identifiers are apparently not unique) and put forward another idea for discussion.

    I don't see that anything I said, or anything in my tone, merits this sort of vitriol. If you think I am wrong, perhaps you could disagree in a civil manner.

    Sorry if I’ve misread.

    Other anons are chafing and grumbling. My assumption from 340′s post was that more than one person wrote from that IP address. [This happens, such as when Sam Shama's computer was used by his nephew.] You’re saying the fault is with Ron’s software? Seems less likely to me.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous
    As it seems important to you:

    1. I posted only ## 15 and 18 above.

    2. I have no relationship to the other "[340]."

    And I, too, think that you're needlessly confrontational and often rude.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. Elsewhere says:
    @Anon

    It may be worthwhile to clarify this in your site info. (BTW I’m not the same 340 as the other 340)
     
    Perhaps an alternate approach would be to provide the anons with thread*-specific IDs? So that instead of #291 for instance I would be, say, Anon[4], being the fourth (or so, I haven't counted) anonymous commenter on the thread.

    If the hashing problem is resolved that makes the three-digit identifiers not unique (if this is even viewed as a problem) it makes the "disclaimer" somewhat unnecessary, I should think.


    *thread: I mean, this comment page. Maybe "article" would be a better word.

    This would be my preferred solution.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:
    @RobinG
    Sorry if I've misread.

    Other anons are chafing and grumbling. My assumption from 340's post was that more than one person wrote from that IP address. [This happens, such as when Sam Shama's computer was used by his nephew.] You're saying the fault is with Ron's software? Seems less likely to me.

    As it seems important to you:

    1. I posted only ## 15 and 18 above.

    2. I have no relationship to the other “[340].”

    And I, too, think that you’re needlessly confrontational and often rude.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. The HTML books feature is fantastic, thank you! I look forward to using it to reread old favorites and discover new authors and books, listen to books, share links to specific passages, and who knows what else.

    It’s really nice to have the same tried and tested, clean interface for books as for articles and blog posts. A lot nicer interface than the Gutenberg web site.

    The choice is already magnificent. Some mouth-watering categories, for example:

    http://www.unz.com/book/genre/russian-literature/

    Now for some random comments based on a first look, comments, not complaints! about stuff that doesn’t quite work for me. None are very important, but perhaps you might be able to use the feedback.

    1. Here’s a request for the Brothers Karamazov, the only one of Dostoevsky’s major works missing.

    2. I’d like to see a full list of the authors.
    Perhaps here: http://www.unz.com/book/author/
    Currently, the best way I can do it is by typing a first letter of an author, 26 times. If there’s a better way, do let me know.

    3. The feature to link or listen to a specific paragraph only works occasionally for me on the iPad, my preferred way to read unz. This comment is not specific to books: I have the same problem with articles.

    The problem is that the paragraph toolbar appears seemingly randomly, usually when I don’t want it and I’m just scrolling around or copy/pasting something. And when I do want it, I usually can’t make it appear, all I can do is get a brief flash for that paragraph when I tap it.

    By the way, a suggestion: since the activation of those paragraph features can be a bit intrusive, perhaps you might consider making the activation clickable only on one side of the page, in the margin. It might be less distracting or confusing at times when people don’t need that feature.

    4. The Listen feature doesn’t quite work for me. It only reads the first part of a text. Sometimes that first part is just the opening quotation, as here:

    http://www.unz.com/book/rudyard_kipling__the-man-who-would-be-king/

    Other times it reads a big part of the text, but stops at the first quotation, as it does here:

    http://www.unz.com/book/rudyard_kipling__just-so-stories/#p_1_15

    Also the Listen controls are a little small, it’s easy to press “stop” instead of “pause”.

    5. It would be nice to be able to search all an author’s works. But there’s no search button on the author page, and the advanced search does not include book authors in the list of authors.

    I’ll stop with the comments now. Thanks again for a fantastic resource!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ron Unz
    Thanks for the very kind words, and the excellent list of suggestions and comments. It's always a very nice feeling when a software developer realizes some people are actually using the things he took quite some time and effort to build.

    I'm actually tied up with some other things right now, but I'll start considering your list of items as soon as I can.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. Ron Unz says:
    @European-American
    The HTML books feature is fantastic, thank you! I look forward to using it to reread old favorites and discover new authors and books, listen to books, share links to specific passages, and who knows what else.

    It’s really nice to have the same tried and tested, clean interface for books as for articles and blog posts. A lot nicer interface than the Gutenberg web site.

    The choice is already magnificent. Some mouth-watering categories, for example:
    http://www.unz.com/book/genre/russian-literature/

    Now for some random comments based on a first look, comments, not complaints! about stuff that doesn’t quite work for me. None are very important, but perhaps you might be able to use the feedback.

    1. Here’s a request for the Brothers Karamazov, the only one of Dostoevsky’s major works missing.

    2. I’d like to see a full list of the authors.
    Perhaps here: http://www.unz.com/book/author/
    Currently, the best way I can do it is by typing a first letter of an author, 26 times. If there’s a better way, do let me know.

    3. The feature to link or listen to a specific paragraph only works occasionally for me on the iPad, my preferred way to read unz. This comment is not specific to books: I have the same problem with articles.

    The problem is that the paragraph toolbar appears seemingly randomly, usually when I don’t want it and I’m just scrolling around or copy/pasting something. And when I do want it, I usually can’t make it appear, all I can do is get a brief flash for that paragraph when I tap it.

    By the way, a suggestion: since the activation of those paragraph features can be a bit intrusive, perhaps you might consider making the activation clickable only on one side of the page, in the margin. It might be less distracting or confusing at times when people don’t need that feature.

    4. The Listen feature doesn’t quite work for me. It only reads the first part of a text. Sometimes that first part is just the opening quotation, as here:
    http://www.unz.com/book/rudyard_kipling__the-man-who-would-be-king/

    Other times it reads a big part of the text, but stops at the first quotation, as it does here:
    http://www.unz.com/book/rudyard_kipling__just-so-stories/#p_1_15

    Also the Listen controls are a little small, it’s easy to press “stop” instead of “pause”.

    5. It would be nice to be able to search all an author’s works. But there’s no search button on the author page, and the advanced search does not include book authors in the list of authors.

    I’ll stop with the comments now. Thanks again for a fantastic resource!

    Thanks for the very kind words, and the excellent list of suggestions and comments. It’s always a very nice feeling when a software developer realizes some people are actually using the things he took quite some time and effort to build.

    I’m actually tied up with some other things right now, but I’ll start considering your list of items as soon as I can.

    Read More
    • Replies: @European-American
    Glad to help. Just to add to point 3, for what it's worth I am now able to reliably, if awkwardly, produce the toolbar on the iPad, which appears easily on the PC with a double click.

    On the iPad, if I tap with one finger on the paragraph I want to select, and at the same time do a resize using another finger, then let go, the paragraph is properly selected and the toolbar appears.

    Obviously it's not ideal, but it's better than nothing. However, I haven't found a way on the iPad to select a phrase in the text and link to it, which is easily and rather elegantly done on the PC:
    http://www.unz.com/book/l_frank_baum__the-wonderful-wizard-of-oz/#p_16_18:1-7

    Update on the comment below: I just realized from the "Jump to Top/Bottom of Page" hover text on the arrows (visible on the PC, not the iPad) that they are actually working as designed. So my bad. Still, perhaps signs something like ⤒ ⤓ would be clearer?

    Leaving the comment below for the record of how I was confused, maybe others have been too:

    And just one more small bug I noticed both on iPad and PC: the paragraph toolbar ▲▼ up and down arrows (presumably to go from paragraph to paragraph?) don't work, instead they go to the beginning or end of the document.

    This may be related to the tiny bug that, in a search, if you click on the "next search item" arrow when at the last item, you are returned to the start of the document.
    http://www.unz.com/book/h_g_wells__the-time-machine/?highlight=Morlock#p_12_4

    , @FKA Max
    Mr. Unz,

    all commenters' archives seem to be down at the moment:

    We're sorry. That page could not be found. - http://www.unz.com/comments/all/?commenterfilter=Ron+Unz

    Congratulations on the increasing web traffic to your site, impressive and encouraging:

    Finally, partly due to the full incorporation of the separate PDF content archives, our website’s April traffic completely smashed all previous records, easily exceeding 2.7 million total pageviews. According to Alexa.com, our total traffic ranking is now regularly 30% higher than The American Conservative and 20% above CounterPunch, a remarkable achievement for a relatively young website run on an absolute shoestring, providing alternative media coverage that completely crosses all ideological lines.
     
    - http://www.unz.com/digest/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. @Ron Unz
    Thanks for the very kind words, and the excellent list of suggestions and comments. It's always a very nice feeling when a software developer realizes some people are actually using the things he took quite some time and effort to build.

    I'm actually tied up with some other things right now, but I'll start considering your list of items as soon as I can.

    Glad to help. Just to add to point 3, for what it’s worth I am now able to reliably, if awkwardly, produce the toolbar on the iPad, which appears easily on the PC with a double click.

    On the iPad, if I tap with one finger on the paragraph I want to select, and at the same time do a resize using another finger, then let go, the paragraph is properly selected and the toolbar appears.

    Obviously it’s not ideal, but it’s better than nothing. However, I haven’t found a way on the iPad to select a phrase in the text and link to it, which is easily and rather elegantly done on the PC:

    http://www.unz.com/book/l_frank_baum__the-wonderful-wizard-of-oz/#p_16_18:1-7

    Update on the comment below: I just realized from the “Jump to Top/Bottom of Page” hover text on the arrows (visible on the PC, not the iPad) that they are actually working as designed. So my bad. Still, perhaps signs something like ⤒ ⤓ would be clearer?

    Leaving the comment below for the record of how I was confused, maybe others have been too:

    And just one more small bug I noticed both on iPad and PC: the paragraph toolbar ▲▼ up and down arrows (presumably to go from paragraph to paragraph?) don’t work, instead they go to the beginning or end of the document.

    This may be related to the tiny bug that, in a search, if you click on the “next search item” arrow when at the last item, you are returned to the start of the document.

    http://www.unz.com/book/h_g_wells__the-time-machine/?highlight=Morlock#p_12_4

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. Anonymous[326] • Disclaimer says:
    @Ron Unz

    What would particularly irk me were I anonymous is the retroactive tagging of my comments.
     
    Okay, that's a reasonable complaint. I just changed the system so that it only tags anonymous comments made after 3/22/18 GMT. Anyway, if you change your IP, the tag would also change.

    But, frankly, the paranoia of such commenters seems ridiculous to me. Can anyone think of the last time a non-high-profile individual has gotten into trouble for the un-PC comments he made under a website pseudonym, let alone under "Anonymous"?

    As far as I can tell, 99% of the people who get into trouble do so because of the comments they make on their Facebook page or Twitter feed or maybe because they get photographed carrying a banner at a violent Alt-Right rally.

    Why would anyone care what some random person said anonymously on a website?

    With all due respect, I think you have a significant blindspot here.
    Problems can arise if one has an identifiable public persona (even if one is not a celebrity or in any way an overt member of some intellectual or any sort of elite) that can potentially be linked to an anonymous persona. Anyone offering serious and thoughtful comments on a site like this is going to progressively reveal personal information, information that can cumulatively enable individual identification by someone familiar with the public persona.

    indignor quandoque bonus dormitat Homerus

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ron Unz
    Well, I've never heard a single case of a non-ultra-high-profile person (e.g. a big celebrities or a mass-shooter) ever having had his anonymous website comments used to identify him. But I suppose there's always a first time.

    However, the ID# listed next to Anonymous is just a partial hash of your IP, so someone would need to go to an *enormous* amount of trouble to locate all the Anonymous comments with that particular ID.

    Meanwhile, if you're so extremely paranoid, why not just occasionally change your IP, which automatically changes the ID...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. Ron Unz says:
    @Anonymous
    With all due respect, I think you have a significant blindspot here.
    Problems can arise if one has an identifiable public persona (even if one is not a celebrity or in any way an overt member of some intellectual or any sort of elite) that can potentially be linked to an anonymous persona. Anyone offering serious and thoughtful comments on a site like this is going to progressively reveal personal information, information that can cumulatively enable individual identification by someone familiar with the public persona.

    indignor quandoque bonus dormitat Homerus

    Well, I’ve never heard a single case of a non-ultra-high-profile person (e.g. a big celebrities or a mass-shooter) ever having had his anonymous website comments used to identify him. But I suppose there’s always a first time.

    However, the ID# listed next to Anonymous is just a partial hash of your IP, so someone would need to go to an *enormous* amount of trouble to locate all the Anonymous comments with that particular ID.

    Meanwhile, if you’re so extremely paranoid, why not just occasionally change your IP, which automatically changes the ID…

    Read More
    • Replies: @RobinG
    A[326]'s argument is based on logical fallacy. There is absolutely no reason to "progressively reveal personal information." Only a lack of self control and imagination could bring one to that conclusion.

    On another subject, you wrote that a good first step [politically] would be to discredit the MSM press. Well, that is happening, but independent views continue to be marginalized, ridiculed, and stigmatized as "anti-American."

    If you have any ideas on how to use the Sinclair Broadcasting "PSA" to our advantage (i.e. alternative media), please share your insights. Because the dissonance, rather than bringing better analysis [by consumers] of all reporting, is causing a doubling down of polarization and a tenacious clinging to bankrupt memes.

    , @RobinG
    In case anyone wonders what I'm talking about ---

    http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-breaching-the-media-barrier/
    American Pravda: Breaching the Media Barrier
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. RobinG says:
    @Ron Unz
    Well, I've never heard a single case of a non-ultra-high-profile person (e.g. a big celebrities or a mass-shooter) ever having had his anonymous website comments used to identify him. But I suppose there's always a first time.

    However, the ID# listed next to Anonymous is just a partial hash of your IP, so someone would need to go to an *enormous* amount of trouble to locate all the Anonymous comments with that particular ID.

    Meanwhile, if you're so extremely paranoid, why not just occasionally change your IP, which automatically changes the ID...

    A[326]‘s argument is based on logical fallacy. There is absolutely no reason to “progressively reveal personal information.” Only a lack of self control and imagination could bring one to that conclusion.

    On another subject, you wrote that a good first step [politically] would be to discredit the MSM press. Well, that is happening, but independent views continue to be marginalized, ridiculed, and stigmatized as “anti-American.”

    If you have any ideas on how to use the Sinclair Broadcasting “PSA” to our advantage (i.e. alternative media), please share your insights. Because the dissonance, rather than bringing better analysis [by consumers] of all reporting, is causing a doubling down of polarization and a tenacious clinging to bankrupt memes.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    My argument is certainly not based on a logical fallacy (even if I grant, as I certainly do, that there may be strong counterarguments). Indeed, active use of imagination and self-control will progressively reveal personal information, contrary to your claim. If I am giving my best effort to employ my intellect and my knowledge to provide insightful commentary on the articles, I will be drawing on the full range of my experience as a living human. For instance, suppose that after a fractious time in high school, I earned a degree at a somewhat selective liberal arts colllege, did a stint in the Peace Corps, and then enrolled in the economics program at Princeton, earning a PhD. My posts here would likely reveal some of this, over time. (I am not actually describing myself.) In reality, I probably have several hundred comments here (some under a profile, and some as Anonymous), and many of the better ones do reveal something about me personally, even if there is also reasoning involved. On at least one occasion, someone has even replied to my Anonymous comment, accurately recognizing me from prior comments.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. RobinG says:
    @Ron Unz
    Well, I've never heard a single case of a non-ultra-high-profile person (e.g. a big celebrities or a mass-shooter) ever having had his anonymous website comments used to identify him. But I suppose there's always a first time.

    However, the ID# listed next to Anonymous is just a partial hash of your IP, so someone would need to go to an *enormous* amount of trouble to locate all the Anonymous comments with that particular ID.

    Meanwhile, if you're so extremely paranoid, why not just occasionally change your IP, which automatically changes the ID...

    In case anyone wonders what I’m talking about —

    http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-breaching-the-media-barrier/

    American Pravda: Breaching the Media Barrier

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. Talha says:

    Mr. Unz – a suggestion. I have been watching this guys’ videos for a bit – he has great stuff out there on so many things related to genetics, origins of people, racial admixtures, etc.

    And he presents thing is a very thorough and academic way. He would be a great addition to the video section.

    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1vVNQN-TCy8d3Mb_Owr2Kw

    And might be great for a couple of articles!

    Keep up the great work and the Anonymous ID tracking is a great feature and a nice balance to the issue!

    Peace.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  53. Anonymous[326] • Disclaimer says:
    @RobinG
    A[326]'s argument is based on logical fallacy. There is absolutely no reason to "progressively reveal personal information." Only a lack of self control and imagination could bring one to that conclusion.

    On another subject, you wrote that a good first step [politically] would be to discredit the MSM press. Well, that is happening, but independent views continue to be marginalized, ridiculed, and stigmatized as "anti-American."

    If you have any ideas on how to use the Sinclair Broadcasting "PSA" to our advantage (i.e. alternative media), please share your insights. Because the dissonance, rather than bringing better analysis [by consumers] of all reporting, is causing a doubling down of polarization and a tenacious clinging to bankrupt memes.

    My argument is certainly not based on a logical fallacy (even if I grant, as I certainly do, that there may be strong counterarguments). Indeed, active use of imagination and self-control will progressively reveal personal information, contrary to your claim. If I am giving my best effort to employ my intellect and my knowledge to provide insightful commentary on the articles, I will be drawing on the full range of my experience as a living human. For instance, suppose that after a fractious time in high school, I earned a degree at a somewhat selective liberal arts colllege, did a stint in the Peace Corps, and then enrolled in the economics program at Princeton, earning a PhD. My posts here would likely reveal some of this, over time. (I am not actually describing myself.) In reality, I probably have several hundred comments here (some under a profile, and some as Anonymous), and many of the better ones do reveal something about me personally, even if there is also reasoning involved. On at least one occasion, someone has even replied to my Anonymous comment, accurately recognizing me from prior comments.

    Read More
    • Agree: European-American
    • Replies: @RobinG
    LOL. It's your choice to tell stories about yourself.

    "....accurately recognizing me from prior comments." Do you mean, recognizing you as the same anonymous poster? So What? Anyhow, anecdotes are the poorest form of evidence, if you were making an argument that way.

    , @utu

    If I am giving my best effort to employ my intellect and my knowledge to provide insightful commentary on the articles
     
    Could you give an example of an insightful comment of yours? I would like to know what is at stake and how much loss we are facing if you quit.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. RobinG says:
    @Anonymous
    My argument is certainly not based on a logical fallacy (even if I grant, as I certainly do, that there may be strong counterarguments). Indeed, active use of imagination and self-control will progressively reveal personal information, contrary to your claim. If I am giving my best effort to employ my intellect and my knowledge to provide insightful commentary on the articles, I will be drawing on the full range of my experience as a living human. For instance, suppose that after a fractious time in high school, I earned a degree at a somewhat selective liberal arts colllege, did a stint in the Peace Corps, and then enrolled in the economics program at Princeton, earning a PhD. My posts here would likely reveal some of this, over time. (I am not actually describing myself.) In reality, I probably have several hundred comments here (some under a profile, and some as Anonymous), and many of the better ones do reveal something about me personally, even if there is also reasoning involved. On at least one occasion, someone has even replied to my Anonymous comment, accurately recognizing me from prior comments.

    LOL. It’s your choice to tell stories about yourself.

    “….accurately recognizing me from prior comments.” Do you mean, recognizing you as the same anonymous poster? So What? Anyhow, anecdotes are the poorest form of evidence, if you were making an argument that way.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Yes to your question.

    On a more substantive level, the dismissal of so-called "anecdote" is very often misguided. If you are trying to do statistics, then yes, anecdote is not the way to go (even if it might often provide clues as to why the statistics lie...). But if you are trying to understand reality, then statistics are no more than second-rate: the best thing is observation, coupled with reflection on what you observe. At best, statistics serve to overcome the limitations of your own observations. In that sense they are very useful. But if you are trying to do statistics in a way that is not grounded in your own lived experience, then you are liable to end up believing some stuff that is quite loony and false.

    To a considerable extent, the authoritarian left has exploited the idea of the "situated" character of human experience. But they are not wrong (even if I disagree with how they use this idea). Much of what Steve Sailer writes, for instance, hinges on "noticing" things from a certain "situatedness" that gets disparaged by those in power.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. Anonymous[326] • Disclaimer says:
    @RobinG
    LOL. It's your choice to tell stories about yourself.

    "....accurately recognizing me from prior comments." Do you mean, recognizing you as the same anonymous poster? So What? Anyhow, anecdotes are the poorest form of evidence, if you were making an argument that way.

    Yes to your question.

    On a more substantive level, the dismissal of so-called “anecdote” is very often misguided. If you are trying to do statistics, then yes, anecdote is not the way to go (even if it might often provide clues as to why the statistics lie…). But if you are trying to understand reality, then statistics are no more than second-rate: the best thing is observation, coupled with reflection on what you observe. At best, statistics serve to overcome the limitations of your own observations. In that sense they are very useful. But if you are trying to do statistics in a way that is not grounded in your own lived experience, then you are liable to end up believing some stuff that is quite loony and false.

    To a considerable extent, the authoritarian left has exploited the idea of the “situated” character of human experience. But they are not wrong (even if I disagree with how they use this idea). Much of what Steve Sailer writes, for instance, hinges on “noticing” things from a certain “situatedness” that gets disparaged by those in power.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RobinG
    "Yes to your question."

    That settles it. Nobody identified [you].
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. RobinG says:
    @Anonymous
    Yes to your question.

    On a more substantive level, the dismissal of so-called "anecdote" is very often misguided. If you are trying to do statistics, then yes, anecdote is not the way to go (even if it might often provide clues as to why the statistics lie...). But if you are trying to understand reality, then statistics are no more than second-rate: the best thing is observation, coupled with reflection on what you observe. At best, statistics serve to overcome the limitations of your own observations. In that sense they are very useful. But if you are trying to do statistics in a way that is not grounded in your own lived experience, then you are liable to end up believing some stuff that is quite loony and false.

    To a considerable extent, the authoritarian left has exploited the idea of the "situated" character of human experience. But they are not wrong (even if I disagree with how they use this idea). Much of what Steve Sailer writes, for instance, hinges on "noticing" things from a certain "situatedness" that gets disparaged by those in power.

    “Yes to your question.”

    That settles it. Nobody identified [you].

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. FKA Max says:
    @Ron Unz
    Thanks for the very kind words, and the excellent list of suggestions and comments. It's always a very nice feeling when a software developer realizes some people are actually using the things he took quite some time and effort to build.

    I'm actually tied up with some other things right now, but I'll start considering your list of items as soon as I can.

    Mr. Unz,

    all commenters’ archives seem to be down at the moment:

    We’re sorry. That page could not be found.http://www.unz.com/comments/all/?commenterfilter=Ron+Unz

    Congratulations on the increasing web traffic to your site, impressive and encouraging:

    Finally, partly due to the full incorporation of the separate PDF content archives, our website’s April traffic completely smashed all previous records, easily exceeding 2.7 million total pageviews. According to Alexa.com, our total traffic ranking is now regularly 30% higher than The American Conservative and 20% above CounterPunch, a remarkable achievement for a relatively young website run on an absolute shoestring, providing alternative media coverage that completely crosses all ideological lines.

    http://www.unz.com/digest/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:
    @anonymous
    I'm likely one of those folks.

    One of the downsides of "real handles," and which is still concerning under this new regime where I am now henceforth #340,* is the inevitable falloff in quality. Those with little of value to say, but who love seeing their "name" in print or feel compelled to share their view or repeat their obsession, are more likely to clog up a thread. They also are enabled to revive and prolong feuds that started elsewhere, and to call out and abuse each other. Have a peek at Taki's or ZeroHedge to see where this can lead.

    In light of the new system, I'm considering whether to become "Xxxxxx" and even asking for my entire history to be rebranded as such.

    I do appreciate your comments, by the way.

    -------

    *Back in 2015, I was one (not the best) of the commenters who logged in as "guest." I now see some of my "anonymous" comments with a different three-digit figure under an Ilana Mercer column that year; perhaps my email service was different that recently, or I used a different device.

    I realize that no one may ever read this late comment, but it seems worthwhile to note that Taki’s apparently has abandoned commenting other than through old school letters to the editor.

    If he wants to maintain the current, high level of comments here, Mr. Unz may need to consider banning and/or screening commenters who, I repeat, otherwise inevitably degrade any website.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. Ron,

    A couple issues have emerged over the past few months.

    1) Clicking on a commenter produces a “sorry, page doesn’t exist” page instead of comment history. I don’t like it, it makes it more difficult to make sense of new commenters (new means ones I didn’t know before), or identify stupid or troll commenters, so wastes our time.

    2) Next to the “reply” and “agree/disagree/etc.” buttons there are three more buttons. On my iPhone 7 (always latest iOS, Safari) it’s just a “more” button. However, since the last website crash (I think maybe six months or more ago?) it just disappears if I tap on it. So it’s not working. I thought it’d eventually be restored, but apparently you’re unaware of it.

    Thanks for your wonderful website!
    reiner Tor

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ron Unz
    As I'd mentioned in a couple of comments, we were hit by an exceptionally large bot-wave starting late Sunday night, and for almost eight hours the website was either extremely sluggish or completely offline. Early Monday morning we put up some temporarily solutions to the problem, but this involved blocking out all the /comments/ pages and various others.

    Over the last couple of days I've built some powerful new defenses which I'm just about to implement on the server. Once those are active, the /comments/ pages and the others will be reactivated. My apologies for the inconvenience, and it sounds like you may not have even been aware of the very severe outage, which is encouraging.

    My apologies for the convenience, and when I have a chance I'll also take a look at that other problem you mentions.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. Ron Unz says:
    @reiner Tor
    Ron,

    A couple issues have emerged over the past few months.

    1) Clicking on a commenter produces a "sorry, page doesn't exist" page instead of comment history. I don't like it, it makes it more difficult to make sense of new commenters (new means ones I didn't know before), or identify stupid or troll commenters, so wastes our time.

    2) Next to the "reply" and "agree/disagree/etc." buttons there are three more buttons. On my iPhone 7 (always latest iOS, Safari) it's just a "more" button. However, since the last website crash (I think maybe six months or more ago?) it just disappears if I tap on it. So it's not working. I thought it'd eventually be restored, but apparently you're unaware of it.

    Thanks for your wonderful website!
    reiner Tor

    As I’d mentioned in a couple of comments, we were hit by an exceptionally large bot-wave starting late Sunday night, and for almost eight hours the website was either extremely sluggish or completely offline. Early Monday morning we put up some temporarily solutions to the problem, but this involved blocking out all the /comments/ pages and various others.

    Over the last couple of days I’ve built some powerful new defenses which I’m just about to implement on the server. Once those are active, the /comments/ pages and the others will be reactivated. My apologies for the inconvenience, and it sounds like you may not have even been aware of the very severe outage, which is encouraging.

    My apologies for the convenience, and when I have a chance I’ll also take a look at that other problem you mentions.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    I noticed something, but I was so absorbed in Hungarian politics on the day that I immediately forgot it.

    Also, sorry for writing to you without reading the previous comments, I should've done that.

    Have a nice day, hopefully without a world war!
    , @HogHappenin
    Greetings Mr. Editor!

    You maintain a pretty fine webzine and you allow for true FoS on this webzine! Our "elites" don't like that and I'm sure you must have come under the ever expanding range of their "radar"

    I hope you can come out stronger every time "they" try to take your superb site down!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. @Ron Unz
    As I'd mentioned in a couple of comments, we were hit by an exceptionally large bot-wave starting late Sunday night, and for almost eight hours the website was either extremely sluggish or completely offline. Early Monday morning we put up some temporarily solutions to the problem, but this involved blocking out all the /comments/ pages and various others.

    Over the last couple of days I've built some powerful new defenses which I'm just about to implement on the server. Once those are active, the /comments/ pages and the others will be reactivated. My apologies for the inconvenience, and it sounds like you may not have even been aware of the very severe outage, which is encouraging.

    My apologies for the convenience, and when I have a chance I'll also take a look at that other problem you mentions.

    I noticed something, but I was so absorbed in Hungarian politics on the day that I immediately forgot it.

    Also, sorry for writing to you without reading the previous comments, I should’ve done that.

    Have a nice day, hopefully without a world war!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. A new issue just surfaced: it’s impossible now to list articles by author. Neither the columnists nor the bloggers, though the blogs have the blog view. I just don’t like it because I have to scroll through the actual articles which I have already read them, and am only coming back to check out the comments.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ron Unz

    A new issue just surfaced: it’s impossible now to list articles by author. Neither the columnists nor the bloggers, though the blogs have the blog view.
     
    That's now fixed. Also, all of the /topic/, /category/, and /source/ filters have now been reactivated. With luck, everything will again be fully operational by later today.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  63. Ron Unz says:
    @reiner Tor
    A new issue just surfaced: it’s impossible now to list articles by author. Neither the columnists nor the bloggers, though the blogs have the blog view. I just don’t like it because I have to scroll through the actual articles which I have already read them, and am only coming back to check out the comments.

    A new issue just surfaced: it’s impossible now to list articles by author. Neither the columnists nor the bloggers, though the blogs have the blog view.

    That’s now fixed. Also, all of the /topic/, /category/, and /source/ filters have now been reactivated. With luck, everything will again be fully operational by later today.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. utu says:
    @Anonymous
    My argument is certainly not based on a logical fallacy (even if I grant, as I certainly do, that there may be strong counterarguments). Indeed, active use of imagination and self-control will progressively reveal personal information, contrary to your claim. If I am giving my best effort to employ my intellect and my knowledge to provide insightful commentary on the articles, I will be drawing on the full range of my experience as a living human. For instance, suppose that after a fractious time in high school, I earned a degree at a somewhat selective liberal arts colllege, did a stint in the Peace Corps, and then enrolled in the economics program at Princeton, earning a PhD. My posts here would likely reveal some of this, over time. (I am not actually describing myself.) In reality, I probably have several hundred comments here (some under a profile, and some as Anonymous), and many of the better ones do reveal something about me personally, even if there is also reasoning involved. On at least one occasion, someone has even replied to my Anonymous comment, accurately recognizing me from prior comments.

    If I am giving my best effort to employ my intellect and my knowledge to provide insightful commentary on the articles

    Could you give an example of an insightful comment of yours? I would like to know what is at stake and how much loss we are facing if you quit.

    Read More
    • Replies: @European-American
    Sorry this came out a bit long... tldr:
    I thought Anon made a good point that as much anonymity as possible is good.

    I liked Anonymous[326]'s initial comment:


    Anyone offering serious and thoughtful comments on a site like this is going to progressively reveal personal information, information that can cumulatively enable individual identification
     
    There's a difference between anonymous and pseudonymous. If people are identified over a certain period of time by a number (related to their relatively unchanging IP address), then they are not anonymous, just hidden behind a pseudonym, and the set of their comments may gradually identify who they are, for someone who knows them.

    So imagine an eager beaver SJW, who for some reason is on the site, notices a comment that seems familiar. It sounds like a friend or a neighbor or a colleague. By checking earlier comments, he may be able to confirm with reasonable certainty that he knows the commenter. Good-bye anonymity!

    Or imagine an eager beaver SJW AI doing the same thing, exhaustively, for all comments on all blogs and other content on the Internet. It shouldn't be that hard to identify some people. We have created an environment where what would be considered sophisticated spying techniques can be used cheaply on anyone.

    I'm pretty sure some people or softwares could easily identify who I am based on my commenting history. And I'm well aware that's the (foolish?) risk I take with my pseudonym.

    But it would be nice to keep an option to comment in as anonymous a way as possible. I personally like the idea of a unique ID per thread, for convenience in discussion. Or maybe a unique ID for a week. But anyway I'll admit so far I personally (foolishly?) haven't yet much felt the need for posting anonymously.

    It sometimes seems Ron Unz doesn't have much sympathy for these concerns, and I can think of a few reasons why.

    I do understand it's easier to detect and prevent bad behavior if there is less than complete anonymity. There's always this trade-off between liberty and security... But anyway from the server point of view there is much less anonymity, so some forms of bad behavior can be prevented on the server side without sacrificing anonymity vis-à-vis to the outside world.

    Also, as I've commented before , Ron surprisingly doesn't mind by default putting the Facebook and Twitter buttons on every page of his site. It seems to me that unnecessarily helps those companies track their users, in another way that anonymity on this site can be illusory.

    But I'm also guessing that Ron, having long been brave in publicly hosting all sorts of "problematic" content under his own name, is not as sensitive as he might be to the wish of many cowardly, insignificant commenters to stay hidden.

    Still, I do not look forward to the perhaps inevitable day when someone will produce my "Internet report card" and identify me as "questionable" due to evidence of my browsing and commenting habits, so I understand that some want to try to remain as anonymous as possible.

    PS: OK and in further defense of Anonymous[326] I'll admit to not minding that he forced me to look up an obscure (to me) Latin phrase:
    https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/even_Homer_nods

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. @utu

    If I am giving my best effort to employ my intellect and my knowledge to provide insightful commentary on the articles
     
    Could you give an example of an insightful comment of yours? I would like to know what is at stake and how much loss we are facing if you quit.

    Sorry this came out a bit long… tldr:
    I thought Anon made a good point that as much anonymity as possible is good.

    I liked Anonymous[326]‘s initial comment:

    Anyone offering serious and thoughtful comments on a site like this is going to progressively reveal personal information, information that can cumulatively enable individual identification

    There’s a difference between anonymous and pseudonymous. If people are identified over a certain period of time by a number (related to their relatively unchanging IP address), then they are not anonymous, just hidden behind a pseudonym, and the set of their comments may gradually identify who they are, for someone who knows them.

    So imagine an eager beaver SJW, who for some reason is on the site, notices a comment that seems familiar. It sounds like a friend or a neighbor or a colleague. By checking earlier comments, he may be able to confirm with reasonable certainty that he knows the commenter. Good-bye anonymity!

    Or imagine an eager beaver SJW AI doing the same thing, exhaustively, for all comments on all blogs and other content on the Internet. It shouldn’t be that hard to identify some people. We have created an environment where what would be considered sophisticated spying techniques can be used cheaply on anyone.

    I’m pretty sure some people or softwares could easily identify who I am based on my commenting history. And I’m well aware that’s the (foolish?) risk I take with my pseudonym.

    But it would be nice to keep an option to comment in as anonymous a way as possible. I personally like the idea of a unique ID per thread, for convenience in discussion. Or maybe a unique ID for a week. But anyway I’ll admit so far I personally (foolishly?) haven’t yet much felt the need for posting anonymously.

    It sometimes seems Ron Unz doesn’t have much sympathy for these concerns, and I can think of a few reasons why.

    I do understand it’s easier to detect and prevent bad behavior if there is less than complete anonymity. There’s always this trade-off between liberty and security… But anyway from the server point of view there is much less anonymity, so some forms of bad behavior can be prevented on the server side without sacrificing anonymity vis-à-vis to the outside world.

    Also, as I’ve commented before , Ron surprisingly doesn’t mind by default putting the Facebook and Twitter buttons on every page of his site. It seems to me that unnecessarily helps those companies track their users, in another way that anonymity on this site can be illusory.

    But I’m also guessing that Ron, having long been brave in publicly hosting all sorts of “problematic” content under his own name, is not as sensitive as he might be to the wish of many cowardly, insignificant commenters to stay hidden.

    Still, I do not look forward to the perhaps inevitable day when someone will produce my “Internet report card” and identify me as “questionable” due to evidence of my browsing and commenting habits, so I understand that some want to try to remain as anonymous as possible.

    PS: OK and in further defense of Anonymous[326] I’ll admit to not minding that he forced me to look up an obscure (to me) Latin phrase:

    https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/even_Homer_nods

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. @Ron Unz
    As I'd mentioned in a couple of comments, we were hit by an exceptionally large bot-wave starting late Sunday night, and for almost eight hours the website was either extremely sluggish or completely offline. Early Monday morning we put up some temporarily solutions to the problem, but this involved blocking out all the /comments/ pages and various others.

    Over the last couple of days I've built some powerful new defenses which I'm just about to implement on the server. Once those are active, the /comments/ pages and the others will be reactivated. My apologies for the inconvenience, and it sounds like you may not have even been aware of the very severe outage, which is encouraging.

    My apologies for the convenience, and when I have a chance I'll also take a look at that other problem you mentions.

    Greetings Mr. Editor!

    You maintain a pretty fine webzine and you allow for true FoS on this webzine! Our “elites” don’t like that and I’m sure you must have come under the ever expanding range of their “radar”

    I hope you can come out stronger every time “they” try to take your superb site down!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. Svigor says:

    This oughta be fun:

    https://singularityhub.com/2018/04/16/this-startup-is-training-ai-to-gobble-up-the-news-and-rewrite-it-free-of-bias/

    Bias in journalism is nothing new, but there are growing concerns technology is pushing us into echo chambers where we only hear one side of the story. Now a startup says it’s using AI to bring us a truly impartial source of news.

    Knowhere launched earlier this month, alongside an announcement that it had raised $1.8 million in venture capital. The site uses AI to aggregate news from hundreds of sources and create three versions of each story: one skewed to the left, one skewed to the right, and one that’s meant to be impartial.

    Prediction: it will be impartial for about five minutes, then the leftist fanatics will force them to rewrite all three versions to be skewed to the left.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  68. anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:

    The last look, five minute opportunity to edit comments is only working intermittently.

    It works here, but didn’t for another comment I submitted to a Napolitano column this morning.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  69. Greetings Ron,

    With the latest changes to the website, after the page loads some post processing is done – through javascript ? – to apply CSS styling.

    For whatever reason, the pages for me no longer render properly, I am using ‘noscript’ plugin and Firefox.

    Thank you for all of you good works.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS
Personal Classics
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
A simple remedy for income stagnation
What the facts tell us about a taboo subject