People trust. And people abuse that trust. We experience both sides all the time.
Tonight, I read through a thread on Twitter and saw folks asking @th3j35t3r lots of questions about CoSo and about his identity and his back-up plans for CoSo should something adversely happen to him (which could be more of a possibility were he to out himself).
And I get it. Sort of. But here is my take, for what it is worth.
By the millions people have signed up for FB, Twitter, IG, even Google Chrome...
1/
They have signed up without reading all the fine print and when it was later disclosed numerous times that each of these sights not only access contact lists, they follow their cookies.. hell, they follow their friends' cookies too! And still, people continue to use those sites and still sign up anew.
And we see the faces of those companies, the unethical standards, the favoritism, the duplicity is what they say in front of Congress and what they actually do.
2/
Now.. I have only seen J's face the one or two times he posted it. But I wouldn't be able to pick him out if I saw him getting a fish sandwich or sitting at a table at Starbucks. But I bet there would be some who could easily identify him and carry out threats.
AND STILL.. I trust him more than any of the other owners previously mentioned.
Why? Gut instinct? Maybe.
But also, his dedication to this site, his palpable and present interest in his creation, his willingness to listen to ideas.
3/
Tbf, there’s no way to verify if those pics were of his face, for all we know, they’re red herrings, and I wouldn’t be surprised, disappointed, or insulted or anything like that if they were…
And tbh, I think there’s an advantage to having an incognito hacker be the one in charge of a social network built on a foundation of RESPECT, not on trust.
Trust is given. It is not inherently earned; faith is a form of unearned trust, for example.
I don’t have faith in J.
I respect him
I don’t have trust in J.
I.
Have.
DATA.
Not on the shape of his face or the sounds his parents used to get his attention or the color of his skin, but on the content of his character.
That’s the important bit, right?
And that’s the foundation of respect. Cold, hard data. No bullshit.
Fuck trust. Trust gets you in cults and shot in the back of the head and left in a gutter.
Respect built on DATA gets you allies who come through where you need them, when you need them.
@GlytchMeister I appreciate what you are saying. However, I am not a data person. I spoke from my heart and my instincts. My proof is in the people and how they behave, how they show up, how they care.
Which is how the USA works. But stepping outside that system can be hard for people who never learned your kind of trust. Which is why I’m reframing it as data-driven respect.
@GlytchMeister I understand. Thanks for the clarification and the earnest response.
Ohhh I see, I might have come off as argumentative, my bad.
Nah, it was just like “hey, you could also look at it like this”
@GlytchMeister I didn't take it as bad, just as a different way of viewing things, as you intended. It's all good.
@ChippySuave
Data-driven respect is based on the same things - how they show up, how they care, etc. It’s just looking at it a different way.
The people who are wanting an ID aren’t wanting it for “trust”, they’re wanting it as a détente. The assurance that if they get screwed by J, they can screw J back.
But J can’t be screwed back, for most intents and purposes… any exemptions are not available to joe blow.
That’s not trust, it’s just a litigious standoff.