zlacker

>>walter+(OP)
Were we ever supposed to be anon on the internet?

>>2OEH8e+Bm
Yes. Implicitly.

Ex Wikipedia: Over 186 constitutions mention the right to privacy

https://www.constituteproject.org/constitutions?key=privacy

Oh, and sniper: because the right to privacy will be defended by a number of individuals with radical violence, as you should know if you ever visited the world, so evidently I should not even need to proceed from «Yes. Implicitly».

So contextually: if it were not anonymous, it would not be used (but by a specific class of entities).

>>mdp202+Kq
I don't know if this applies to US law, but privacy and anonymity are often different and unrelated concepts.

>>marcos+es
In the relevant cases privacy and anonymity converge: to be part of your private sphere, your access to information must be anonymous.

>>mdp202+5v
Anonymity is about your conversation peers not having access to your identity, while privacy is about unrelated parties not having access to your conversation.

In legal matters, those two rarely converge. On technical matters both are usually abstracted as "keeping information secret", but even then they often require widely different techniques to be preserved.

>>marcos+jw
> conversation

But the context here can hardly be instanced in the case of "conversation". Before protecting exchanges (in privacy and anonymity), there is the act of accessing information that would make an intruder an eavesdropping peeping tom.

It is more clear in its actual context: the "private space", which could be breached by so-called "intrusion upon seclusion" cases (peeping, eavesdropping etc.), is protected - see e.g. the case of the "IV amendment" (discussed nearby), protecting against the intrusion in one's «papers» (instance of a broader private space relevant to the explicit context of «searching» as primary practical concern), and base for more specific legislation, possibly after Warren and Brandeis' "The Right to Privacy" - which is relevant because further legislation got needed after new technical-aided phenomena (the gossip press) breaching base principles otherwise formerly threatened by «the idle and... the vicious» (Warren and Brandeis).

So: having rights about a private space, one's act of accessing information must be in anonymous form.