I just read that moot's Canvas is live in beta.
canv.as
Requires Facebook login (lol)
Invite only
Anyone tried it? What do you think?
From what little I've heard, it sounds like "social" GameBoy Camera.
It looks like /b/ for people who can't use MS Paint.
And how is it going to make money?
I got into the close beta. Doesn't seem as bad as I've heard, they don't actually display any of your facebook information there.
I'll post some screenshots if anybody wants.
> they don't actually display any of your facebook information there
Yet.
I don't trust facebook or any sites that associate with it, too many of them prove to be dickheads well after a lot of people have decided to trust them.
>>6
http://img546.imageshack.us/g/canvasscreenshot2.jpg/
The navigation there is pretty horrible too.
>>7
Well, after moot's speech at TED on internet anonymity I think he would at least keep the "post anonymously" button.
>>9
No, he did. I was just saying that he probably wouldn't go as far as to completely remove all anonimity from his site.
From the screenshot I saw, anonymous posting was off by default. Is that true?
Do you have to manually turn it on each time you post?
>>11
You just have to turn it on the first time. Don't worry; most people are anonymous.
I hate Canv.as and I hate moot with fiery passion of a thousand suns.
I don't care about Canv.as and I don't care about moot with fiery passion of a thousand moons.
>>15
ttp://www.ted.com/talks/christopher_m00t_poole_the_case_for_anonymity_online.html
Pretty mediocre speech, IIRC. Shii would've probably been more interesting.
>>16
Depends, I guess. I don't particularly like Shii.
Actually come to think of it I don't care for most of the "personalities" related to imageboards.
Thanks for the link.
Man I'm bored without /b/ . tumblr must die
> Shii would've probably been more interesting.
Soooo much more interesting. sarcasm
It's shit.
>>21
It's true, in his formspring account before he closed it down he said that he no longer supported what he wrote. As a matter of fact, the best way for an anonymous posting system to work is if the person logs in first, then be allowed to post anonymously. Only the mods and admins know the true "logged-in" username of the person.
Sad, but true.
>>22
Then it's not anonymous, it's just a very dangerous false sense of security. One of the most compelling cases for anonymity is for whistleblowing, and if you have to log in first, you're leaving evidence that can be linked back to you if the case ends up going to court. Big companies have lots of muscle and are very effective at making your life suck.
>>23
You have to remember that IPs get logged anyway.
>>24
I thought most boards used one-way hashes. If done correctly, it should be cryptographically secure. I might be wrong though.
Of course, the same thing could probably be done with the ID/name of the user account.
>>25
irrelevant
http://panopticlick.eff.org/
>>25
No - every imageboard script I've seen puts the IP address straight into the database.
on my own boards I made a small modification that strips the IP off of posts that are more than a couple days old, and I don't keep log files any longer than that either - mostly to save space, one day of access logs is about 100 megabytes - but also for privacy.
IIRC 2ch doesn't keep logs at all, and only stores the IP for the first post in a thread. I'm having trouble finding anything to back that up, I just remember reading it somewhere.
If anonymity really is a concern you should really be using something like tor to mask your IP as well as various other data that might get "leaked" (>>26) when you post. Requiring any sort of login renders any actual means of anonymity impossible regardless of the promises of the site administrators.
Bumping this because it got lost when some tardbot came by to spam Timberlands.
>>23
There's different levels of anonymity in my opinion.
A whistle-blower, obviously, needs true anonymity. But a casual web user who wants to post in a forum/etc without a name only needs to be anonymous to the rest of the community.
>>29
But problems arise when there is no distinction between the two.
I have seen a few times that someone would make a reference to the server logs, IP addresses, or something like that, and and someone would reply in a bit of a panic because they had thought that imageboards didn't log anything at all because they were anonymous. I have no idea what those people might have posted or planned to post, but I'm sure that if there was some sort of explicit notice somewhere that indicated what specific data was logged along with the post, it wouldn't come as a complete shock to some people upon finding out that some of your information is in fact saved when you post on an anonymous board.
Moot is answering questions about canv.as (and 4chan) on Reddit:
http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/gdzfi/iam_christopher_poole_aka_moot_founder_of_4chan/
> That said, there are times where you do want to know who that other person is, and where real-ID is preferable. A good example is news websites and YouTube, where the comment quality is often terrible. Facebook rolled out their Comments product recently, and TechCruch, which has had a lot of trouble in the past keeping comments on track, adopted it and and it radically improved their comment quality.
Money quote
However, the Q and A he had with reddit confirmed one thing: After the public beta, the Facebook Connect requirement will be gone, but you still need an account to participate.
>Accounts will be required, but you'll still be able to make unattributed/anonymous posts. We may offer some limited functionality for logged-out users, but there's a lot we want to do with the site that benefits from having accounts (but not necessarily your name next to a comment!).
He said that he would design a new type of imageboard that doesn't rely on 10 year old technology. Guess what, this isn't an imageboard as it requires you to log in irregardless of you want to post anonymously or not.
>isn't an imageboard as it requires you to log in irregardless of you want to post anonymously or not.
moot, seems to be experimenting with what the best ways are to manage content on his user generated content sites. so far he hasn't come across anything that worked effectively, but he probably learns a lot from his failures. my guess that the real problem is the quality of the endusers who are generally attracted to english language imageboards or some quality of the psychology of westerners in general. whatever it is, my impression is that, in general, there is no reward for being a quality contributor on any of the major western image boards. maybe forcing people to log in will attract a different crowd and it will end up the way he wants or if it doesn't he will probably try something else.
> this isn't an imageboard
An "imageboard" is a message board that is built around the posting of images. I'm not sure what twisted definition you have.
>>37 This.
Even if you could call this a imageboard or chan, (witch I don't think you can) you should not just by principal. Moot learned himself in marketing and psychology so maybe he could make some money. He also knows that appealing to a niche market is $$$$$$. He realized the fact the 4chan is attracting a crowd of under 18, hipster, mac users that are used to using web2.0 and social networking sites like Tumblr (he announced it on Tumblr first) and Facebook and love "so random lol XD XD XD" like content. He also realized these same people browse /b/ and /soc/ all day without posting a new image (Unless it's their face) or even an edited image. The fact that they don't have something like MSpaint installed one their Mac is a large factor in this and moot sees that. Unless it's not abundantly easy to do something, people won't. Thus, his Canvas is a silver bullet to make money of this niche. It provides them with the ability to draw on images they upload and/or make their own right on the site itself, it has an extremely web2.0 interface, it has a these happy-fun little sticker things with emoticon faces on them that you can "stick" to other images to show that you approve of them. (But there is no face that lets you show that you disapprove. This keeps users from showing their disapproval and the other users don't feel bad or disapproved of, thus keeping them on the site.)
I've been using it for about a month now, so far I can say it's pretty boring and tireing to use. Not to mention because of web2.0, it runs like crap and is very slow. The biggest problem with it is that ALL of the images the users upload are just images that have already been uploaded to 4chan. All the comments that you see on images are around Youtube commenter level of intelligence. I really cannot see something like this lasting long, but because of all the money moot has gotten for it, it will unfortunately be around for a long time.
> The fact that they don't have something like MSpaint installed one their Mac
I lol'd because it's true.
Someone should make a MSPaint clone, build in canv.as integration, and put it on the App Store for $1-5. They'd make millions.
moot should have opted out of a login system and went with user tracking via supercookies like evercookie.
