Then respond to the following prompts. Try to write approximately 500 words overall (including all responses).
Frame the conventional "privacy vs security tradeoff." In what ways is it good for society to have anonymous online interactions? What are the dangers or possible abuses? Which do you think are greater: The dangers of anonymity or the dangers of all citizens being identified at all times?
The author thinks that the right solution is for centralized institutions to mete out information about their clients on an as-needed basis. That way no one is really anonymous but information is minimally disclosed to everyone except for the centralized gatekeeper (who knows everything about everyone). Do you like this view? Do you have any criticisms or see any way that this could go wrong? Is this really that different from the conventional framing that you outlined in your first response?
Look at the biography of the author. Can you imagine ways in which he might have a financial interest in which way this issue is decided?