Lemmy would not be illegal. Instead, Lemmy would be required to verify that each account belongs to a real person. Essentially, it’s a way to make bots and astroturfing illegal.
Me neither, probably. But it’s still a good idea in principle. The spread of malicious misinformation and propaganda has already led to millions of deaths. If we have to give up some anonymous shitposting to curb these excesses, it’s worth it.
That’s a little too close to reality for comfort. 😟
We have several governments saying that being able to read some people’s encrypted messages would catch some criminals, therefore we need to be able to read everyone’s encrypted messages.
Literally 2 days ago I was arguing with family about privacy online and I was the only person in car that gave a fuck about it. The 3 other family members were totally ok with being spied on online from start to finish and have this information used against because they had “nothing to hide” and that caring about it would not change anything in their personal lives anyway and that we don’t live in a country that actively cracks down on people against certain things. No example or angle I brought up would change their mind. This was the moment I gave up on those family members in my head. Ugh…
Malicious misinformation gets spread by plenty of elected officials and journalists every day. You don’t have to be anonymous to do that. Hell pretty much the entire US government does it.
The whole point of anonymity is that people can say whatever they want publicly without it affecting their real life.
So you can be against whatever war or business practices without the government or your boss bothering you. Now they want to stifle dissent by putting your face to every opinion you have online. They want to card you for being against the war.
Since you like the idea so much, you go first. What’s your real name, “friend”? Put your money where your mouth is. Let’s see how safe you feel giving out that information. C’mon, old buddy old pal. What’s the harm, right? Out with it. Triple dog dare ya, bud. We’re waiting. Oh, and until you tell us, maybe can it otherwise.
It seems you don’t understand the idea, which wouldn’t be that people would be forced to disclose their identity on social media. Instead, social media would be required to check that users are who they say they are.
Imagine Coca-Cola puts out an ad saying Pepsi instantly makes your balls explode, or that the Daily Mail publishes an op-ed from a Labour insider who is actually an LLM prompted by a GRU operative. It is this type of “free speech” that currently runs rampant on social media, and would be curtailed under this type of proposal.
It’s impossible to verify humanity without verifying identity. Just like all attemps to verify age this will result in vast databases of all our personal data that will be abused, sold, leaked, and hacked.
Lemmy would not be illegal. Instead, Lemmy would be required to verify that each account belongs to a real person. Essentially, it’s a way to make bots and astroturfing illegal.
I wouldn’t be here if it asked for my id.
Me neither, probably. But it’s still a good idea in principle. The spread of malicious misinformation and propaganda has already led to millions of deaths. If we have to give up some anonymous shitposting to curb these excesses, it’s worth it.
No.
Malicious misinformation and propaganda is constantly spread without any sort of anonymity, so I can’t see how this is relevant.
Exactly, nation states and political parties are the worst in this regard.
Chemotherapy does not cure all forms of cancer, therefore chemotherapy is not relevant to cancer treatment.
No but you don’t give everyone chemotherapy just because some people have cancer
Thank you. I agree with this.
Home searches would catch some criminals, therefore a blanket search warrant is relevant to stopping crime.
That’s a little too close to reality for comfort. 😟
We have several governments saying that being able to read some people’s encrypted messages would catch some criminals, therefore we need to be able to read everyone’s encrypted messages.
Literally 2 days ago I was arguing with family about privacy online and I was the only person in car that gave a fuck about it. The 3 other family members were totally ok with being spied on online from start to finish and have this information used against because they had “nothing to hide” and that caring about it would not change anything in their personal lives anyway and that we don’t live in a country that actively cracks down on people against certain things. No example or angle I brought up would change their mind. This was the moment I gave up on those family members in my head. Ugh…
bro thought he really cooked with this one
So youre the type of person who gives up some freedoms in the name of security and comfort.
Malicious misinformation gets spread by plenty of elected officials and journalists every day. You don’t have to be anonymous to do that. Hell pretty much the entire US government does it.
no, its not
The whole point of anonymity is that people can say whatever they want publicly without it affecting their real life.
So you can be against whatever war or business practices without the government or your boss bothering you. Now they want to stifle dissent by putting your face to every opinion you have online. They want to card you for being against the war.
The proposal isn’t to ban pseudonyms.
Greece isn’t in any war that I am aware of.
Since you like the idea so much, you go first. What’s your real name, “friend”? Put your money where your mouth is. Let’s see how safe you feel giving out that information. C’mon, old buddy old pal. What’s the harm, right? Out with it. Triple dog dare ya, bud. We’re waiting. Oh, and until you tell us, maybe can it otherwise.
It seems you don’t understand the idea, which wouldn’t be that people would be forced to disclose their identity on social media. Instead, social media would be required to check that users are who they say they are.
Imagine Coca-Cola puts out an ad saying Pepsi instantly makes your balls explode, or that the Daily Mail publishes an op-ed from a Labour insider who is actually an LLM prompted by a GRU operative. It is this type of “free speech” that currently runs rampant on social media, and would be curtailed under this type of proposal.
Have you messaged the admins of every lemmy instance lemmy.world is federated with to tell them your Name, Date of Birth, Street Address, etc?
If not, why not? That’s what you want for others?
Pseudonyms aren’t anonymous by their very definition.
If it was expanded to the EU, I assume it’d be the Ukraine war. Europe seems to be leaning towards a war with Russia or keeps hinting it might happen.
It’s impossible to verify humanity without verifying identity. Just like all attemps to verify age this will result in vast databases of all our personal data that will be abused, sold, leaked, and hacked.
So lemmy would in fact be illegal, because it wouldn’t be lemmy if anonymity wasn’t possible.
Anonymity would still be possible, in the same sense that anonymous op-eds in newspapers are possible.