Anonymity on social media is how we got here. You can have anonymity elsewhere on the web. Wanna post on instagram comments? You shouldn’t be anonymous.
So what happens when a platform grows and that threshold is reached one day? Force everyone to de-anonymize and potentially reveal sensitive information about themselves or abandon their account?
There’s just no good way to force only some to de-anonymize without running into problems.
While I believe in the right to online anonymity, I also don’t think that de-anonymization would even work, when I see the same garbage being posted in places that enforce real names. It just doesn’t seem like a detractor to those types of people.
Instead, I’d rather want to see harsher punishments for big sites failing to moderate their content. I’d also take a look at these personalized “recommendation” engine and maybe ban them altogether. (Bonus points if it also affects personalized ads.)
Try to come up with a reasonable process for transitioning between the thresholds or stop pretending you’re interested in anything but proving your point.
Sorry, but this comment left me completely stunlocked. Why am I supposed to solve the problems to a problem you’ve created? Since when is trying to prove your point not how an argument works? What even is an argument anymore?
You can still have your dumb username. We just need to make sure you’re not a child or a Russian. Alternatively, we could also just wait for authoritarianism to make social media completely illegal or unusable. That’s our current track.
I see you implying everyone arguing against you is either a dumb moron, a child or russians in your other comments, so it’s worthless arguing against your, ironically, authoritarianism-fueled idea.
Anonymity on social media is how we got here. You can have anonymity elsewhere on the web. Wanna post on instagram comments? You shouldn’t be anonymous.
So how exactly would you decide which platforms are allowed to be anonymous then?
Does it align with my opinion. If not, it’s misinformation.
Number of users is an obvious example. There are others.
So what happens when a platform grows and that threshold is reached one day? Force everyone to de-anonymize and potentially reveal sensitive information about themselves or abandon their account?
There’s just no good way to force only some to de-anonymize without running into problems.
While I believe in the right to online anonymity, I also don’t think that de-anonymization would even work, when I see the same garbage being posted in places that enforce real names. It just doesn’t seem like a detractor to those types of people.
Instead, I’d rather want to see harsher punishments for big sites failing to moderate their content. I’d also take a look at these personalized “recommendation” engine and maybe ban them altogether. (Bonus points if it also affects personalized ads.)
Try to come up with a reasonable process for transitioning between the thresholds or stop pretending you’re interested in anything but proving your point.
Sorry, but this comment left me completely stunlocked. Why am I supposed to solve the problems to a problem you’ve created? Since when is trying to prove your point not how an argument works? What even is an argument anymore?
You can still have your dumb username. We just need to make sure you’re not a child or a Russian. Alternatively, we could also just wait for authoritarianism to make social media completely illegal or unusable. That’s our current track.
I see you implying everyone arguing against you is either a dumb moron, a child or russians in your other comments, so it’s worthless arguing against your, ironically, authoritarianism-fueled idea.
Bye.