So does the government ban the news from criticizing them just because they’re not anonymous? That’s not the way it works in the EU. You’re very lost it would seem…
And it’s not about Sánchez and his government. I don’t think they would do it. But governments change, sooner or later someone else will win elections. Someone who might not agree with criticism.
And don’t try to convince me “it would never happen in the EU”. We have more than enough examples that eventually every country has a brush with authoritarianism. Even in the EU currently (eg Hungary). Prevention is always better than trying to fix it later.
Spain was a dictatorship until the 70s and transitioned into a democracy without anonymous internet shitposting. The USA was a functioning democracy and transitioned into a shithole with anonymous internet shitposting.
Anonymous internet shitposting fixes nothing, it only damages the social fabric and pollutes the public discourse. That’s why foreign actors love to weaponize it.
Being a citizen of a free country comes with responsibilities: paying taxes, voting, expressing your opinions sensibly. Anonymous internet shitposting advances zero democratic values, it’s simply a great channel for conducting international destabilization campaigns.
It. Fixes. Nothing. If you’re as lazy as to need anonymity to post your opinions in a free country you’re going to overthrow no tyranny. You’ll just be fed psyops by others who will break your system.
As I said, having a government platform doing the encrypted id check means you would get the encrypted id check and verification, and the government would read your data (as it already does). Don’t try to sell fear.
And by the way, I’m registered as the owner and resident of my house that has an internet connection with an IP from which I’m writing, paid with my bank account, all of them well known to the government.
The only difference is you don’t know whether I’m an individual over 18 and a citizen of the EU or a sim on a multisim device in Vladivostok. And I think that’s not good.
And your point is? Creating an id check doesn’t increase the potential risk, the government already has all the data.
My question is, why do you want underage citizens to use social media platforms that a) have been proven to be damaging to their psychological health b) farm their data and store it far from our control c) don’t add anything to our economy.
I don’t want them to use it. I agree with all your points.
I strongly disagree that mandatory ID on the net is the solution to this.
It also fascinates me that you’d think putting such a tool, with all the trouble it could cause if our countries stop being democracies, in the hands of government as a purported solution to children being on social media. That’s throwing out the baby with the bathwater
The tool already exists and is used for serious stuff (dealing with the treasury department, police, banks, bond auctions), the only difference is you would be forcing mainstream social media platforms to get an OK from that government’s platform.
Sorry but if you can’t trust your country’s system as a legitimate large scale shield then there is no possible defense against multinational conglomerates and at that point you’re better off just going bunker prepper, I don’t really know what your point is. Democracy doesn’t stick in low trust societies.
So does the government ban the news from criticizing them just because they’re not anonymous? That’s not the way it works in the EU. You’re very lost it would seem…
Not yet. Because they don’t have the mechanism.
And it’s not about Sánchez and his government. I don’t think they would do it. But governments change, sooner or later someone else will win elections. Someone who might not agree with criticism.
And don’t try to convince me “it would never happen in the EU”. We have more than enough examples that eventually every country has a brush with authoritarianism. Even in the EU currently (eg Hungary). Prevention is always better than trying to fix it later.
“Not yet”
Spain was a dictatorship until the 70s and transitioned into a democracy without anonymous internet shitposting. The USA was a functioning democracy and transitioned into a shithole with anonymous internet shitposting.
Anonymous internet shitposting fixes nothing, it only damages the social fabric and pollutes the public discourse. That’s why foreign actors love to weaponize it.
Being a citizen of a free country comes with responsibilities: paying taxes, voting, expressing your opinions sensibly. Anonymous internet shitposting advances zero democratic values, it’s simply a great channel for conducting international destabilization campaigns.
It. Fixes. Nothing. If you’re as lazy as to need anonymity to post your opinions in a free country you’re going to overthrow no tyranny. You’ll just be fed psyops by others who will break your system.
Can you sign that comment with your real name and address to be an example for all of us? Don’t forget to add your phone number.
We will of course need proof, so attaching a scan of your id would be a step towards It.Fixing.Something.
As I said, having a government platform doing the encrypted id check means you would get the encrypted id check and verification, and the government would read your data (as it already does). Don’t try to sell fear.
And by the way, I’m registered as the owner and resident of my house that has an internet connection with an IP from which I’m writing, paid with my bank account, all of them well known to the government.
The only difference is you don’t know whether I’m an individual over 18 and a citizen of the EU or a sim on a multisim device in Vladivostok. And I think that’s not good.
A government platform you say? From the government that regularly gets hacked, leaking the IDs of millions of Spanish citizens that can now be used to commit identity fraud? https://hipertextual.com/seguridad/hackers-venta-millones-dni-espanoles-dark-web/
and it’s not like this is a rare thing to happen.
And your point is? Creating an id check doesn’t increase the potential risk, the government already has all the data.
My question is, why do you want underage citizens to use social media platforms that a) have been proven to be damaging to their psychological health b) farm their data and store it far from our control c) don’t add anything to our economy.
Care to explain? Because it really fascinates me.
I don’t want them to use it. I agree with all your points.
I strongly disagree that mandatory ID on the net is the solution to this.
It also fascinates me that you’d think putting such a tool, with all the trouble it could cause if our countries stop being democracies, in the hands of government as a purported solution to children being on social media. That’s throwing out the baby with the bathwater
The tool already exists and is used for serious stuff (dealing with the treasury department, police, banks, bond auctions), the only difference is you would be forcing mainstream social media platforms to get an OK from that government’s platform.
Sorry but if you can’t trust your country’s system as a legitimate large scale shield then there is no possible defense against multinational conglomerates and at that point you’re better off just going bunker prepper, I don’t really know what your point is. Democracy doesn’t stick in low trust societies.