You must log in or register to comment.
The beginning of mass surveillance…
Beginning? Where have you been the last decade? Lol
Google, Youtube and Facebook all forced real usernames for a time and it made no difference to the quality of conversation or how toxic it was. Indeed many people on Twitter/X use their real names and say some truly awful things.
Its not about anonymity, the real answer to getting less toxicity is good moderators that care about the subject matter. Its why Reddit is a mixed bag depending on the sub you are in, all depends on the moderators. If you want to fix social medias toxic name calling and everything else you should be forcing Facebook et el to have enough moderators to actually do the job well with interest in the various sub topics.
Sounds like this Greek proposal is more about curbing bot accounts though. Every account should be tied to a real person, etc.
yeah sure
Welcome to TOR and I2P, ανώνυμοι. Also, you might try wireless mesh networks.
I’m kinda hoping a more mainstream darknet will appear. Basically like the role VPN providers have now but more .onion like. It’s basically what common people use for stuff that’s slightly at odds with the law but not too terrible. Like pirate bay. Soon adult sites and social media will fall in this category too if you desire anonymity.
Tor and I2P are too dark for the regular person to go to for their social media just because they want anonymity. There’s too much really nasty stuff there.
The problem of how to create anonymity even when the law forbids it, while still pushing back against the real crimes is a difficult one.
Basically I want my 2002 internet back but how?
Tor and I2P are too dark for the regular person to go to for their social media just because they want anonymity. There’s too much really nasty stuff there. The kind of crime that actually harms real people, not some rich shareholders.
Uhm, no? You still have to actively search for and visit those sites, you don’t just open tor browser and randomly land on dread
No but it’s the association that makes you suspicious, gets exit nodes banned and just gives it a bad reputation. That damages more mainstream initiatives because nobody wants to be known as promotor of the silk road and csam network.
So, lemmy would be illegal under this vision?
an EU-wide approach may be more practical to implement
If you want to do this, do it to yourself. Keep me out of it.
Greece would essentially have to wall themselves off from every country that doesn’t…
So if an instance was hosted in Greece, and this actually happens…
Yeah, it would effect that instance.
It seems like you just quoted a tiny bit of the sentence so it would seem like a possibility tho…
Critics highlight the technical complexity of the issue and suggest that an EU-wide approach may be more practical to implement. Meanwhile, the EU governments which consider such a measure will also need to address potential freedom of speech concerns – as digital rights campaigners have warned for years.
I quoted it because I have a problem with it and it wasn’t the main thing. Who in their right mind would even suggest this?
Because as a complete thought it clearly means:
For X to work we’d have to d Y, which has even less chances of happening.
And you picked out “we’d have to do Y” and presented that like it’s a plan anyone is proposing and not an example of how impossible it would be…
But I don’t think any of that is going to help
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.
The spread of malicious misinformation and propaganda has already led to millions of deaths.
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.
bro thought he really cooked with this one
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.
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.
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.
How, exactly, would they do that?
I’m sure they can force the big ones, like Facebook, but how on earth are you going to force all websites world wide for this?
The point is to make places like this illegal, such that we all have to use Facebook and other monitored services.
again fellow humans. its why I 100% put all my real life information in my profile. its important to lay it all out there and be truthful as sincere beings of earth.
