6 ms·

At the scale of Google and Facebook, I'm not sure it's possible to individually "know" their customer.

by blitmap 9y ago

gaius 9y ago
It’s possible for retail banks with tens of millions of customers to KYC, I’m sure it’s not an insurmountable problem
- jstanley 9y ago
  It's surely possible, but would it be a good thing? When I first starting posting things online, the general advice was "don't use your real name", "don't say anything that will reveal where you live", etc. Now we're not only using our real names but advocating for identity verification of all commenters? How did this go so wrong so fast?
  - tcd 9y ago
    Facebook made the transition plausible; a formal social network, then slowly, the creep began, where it's now acceptable to use your real name online. I still heed the advice of the 90's: NEVER use your real name. We still have that choice thankfully.
    - LV-426 9y ago
      > I still heed the advice of the 90's: NEVER use your real name. Where was this advice given? In my experience, people online in the 1990s routinely used their real names, and emails (in the late 90s obfuscated or removed due to spam), on the primary social-network at that time (Usenet), and people still do to this day.
- mindslight 9y ago
  I can't not respond to "KYC" being thrown around as if it's a legitimate concept. It's a whitewash term for fascist [0] surveillance. [0] The literal merging of the state and corporations to achieve a level of totalitarianism that would be hard for either to achieve on its own.
duality 9y ago
If they did, people may not like that very much either.
juicyfroot 9y ago
And yet more money gets laundered toward terrorism by the banks themselves than just individuals. See HSBC. When 7B was laundered toward terrorist orgs, the US justice system did not do anything, despite finding them guilty. The reasoning was that it would shake confidence in banks. This has nothing to do with combating extremism or terrorism, for there have been numerous counts of the governments having the opportunity to shutdown a large portion of global terror and instead decided it would be bad to prevent it due to political and economic reasons. This is about governments and banks preparing for the inevitable collapse that is coming due to loose fiscal policy, inflating the currency to fund unjust wars. Western nations have become Marxist/Communist with "equality rights talk" for all and at the sametime importing millions of Muslim immigrants wholesale (who 80%+ vote Democrat)

At the scale of Google and Facebook, I'm not sure it's possible to individually "know" their customer.

gaius 9y ago

It’s possible for retail banks with tens of millions of customers to KYC, I’m sure it’s not an insurmountable problem

jstanley 9y ago
It's surely possible, but would it be a good thing? When I first starting posting things online, the general advice was "don't use your real name", "don't say anything that will reveal where you live", etc. Now we're not only using our real names but advocating for identity verification of all commenters? How did this go so wrong so fast?
- tcd 9y ago
  Facebook made the transition plausible; a formal social network, then slowly, the creep began, where it's now acceptable to use your real name online. I still heed the advice of the 90's: NEVER use your real name. We still have that choice thankfully.
  - LV-426 9y ago
    > I still heed the advice of the 90's: NEVER use your real name. Where was this advice given? In my experience, people online in the 1990s routinely used their real names, and emails (in the late 90s obfuscated or removed due to spam), on the primary social-network at that time (Usenet), and people still do to this day.
mindslight 9y ago
I can't not respond to "KYC" being thrown around as if it's a legitimate concept. It's a whitewash term for fascist [0] surveillance. [0] The literal merging of the state and corporations to achieve a level of totalitarianism that would be hard for either to achieve on its own.

duality 9y ago

If they did, people may not like that very much either.

juicyfroot 9y ago

And yet more money gets laundered toward terrorism by the banks themselves than just individuals. See HSBC. When 7B was laundered toward terrorist orgs, the US justice system did not do anything, despite finding them guilty. The reasoning was that it would shake confidence in banks. This has nothing to do with combating extremism or terrorism, for there have been numerous counts of the governments having the opportunity to shutdown a large portion of global terror and instead decided it would be bad to prevent it due to political and economic reasons. This is about governments and banks preparing for the inevitable collapse that is coming due to loose fiscal policy, inflating the currency to fund unjust wars. Western nations have become Marxist/Communist with "equality rights talk" for all and at the sametime importing millions of Muslim immigrants wholesale (who 80%+ vote Democrat)