3 ms·
> > Make trust the default, not the exception. > I'm not here to advocate either way for anonymity Is trust and anonymity somehow disconnected in your mind? B
by tal8d 6y ago
> > Make trust the default, not the exception.
> I'm not here to advocate either way for anonymity
Is trust and anonymity somehow disconnected in your mind? Before you answer that, I'll point out that I didn't say pseudo-anonymity.
> No problems with my CAC, despite OPM's failure.
So you're either a post breach boot or you haven't yet noticed a personal impact. While I've never had the desire, due to the contents of my OPM file, I could never do any business in China under my own name without drawing a disruptive amount of attention. That may or may not be a problem in the future, nobody can say. But it can be said it should have never happened in the first place, as there was ample well reasoned warning and precedent. Anybody else remember the clipper chip? What about that "golden key" stupidity?
Whatever policy Facebook has at the moment is completely beside the point. What you are talking about would require the force of law. This proposal has been floated numerous times, tying online activity to a federally issued identifier.
> Elect better legislators...
lol
- toomuchtodo 6y agoI hold contractor status, and I would never step foot in China (for obvious reasons). I think we see things fundamentally differently, and I wish you well.
- tal8d 6y agoI don't wish you ill, but I wish you and your ideas had no effect on me. Which is more to the point - you are focusing on the wrong part of the problem. Trust and disinformation isn't the problem, the problem is the second order effects. It would be easier to reduce the potential damage that useful idiots and victims of propaganda can do to everyone else, than it would be to pull off the impossible trust+anonymity+benevolentFed scheme.