4 ms·

Facebook's real name policy, Youtube's real name policy, Twitter's blue checks.. This hasn't worked. Not once. Full stop. IRC continues to be the best place t

Facebook's real name policy, Youtube's real name policy, Twitter's blue checks.. This hasn't worked. Not once. Full stop. IRC continues to be the best place to have real conversations. Discord is pretty great too and even has built in alt support.

pphysch 5y ago
> Facebook's real name policy, Youtube's real name policy, Twitter's blue checks.. These are all opt-in verification mechanisms, likely with the main purpose of protecting the rights of influencers and other content creators so that the platforms keep making money off them. I'm talking about a single federal government-run identity provider that obsoletes all the above schemes. That's what we need and where we are headed, whether we like it or not. It is absurd that we still rely on SSNs and home address verification in 2022.
- vorpalhex 5y ago
  You mean like the IRS hiring a private shady biometric company to try and match you to a grainy drivers license photo before they canceled the whole thing due to the bureacratic nightmare hellscape it spawned?
  - pphysch 5y ago
    That sounds awful. No, it would need to be an in-house thing, a proper government agency, complete with their own datacenters and software teams across the US. Probably impossible with the current "print $$$ and outsource" culture in Washington.
    - vorpalhex 5y ago
      So like India's system that was immediately filled with corruption, leaks and outages?
- amadeuspagel 5y ago
  Facebook's real name policy isn't opt in.
  - pphysch 5y ago
    Facebook is opt-in. Haven't touched the thing in a decade, with virtually zero inconvenience.
- throwawayboise 5y ago
  The last people you want running an identity provider are the federal government. You don't want to give them the power to make you an un-person if you some day are not supporting the correct party or agenda. Sometimes you need to know who a person is, most of the time you don't. I don't need to know who you are to sell you a cup of coffee, or really anything you are paying for in full. If I'm lending you money, I need to know to my satisfaction that you are who you say you are, in case I need to find you later to collect. That's my problem and your problem to work out. The Federal Government has no role here.
  - pphysch 5y ago
    > You don't want to give them the power to make you an un-person if you some day are not supporting the correct party or agenda. Too bad. They already have this power -- and more, they can un-life you -- and always have, and always will until they get replaced in the next revolution.
- majinuub 5y ago
  Doxxing everyone by government mandate isn't the answer, nor should it ever be the answer.
  - pphysch 5y ago
    It is just SSNs but updated for the 21st century. Your dox would probably be a lot safer, because they would be held by 1 accountable public agency rather than 10 unaccountable private for-profit corporations.
    - vorpalhex 5y ago
      Let's not forget the OPM "breach", which was done so trivially they might have well posted the admin creds in the newspaper...

pphysch 5y ago

> Facebook's real name policy, Youtube's real name policy, Twitter's blue checks.. These are all opt-in verification mechanisms, likely with the main purpose of protecting the rights of influencers and other content creators so that the platforms keep making money off them. I'm talking about a single federal government-run identity provider that obsoletes all the above schemes. That's what we need and where we are headed, whether we like it or not. It is absurd that we still rely on SSNs and home address verification in 2022.

vorpalhex 5y ago
You mean like the IRS hiring a private shady biometric company to try and match you to a grainy drivers license photo before they canceled the whole thing due to the bureacratic nightmare hellscape it spawned?
- pphysch 5y ago
  That sounds awful. No, it would need to be an in-house thing, a proper government agency, complete with their own datacenters and software teams across the US. Probably impossible with the current "print $$$ and outsource" culture in Washington.
  - vorpalhex 5y ago
    So like India's system that was immediately filled with corruption, leaks and outages?
amadeuspagel 5y ago
Facebook's real name policy isn't opt in.
- pphysch 5y ago
  Facebook is opt-in. Haven't touched the thing in a decade, with virtually zero inconvenience.
throwawayboise 5y ago
The last people you want running an identity provider are the federal government. You don't want to give them the power to make you an un-person if you some day are not supporting the correct party or agenda. Sometimes you need to know who a person is, most of the time you don't. I don't need to know who you are to sell you a cup of coffee, or really anything you are paying for in full. If I'm lending you money, I need to know to my satisfaction that you are who you say you are, in case I need to find you later to collect. That's my problem and your problem to work out. The Federal Government has no role here.
- pphysch 5y ago
  > You don't want to give them the power to make you an un-person if you some day are not supporting the correct party or agenda. Too bad. They already have this power -- and more, they can un-life you -- and always have, and always will until they get replaced in the next revolution.
majinuub 5y ago
Doxxing everyone by government mandate isn't the answer, nor should it ever be the answer.
- pphysch 5y ago
  It is just SSNs but updated for the 21st century. Your dox would probably be a lot safer, because they would be held by 1 accountable public agency rather than 10 unaccountable private for-profit corporations.
  - vorpalhex 5y ago
    Let's not forget the OPM "breach", which was done so trivially they might have well posted the admin creds in the newspaper...