3 ms·

> No tech company will pay all those salaries to run a free service, so realistically that place is going to the be the DMV or similar. Or we legislate and ma

> No tech company will pay all those salaries to run a free service, so realistically that place is going to the be the DMV or similar. Or we legislate and make companies provide a minimum amount of service. You can't offload your operating expenses to the government.

shagie 4y ago
The advantage of the government is that it is rather difficult for it to ignore you. If you exist, you pay taxes type "you won't be ignored." However, if you are fraudster and get to the point where Apple and Facebook and Google all cancel their accounts with you for non-payment or use of stolen credit cards of whatever other reason that a company would decline to do business with an individual... Well, now you don't exist since the big IDPs won't auth you. Or, are we suggesting that we legislate so that companies are required to do business with individuals who are making fraudulent use of their services? The only reasonable organization to do this is the one that has an inherent obligation to do it and for better or worse, that's the government.
- vorpalhex 4y ago
  > The advantage of the government is that it is rather difficult for it to ignore you. If you exist, you pay taxes type "you won't be ignored." No, the Government has a long track record of successfully ignoring people who have hard to solve problems.[1] > ...we legislate so that companies are required to do business with individuals who are making fraudulent use of their services I suppose instead of just canceling your account and you losing your email, you could get arrested and charged. Or more likely end up having to use facial recognition[2] administered by a third party which is incapable of verifying people. If you think going to the Social Security Administration to have a paper card printed for you is bad, wait until you have to go to have your password reset... Or we can legislate Google, Apple and co that if someone holds an account with them and is banned they are entitled to a human led review process, possibly by a third party or other group. We can legislate that if you're a customer in good standing, they have to have human support available. Does this mean they might be more stingy with "free" services? Probably - that isn't a bad thing. Most people take offense to Walmart moving in to areas, taking a loss for a year or two to steal customers and close local stores and then jacking up prices. I don't understand why we're ok with big tech getting a pass to do the same thing digitally. [1]: https://www.grandforksherald.com/newsmd/va-audit-finds-thousands-of-u-s-veterans-waiting-for-health-care https://www.grandforksherald.com/newsmd/va-audit-finds-thous... [2]: https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/irs-facial-recognition-scans-tax-returns https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/irs-facial-recognition-s...

shagie 4y ago

The advantage of the government is that it is rather difficult for it to ignore you. If you exist, you pay taxes type "you won't be ignored." However, if you are fraudster and get to the point where Apple and Facebook and Google all cancel their accounts with you for non-payment or use of stolen credit cards of whatever other reason that a company would decline to do business with an individual... Well, now you don't exist since the big IDPs won't auth you. Or, are we suggesting that we legislate so that companies are required to do business with individuals who are making fraudulent use of their services? The only reasonable organization to do this is the one that has an inherent obligation to do it and for better or worse, that's the government.

vorpalhex 4y ago
> The advantage of the government is that it is rather difficult for it to ignore you. If you exist, you pay taxes type "you won't be ignored." No, the Government has a long track record of successfully ignoring people who have hard to solve problems.[1] > ...we legislate so that companies are required to do business with individuals who are making fraudulent use of their services I suppose instead of just canceling your account and you losing your email, you could get arrested and charged. Or more likely end up having to use facial recognition[2] administered by a third party which is incapable of verifying people. If you think going to the Social Security Administration to have a paper card printed for you is bad, wait until you have to go to have your password reset... Or we can legislate Google, Apple and co that if someone holds an account with them and is banned they are entitled to a human led review process, possibly by a third party or other group. We can legislate that if you're a customer in good standing, they have to have human support available. Does this mean they might be more stingy with "free" services? Probably - that isn't a bad thing. Most people take offense to Walmart moving in to areas, taking a loss for a year or two to steal customers and close local stores and then jacking up prices. I don't understand why we're ok with big tech getting a pass to do the same thing digitally. [1]: https://www.grandforksherald.com/newsmd/va-audit-finds-thousands-of-u-s-veterans-waiting-for-health-care https://www.grandforksherald.com/newsmd/va-audit-finds-thous... [2]: https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/irs-facial-recognition-scans-tax-returns https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/irs-facial-recognition-s...