4 ms·

There are definitely multiple viewpoints on "anonymous trolls." I don't understand how allowing anonymity fails to address all of them. - the EU GDPR effectiv

There are definitely multiple viewpoints on "anonymous trolls." I don't understand how allowing anonymity fails to address all of them. - the EU GDPR effectively demands that services can be used anonymously, and so did the old §13 TMG law in Germany. This allows anonymity. - service providers (Facebook most infamously) try to skirt these laws because they sell "authenticity" of users as part of their product appeal, and others to combat spam Consumers/users are not forced to use these products... as with any other product, they are forced to balance the commercial offerings' pros and cons. If they value anonymity highly, they may choose to not partake. - the people demand the ability to post on the Internet without having to reveal their identity - say, in customer or employer review sites, or when unionizing or protesting against the government This allows anonymity. - Employers and brands do not want anonymous reviews due to the libel potential They can decide (or not) to require anonymity for their offering, with attendant effects on engagement and community trust. - people wish to watch porn or sext anonymously, because of the risk that a link between their porn habits and identity poses - the best example here is the prosecution of gays via Grindr This allows anonymity. - governments do not like anonymous commenting either, partially because they're oppressive, and partially because of the potential for hostile acts by enemy nations such as the Russian and Chinese "fake news" campaigns It seems that oppression is bad, so without a compelling reason, anonymity should be allowed. "Fake news": adults should be allowed to believe in or be exposed to the information of their choice.. particularly because no one can be trusted to be the arbiter of "fake."

mschuster91 3y ago
> It seems that oppression is bad, so without a compelling reason, anonymity should be allowed. "Fake news": adults should be allowed to believe in or be exposed to the information of their choice.. particularly because no one can be trusted to be the arbiter of "fake." The last six years should have proven that most adults are not capable of judging whether a piece or source of information is trustworthy or not, hence the call for government regulation in the face of digital warfare - and yes, what Russia and China did to Western populations would have been classified as an act of war some decades ago.
- goatlover 3y ago
  And the last six thousand years of government have proven that most officials are not trustworthy for having say over what source of information adults should have access to.
  - 1827163 3y ago
    Well in my opinion the government has absolutely no right whatsoever to dictate to the population what media they should have access to or not. It's not the government's business to regulate what we are reading, period. Such regulation belongs in dictatorships and authoritarian regimes, not free societies. Should the government try to control what we can read, then under the concept of natural rights, it has no authority to do so. And we might even have an obligation to disobey the government - yes, civil disobedience, something that I strongly advocate for in that case. Enough is enough with this censorship and thought control that has no place in a secular, tolerant and free society.
- t-3 3y ago
  > what Russia and China did to Western populations Do you have any examples? Everything I've heard claimed as a Russian psyop has later turned out not to be at all. I haven't heard any claims of Chinese propaganda gaining traction at all.
  - mschuster91 3y ago
    A lot of the funding behind the campaigns of the German far-right is suspected to originate from Russian money, not to mention the ample airtime the party and other far-right figures such as Ralph Niemeyer [1] got on Russia Today. As for Chinese propaganda: TikTok. It has already been shown to engage in censorship e.g. against the LGBT community. This app is a direct wire from Beijing to the minds of our children. [1] https://www.psiram.com/de/index.php/Ralph_Thomas_Niemeyer https://www.psiram.com/de/index.php/Ralph_Thomas_Niemeyer
  - 1827163 3y ago
    Russia is trolling social media on both extremes of the political spectrum, in order to destabilize the west. They are trying to polarize the population in a deliberate 'divide and conquer' strategy.

mschuster91 3y ago

> It seems that oppression is bad, so without a compelling reason, anonymity should be allowed. "Fake news": adults should be allowed to believe in or be exposed to the information of their choice.. particularly because no one can be trusted to be the arbiter of "fake." The last six years should have proven that most adults are not capable of judging whether a piece or source of information is trustworthy or not, hence the call for government regulation in the face of digital warfare - and yes, what Russia and China did to Western populations would have been classified as an act of war some decades ago.

goatlover 3y ago
And the last six thousand years of government have proven that most officials are not trustworthy for having say over what source of information adults should have access to.
- 1827163 3y ago
  Well in my opinion the government has absolutely no right whatsoever to dictate to the population what media they should have access to or not. It's not the government's business to regulate what we are reading, period. Such regulation belongs in dictatorships and authoritarian regimes, not free societies. Should the government try to control what we can read, then under the concept of natural rights, it has no authority to do so. And we might even have an obligation to disobey the government - yes, civil disobedience, something that I strongly advocate for in that case. Enough is enough with this censorship and thought control that has no place in a secular, tolerant and free society.
t-3 3y ago
> what Russia and China did to Western populations Do you have any examples? Everything I've heard claimed as a Russian psyop has later turned out not to be at all. I haven't heard any claims of Chinese propaganda gaining traction at all.
- mschuster91 3y ago
  A lot of the funding behind the campaigns of the German far-right is suspected to originate from Russian money, not to mention the ample airtime the party and other far-right figures such as Ralph Niemeyer [1] got on Russia Today. As for Chinese propaganda: TikTok. It has already been shown to engage in censorship e.g. against the LGBT community. This app is a direct wire from Beijing to the minds of our children. [1] https://www.psiram.com/de/index.php/Ralph_Thomas_Niemeyer https://www.psiram.com/de/index.php/Ralph_Thomas_Niemeyer
- 1827163 3y ago
  Russia is trolling social media on both extremes of the political spectrum, in order to destabilize the west. They are trying to polarize the population in a deliberate 'divide and conquer' strategy.