5 ms·
> The only future of the internet is, sadly, proof-of-person and proof-of-residence on every public network interaction. I really hope we do not give up the in
by sebtron 2y ago
> The only future of the internet is, sadly, proof-of-person and proof-of-residence on every public network interaction.
I really hope we do not give up the internet's freedom as they suggest (and I doubt this would solve the spam problem).
- fxtentacle 2y agoAs much as I hate the idea, I'm convinced it would be a godsent for 99% of the population. Just imagine when you buy your SIM card the phone shop asks you: Do you want to limit incoming calls to people who you either called before or who have ever had a permanent residence in your country? 99% of spam and scam calls blocked, just like that. And just imagine how hilarious it would be if all those Nigerian prince emails had a note that says "actually, the sender of this email has never been to Nigeria"
- groestl 2y ago> actually, the sender of this email has never been to Nigeria Conversely, what if all those emails actually originate from Nigeria? Would it make them more legit?
- sebtron 2y ago99% of the population is also happy with carrying a spyware device everywhere and allowing Google to know everything you do in order to serve you better ads. I am not saying this does not have upsides, but it would be a nightmare to have it imposwd on you.
- boesboes 2y agoI don't think this is actually true, they are not happy about it, they just can't care because they have no real choice to do it differntly
- ultrasaurus 2y agoPersonally I'd start with the phone system guaranteeing that the person calling me owns the number that shows up on the call display. That's how people already assume it works and would cut 90% of the spammiest of spam calls while still letting folks with family in Nigeria choose to answer those calls.
- zandrew 2y agoAgree, as much as we hate AI-generated content, what’s to say that the content isn’t helpful to some in some instances? Also, as long as search engines do their job, engagement on high quality pieces will always justify having a human write art
- boesboes 2y agoCan you think of a single example how AI generated blogspam can be useful? I cannot. It's all just noise and bullshit. > as long as search engines do their job lolololololol, funniest thing i've read all day.
- berniedurfee 2y agoI think it’s the only way forward. I wrote a blog post about this recently. I think abandoning anonymity is the only way forward and I think it’ll be glorious.
- sverona 2y agoI read said blog post. The future you dream of would require, at minimum, vastly improved privacy laws and freedom of identity.
- berniedurfee 2y agoI agree, but I just don’t see an alternative future if we want to maintain an open platform for the global exchange of ideas. I also don’t feel like this changes the privacy debate. I’m not naive enough to think Google and 1000 other data brokers don’t know exactly who I am. Having a verifiably unique digital identity wouldn’t change that fact. I’d still want to control when and how data associated with my identity is monetized. Maybe regulators can force Google et al to digitally watermark data before they sell it, so if I find it elsewhere without my permission I can trace it back to Google and seek remuneration. I think the only way we get the internet back is to hold everyone accountable that wants to participate.
- sverona 2y agoWhat I mean, mostly, is that I shouldn't get doxxed for the crime of being queer on the internet the way some people I won't name like to do. There isn't really law surrounding this yet (in the US.)
- mentos 2y agoShare the blog post? I remember in my 2005 high school political science class proposing fake legislation to require ID to go on the internet. For the past 20 years I’ve shuttered at how awful an idea that would be and how naive I was as a kid. But now I am curious how all of the externalities would play out.