4 ms·
> It's a slippery slope. Is it? I thought that was a logical fallacy? > This is the next two steps into 1984. How so? > Once you start mandating this, there
by Nursie 8mo ago
> It's a slippery slope.
Is it? I thought that was a logical fallacy?
> This is the next two steps into 1984.
How so?
> Once you start mandating this, there's no going back.
> The next generation will start associating wrongthink with government IDs.
Could you provide some more details on why you think this?
For a start I talked about a scheme in which you don't hand over ID.
- consp 8mo agoSlippery slope can be argumental if you provide the actual argumental reasoning for it as I was thought it could be used as deductive argumentation (though that does not say much). On itself it is a fallacy. I don't see how verifiable credentials with zero knowledge proofs provide that however.