4 ms·
As always when this pops up, I'm asking what options are there to prove that a user is human that are more privacy friendly (and as the author puts it, less cre
by yreg 6mo ago
As always when this pops up, I'm asking what options are there to prove that a user is human that are more privacy friendly (and as the author puts it, less creepy).
Because the problem World claims to try to solve is real.
- Teever 6mo agoI’m glad you asked. I’m working in a competing product named Globe that will offer twice the service at half the cost with a greater emphasis on security and privacy than Sam Altman ever could. All you need to do is send me your biometrics, and if you don’t feel like doing that willingly I’ll use the billions of dollars of capital that my friends and I have to coerce you into doing so because I’ll leave you with no other choice. The problem we at Globe are trying to solve is real and necessary to solve. People who oppose it are obviously the problem, not me and the existence of a problem is sufficient reason for me to coerce people into accepting my solution without government oversight because my friends have been diligently working hard to reduce the ability of governments around the world to do so.
- dmitrygr 6mo agodriver license number, notaries can offer the service
- yreg 6mo agoHow does the notary confirm to Tinder that you are a real user? There needs to be some glue. I don't think anything like that exists. And can't you just visit 100 notaries and create 100 accounts?
- dmitrygr 6mo agonotary verifies but does not disclose your ID. they are licensed and have regulations and enforcement. glue can be created.
- Terr_ 6mo agoRecycling a comment _____ Imagine A system where there's a vending machine outside City Hall, you spend $X on a charity for choice, and you get a one-time, anonymous token. You can "spend" it with a forum to indicate "this is probably a person or close enough to it." Misuse of the system could be curbed by making it so that the status of a token cannot be tested non-destructively.
- yreg 6mo agoI like the idea, but I'm not sure it solves the problem enough. I'm not convinced that there is an $X where the service is not too cost prohibitive for humans and at the same time cost prohibitive enough to discourage bots. In the specific case of Tinder you might as well just make Tinder paid and skip all of this.
- JohnFen 6mo agoI think a key part of the idea is that it's a vending machine you'd have to physically interact with and not an online service. That would filter out bots pretty effectively.
- Terr_ 6mo agoThere's a rather rich spectrum of solutions, and too-often often the debate becomes a binary of comprehensively-identified versus uncontrolled-anonymity". By clarifying our requirements, we can get better mixes of cheapness and privacy. For the average web-forum, you don't really need to know that an account is a human, let alone a unique human. It's enough to know that whatever is on the other end (A) likely cares about what happens to the account if it doesn't follow rules and (B) probably isn't running a hundred sockpuppets, or is at least taking a risk doing so.
- onel 6mo agoYubikey type device issued by an authority trusted by the website owner. Same as we have it now with browsers and SSL certificates. We can even have a key issued by the government as a digital ID card. They can be used to check: is over 18, is real person, for digital signature, etc.