Comment on Yes, I definitely do see the irony of this being posted to X
gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 1 day agoi’ve said before that we’re faced with two options:
- either introduce a system that can tell you what account is run by an actual human being and which account is not. that could be done in an anonymity-preserving way with codes that you have to get in person (like, from a local library) and then use as a cryptographic signature for online accounts. it’s a bit techy, but doable.
- or we accept that machines casually pass the Turing Test and we’re probably talking to AIs online.
whoisearth@lemmy.ca 1 day ago
On point 1. Every time stuff like this comes up in policy discussions there is pushback maybe because the narrative is too vague I don’t know. The gist is the requirement for named users online not aliases, or a way to tie those aliases easily to named users if required.
People don’t like this. I would argue it’s too late to get a consensus and stuff like Facebook tying your phone and name to an account is needed.
The nuance is how companies and governments use that information and in that we continue to fail hard. My name and my number is my data to decide how to share NOT for Facebook or anyone else.
Penny arcade provided decades ago the internet anonymity problem and it’s growing alarmingly fast.
We all are or have been that person to yell shitcock! at times.