Abolish anonymity on the internet?

"2024 GOP presidential candidate Nikki Haley wants to abolish anonymity on the internet.

In a recent appearance on Fox News, Haley said that if she were to become president, her second priority—after forcing the platforms to disclose their algorithms—would be to require name verification of all social media users.

"It's a national security threat," she said. "It gets rid of the Russian bots, the Iranian bots, and the Chinese bots. And then, you're going to get some civility, when people know their name is next to what they say." "

Nikki Haley Wants To Make You Use Your Real Name on Social Media (reason.com)

I'm willing to grant this may increase civility. But I dont think thats worth the cost of undermining both the rights to freedom of expression and privacy, as well as setting this sort of precedent of controls over private industry. Also I think there's some massive problems in enforceability.

Some questions-
Is this just for Facebook and Twitter, or will you be posting as [your legal name here] on Political Forum as well?

Does this apply to 'ghost writers' and pseudonym authors of books, or only things 'published' (posted) on the internet?

How much of a 'crime' is it if I post a meme under a 'false identity'?

What protections will there be from 'internet rage' turning into real world violence once everyone knows who everyone else is, and is able to use that information to track them down?

I think this is a terrible idea, and probably a good indicator how a Nikki Haley presidency is likely to go... what about you? Good idea? Bad? Why?

 

When you talk of rights to freedom of expression and privacy, are you referring to the Constitution?

 

In the case of expression, yes. In the case of privacy, I'm referring to the SC's interpretation of the BoR and how it applies to privacy in a modern context.

Why do you ask?

 

In my opinion, politicians on the Left have a much greater proclivity to want to take away anonymity and free speech than the conservative Right (at least in America).
That being said, there still exist some Republican politicians who would take away the right to privacy and anonymity if they could, as this appears to show.
In my opinion this is pretty fascist.

In my opinion I also think some of this comes down to "female mentality" versus "male mentality". Unfortunately a lot of females when they formulate political beliefs have a tendency to want to apply a more "nanny state" approach, believing in more patriarchal control from government and seeing the population being analogous to children.
Normally I would have thought most of that does not exist in the Republican party, that this seems to show that some exceptions do exist.

I do wonder what ever happened to the "liberal Democrat" of the 80s and 90s that recognized the importance of concern for civil liberties issues.

 

It is a terrible idea. You might as well have Alexa broadcasting your preferences - it does. Or a pre employment scan of Facebook killing your hiring prospects. Or a scan of a site like this confronting the owner with a stupid comment you made: "Do we really want this guy?"
Or... the guy might be seen to be a Title 24 lawsuit waiting to happen.
Then there is the whole plethora of ammunition the progressives will use to destroy you.

 

There was a situation here in this board - evening time with a troll attacking and threatening members - saying he would drive to their homes and shoot them. No mods were on and I was worried about others (nd yes it is possible to trace IP addresses) So I made him focus on me. Figured if he was dumb enough to try and drive to my place he was in for a long wet submerged trek across the Pacific Ocean.

 

I am for Anominimity in the USA, but all traffic from outside the USA needs to be flagged by Country of Origin - All VPN traffic from outside the USA to a VPN in the USA needs to be tagged as well

 

Too Orwellian for me to support, but I would still take Nikki over Trump or Biden.

 

Can they do that tho? Seems like trying to verify that people are foreign will eventually end requiring that we verify we're not...

 

they could, would require the will to do it, I think that will happen someday

I do not want to see it, but I think Anominimity is going to die

heck, IP 6 was designed so each device had it's own IP

 

'someday' doesnt work for me. Get back to me when the tech is there, and I'll reconsider.

 

the gov will push it someday, I think first they want your car and cell phones to track you, next comes your network traffic identifying you

 

I dont doubt it.

 

It would never fly but probably would help address the bile and rhetoric that has fanaticized much of today's political world in this country. If you can't hide behind a screen name, you're far more likely to not contribute to the massive amounts of **** on the internet.

As far as Nikki Haley goes, we should be so lucky to get her instead of Trump. But alas she probably has no chance. The love for the character Trump plays on TV is pretty ingrained.

 

~ Hailey and Graham should go start their own country.

 

This is a great idea — place a little flag next to the name of people from where their IP originates.

I wonder if that could be implemented here? It would be interesting to see which members suddenly stop posting.

 

agree, though as of now, people could use a VPN and look like from any country, many use that now to trick companies like Netflix

so it would help, but until that was addressed, would not be full proof

I think we would find many foreign governments trying to manipulate us from the inside - pretending to be Americans

 

That is pretty much being done already. But as technology as brought data gathering to extreme levels of efficiency, we are all being monitored digitally.
Today it is "to, from, and key words". All that is missing is the A.I. needed to assemble and put the data in context and issue FISA, DoJ, local and state warrants rubber stamped by Mr. Muffet the "We know what you ate for dinner last night Office"

 

not being presented to users though on social media sites, which opens the door for other governments to easily spread their propaganda

 

there will still be propaganda. it will just only be allowed from approved sources. the problem is that the propaganda isn't going to be any less damaging, it will just be less diverse.

 

It would find itself immediately going to war.

 

foreign propaganda is dangerous

 

interesting

"Meta shuts down thousands of fake Facebook accounts spreading polarizing political content" 11/30/23

https://thehill.com/policy/technology/4335328-meta-shuts-down-fake-facebook-accounts/

"Meta said Thursday that it removed 4,789 Facebook accounts in China that targeted the United States by posing as Americans and spreading polarizing content about U.S. domestic politics and U.S.-China relations."

"The accounts included fake photos, names and locations in an effort to appear like average American citizens expressing views on U.S. politics. In reality, the accounts originated in China, Meta said."

 

ya, but its not any worse than domestic propaganda

 

much worse as it's used by a foreign entity to destroy of from the inside out

Doesn't mean domestic propaganda is not also bad, just not even in the same ballpark