I'll pass on putting my personal ID in the hands of an organization that sells data as a business. No matter how many flimsy laws they put in place to ban selling my PII, you'd have to be born yesterday to think that won't just delay the sale this new treasure-trove of information.
It would be great to have a system with a municipal agency where you sign up for an account at the DMV and then they will sign low-info attestations of identity ("this person is over 18", "this person resides in California", etc) in response to queries from orgs.
I'd much rather my sensitive digital information be stored with FB (knowing how much they spend on cyber security) than the CA DMV.
I know what you mean and also my information is stored at the DMV if I want a drivers' liscence - we have no choice in the matter. I think we must improve public systems.
Require a credit card associated with the account that matches the name of the account? (IIRC, you need to be 18+ to get a credit card)
(I recognize this goes outside the scope of GP, and this example may not be viable as I'm sure I am forgetting something here.)
I'm not under an illusion that I myself am personally anonymous. I'm sure I leave enough breadcrumbs around the Internet but that's my (dubious) choice. However, force me to verify my identity, use my real name, or enter a phone number and I lose that opportunity.
This nonsense that one more organization asking for ID is somehow the straw the broke the camels back is decades too late.
You say you are under no illusions, and then you demonstrate with words that you are under illusions.
You don't see it? It is clear as a bell to me.
It's a lot like saying "well now, this boat is full of holes, so rather than start patching them, let's just open several new ones".
I see it as the exact opposite: the gambler's fallacy. "This time we'll protect our privacy! I got a lucky feeling!!"
Doors open. Horse is gone. ID is actually smarter in this case because it will prevent fake accounts, which is a huge problem given their failures at policing the horrible things being done behind anonymity.
In addition:
> policing the horrible things being done behind anonymity
Anonymity isn't something you can just do away with and have a happy ending. In some parts of the world, anonymity is the only thing standing between people and their government. That's not something I'd like to see done away with. The Afghan people need anonymity now more than nearly anyone else in the world. As do the Chinese, the Turkmens, Eritreans, domestic violence victims, and anyone who lives in a world where being identified could lead to a swift, brutal death. What are these folks to do? Hide forever? If that's the result, then we are not just seeing social cooling, we're looking at a social ice age.
I see this as a win for society. The more friction we insert and the more people are discouraged to join these ad-ware social networks the better.