I really hope we do not give up the internet's freedom as they suggest (and I doubt this would solve the spam problem).
I really hope we do not give up the internet's freedom as they suggest (and I doubt this would solve the spam problem).
Just imagine when you buy your SIM card the phone shop asks you: Do you want to limit incoming calls to people who you either called before or who have ever had a permanent residence in your country? 99% of spam and scam calls blocked, just like that.
And just imagine how hilarious it would be if all those Nigerian prince emails had a note that says "actually, the sender of this email has never been to Nigeria"
Conversely, what if all those emails actually originate from Nigeria? Would it make them more legit?
I am not saying this does not have upsides, but it would be a nightmare to have it imposwd on you.
Also, as long as search engines do their job, engagement on high quality pieces will always justify having a human write art
> as long as search engines do their job
lolololololol, funniest thing i've read all day.
I think abandoning anonymity is the only way forward and I think it’ll be glorious.
I also don’t feel like this changes the privacy debate. I’m not naive enough to think Google and 1000 other data brokers don’t know exactly who I am.
Having a verifiably unique digital identity wouldn’t change that fact. I’d still want to control when and how data associated with my identity is monetized.
Maybe regulators can force Google et al to digitally watermark data before they sell it, so if I find it elsewhere without my permission I can trace it back to Google and seek remuneration.
I think the only way we get the internet back is to hold everyone accountable that wants to participate.
I remember in my 2005 high school political science class proposing fake legislation to require ID to go on the internet.
For the past 20 years I’ve shuttered at how awful an idea that would be and how naive I was as a kid.
But now I am curious how all of the externalities would play out.