Submitted 11 months ago by L4s@lemmy.world [bot] to technology@lemmy.world
Nikki Haley vows to abolish anonymous social media accounts: ‘It’s a national security threat’::WPDE covers news, sports, weather, and local events in and around the Grand Strand, Pee Dee, and the Border Belt.
Ah yes, one step closer to a totalitarian state. Let’s go.
Fortunately it’s just empty, laughable rhetoric designed for Faceboomers who don’t understand the internet.
Republicans really hate privacy don’t they. In 20 years theyre gonna ban bathroom doors so they can make sure the “right” people are in the “right” bathrooms.
We really aren’t that far removed from codified segregation. I have parents, who grew up in the NE US, not even in the South, and they remember living with segregation. Separate bathrooms, separate water fountains, different entrances (if people of color were allowed in the establishment at all).
And they’re really not that old.
Such a move would lead to an increase in “civility,” Haley believes. “When they know their pastor, their family members can see it, it’s going to help our kids and it’s going to help our country," she said.
That’s what everyone said about posting next to your real name on Facebook. How did that turn out?
Pretty good, actually. It was nice of the traitors to upload pictures of themselves in the act on Jan 6.
I don’t have a pastor 😎
Well she’s right. But I don’t think anyone has an obligation to be “civil”. Posting anonymously is exactly what allows me to be honest without fear of backlash from family and friends. For better or worse.
their pastor
Aren’t they obliged to confess their sins to those anyway? Not that having that obligation stopped many from doing bad things anyway.
A pastor usually leads a Protestant church. Catholic churches are led by priests.
Confession of sins to (God though) a priest is a rite in the Catholic church, but not in Protestant churches. Protestant churches often encourage members to ask forgiveness for their sins directly to God through prayer.
There are more Catholics than protestants in the world, but there are more protestants than Catholics in the U.S. The type of Christianity most often associated with socially conservative Republican/MAGA primary voters is Protestant “evangelical” Christianity.
Evangelicals are a hardcore subset of Protestants who take the Bible literally. They’re sometimes called “Born-again Christians” because of their belief in the importance of personal conversion. That is, you’re not really a real Christian until, as an autonomous adult, you willingly choose to surrender yourself, mind body and soul, and devote your life to (your pastor’s teachings about) the teachings of Jesus.
Anyway, now I’ve done an eight-hours-later four-paragraph TED-talk riff on what is otherwise quite a fine and clever comment. I mean no offense and hope none is taken. I mostly just wanted to note that when Nikki Haley talks about “pastors,” she isn’t talking to Catholics; she’s talking directly to the GOP evangelical voter base.
Yes yes think of the children how can we not when it’s all you care about
It’s telling that pastors are the first people she wants to see what people are saying. Got to keep those sinners in line.
Civility is code for “stop complaining about how we treat you”. Jesse Gender has a pretty good video about civility politics (2hrs 21mins): youtu.be/-1TL9id26Ec
I agree with Nimarata Hailey, everyone should use their real names in social media and everywhere
Ohhh the irony
Hey, you never know, maybe their real name is Meridian Longitude. I’ve never heard of Longitude as a last name but I wouldn’t put it past some parents to name their kid Meridian.
I looked it up, and it’s actually spelled Nimrata. Which is funny, because it sounds like it would be a romantic language’s feminine form of nimrod.
That could be the actual etymology. I believe “Nimrod” is the name of a person in the Bible.
I would love to see how the Trump base would try to pronounce her real name.
Uh oh, social credit system coming from…the same people who bitched about social credit system?
Always has been. I remember when the people losing their damn mind about drag were horrified at North Korea’s approved haircut list.
lol I’d love to see how the US Government would be able to enforce such a thing.
Narrator: “They couldn’t”
Ah yes, more of that American freedom I hear so much about as an American.
Oh fuck off, would ya?
How will she round up all the minorities if they’re anonymous online?
Why even bother? It’s not like anything is ever done about the non-anonymous threats we currently see. Ffs.
Terrible idea. Look, the nerds set up the internet and from the beginning never used their real names. There’s a reason for that.
So if these genius’ knew better, Hayley should learn from that.
“I’m an internet Originalist. What did the founding nerds think? That’s all that matters.”
I enjoy this take quite a lot and will be using it myself.
As long as you take the metaphor to its natural end. That is, to only apply that test when it’s convenient for you. Otherwise, ignore it completely.
🤦
This is some 00s level politicians not understanding how the Internet works.
So she wants reddit and youtube like platforms to be named individuals. Is she going to then go after all the forums that still exist? If so, I guess I’ll see you guys next in a Dialup BBS.
Someone doesn’t understand the internet…
First they came for our shit post accounts, and I said nothing…
The dumb part is this vow doesn’t even make sense on the face of it to protect national security.
National security is now anyone’s feelings about mean things.
Republican feelings. About anything really.
The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers.
"Every political donation should be verified by their name. It’s a national security threat," she said. "When you do that, all of a sudden people have to stand by what they say and it gets rid of the Russian bots, the Iranian bots and the Chinese bots."
“Verified” bot accounts incoming, lol. Looking back at Reddit, and now at X, I am absolutely certain that the only people unable to get verified accounts will be people.
So, she really wants to just tank her own campaign, huh?
Don’t anybody tell her that the Fediverse exists. It might break her brain.
Can’t touch this 😎
This will help me afford a home! This will help me afford kids! This will make me feel safe at traffic stops! This will help my union at work! This will help our extreme temperature swings!
So how is she going to make them non-anonymous in a way that businesses can properly verify identity? Does every single social media site need to have its own ID analysis system for every state-ID? I mean that seems like it would be ridiculously hard.
For that to be practical, they’d need something nation-wide, and probably digital.
So, does she want to suggest to her fanbase a national digital ID? How would htat go?
To be fair, we all already use a national id with the social security numbers.
So pretty simply, the government would set up a SS number verification API, tech companies would call that, and use it to verify who you are.
It’s a terrible idea and I hate it, but that’s probably how it would work.
Except SS is a terrible form of authentication that is compromised already by the credit-reporting agencies for a significant fraction of American citizens.
Fuck that. We need to move away from using SSN for literally every-fucking-thing
Yes. I’m wondering if the identity would need to be verified and known/published to the social media site, or just verified to confirm not some Russian disinformation troll. Is there a way to use tokens, or hashes to allow a website to confirm if multiple accounts are the same user without knowing who the users are. I hate this all too, but if it had to be done maybe there’s a way to still protect some anonymity but allow verification.
An ID card, with a tattoo of a QR code for scanning. Christians will love that. Something something mark, something something beast. Haha
In some countries this would be dead simple; look at the nordics, where there are government supported, nationwide systems that verifies identity (you have to physically show up with your passport to collect your set up log in details).
I’d be quite happy if social media offered a way to link your identity in this way, but it’s quite a stretch to mandate it.
It wouldn’t be difficult. Online age verification systems already exist for stuff like vaping supplies.
I’m game for this…Republicans would disappear from the net overnight if they had to use their real names.
Right? This is another in a hilarious series of self-owns. The vast majority of problematic accounts are right wing assholes.
Seriously. They are too cowardly to even use their main accounts. A lot of them have alts because they know they’re unpopular.
I wish that were true but what actually happens is some people are nicer, but asshats are still asshats. People who might have called an asshat an asshat, now just respond politely, but the asshats grow more bold.
So what you’ll get is any sense of reasonable Republican to quiet down, and the worst Republicans to speak louder.
Trump can call people vermin and Republicans celebrate. Biden responds that such language is Nazi-like, since we can’t call him an actual Nazi, and Republicans scream back that Biden is overreacting.
It was not the land of the free?
Terrorism enabler, Nikki Haley
There are people who will defend this
There was a petition for the UK Parliament to implement what this politician wants by requiring verification for accounts (Piers Morgan was endorsing it iirc), and I believe a petition to not implement it under the pretense of it harming transgender individuals (e.g. deadnaming, having to come out to a stranger for verification).
Parliament did respond saying such legislation would stifle the freedom of expression, which is true, but it doesn’t matter when the UK has other legislation doing the same thing.
Ok as a trans person yeah we were my first thought, but my immediate second was abuse victims. Making cyberstalking easier will get people hurt, though from what I’ve seen of the far right, for some of them that’s the point.
The same people who say they have nothing to hide.
She doesn’t have enough support for anybody to defend it.
Rude.
Good luck
that bitch take away her name privileges i will not associate with her
Bishma@discuss.tchncs.de 11 months ago
But she’s fine with continuing the anonymous donations to all the PACs that fund her.
Ranvier@sopuli.xyz 11 months ago
But that’s different you see. Because money is speech and therefore needs to be protected, including by allowing total anonymity of donors. Whereas we’re talking about online accounts, where people of course never engage in speech or express ideas. Hey, wait a second that can’t be right. Hmmm, okay maybe it’s because she’s saying it’s a security risk, because you don’t know if they’re a foreign national spreading propaganda online. This is totally different from political donations, which of course have never been bribes from foreign powers masked by anonymity… Hey wait! She got us again. Almost like she’s some kind of shill who wipes her butt with the constitution while trying to create a crony supported facist state. No that can’t be.
But yeah, according to Republicans, money is speech, but speech is not speech. I’m expecting their next campaign platform to be 2+2=5.