So, lemmy would be illegal under this vision?
an EU-wide approach may be more practical to implement
If you want to do this, do it to yourself. Keep me out of it.
So, lemmy would be illegal under this vision?
an EU-wide approach may be more practical to implement
If you want to do this, do it to yourself. Keep me out of it.
Google, Youtube and Facebook all forced real usernames for a time and it made no difference to the quality of conversation or how toxic it was. Indeed many people on Twitter/X use their real names and say some truly awful things.
Its not about anonymity, the real answer to getting less toxicity is good moderators that care about the subject matter. Its why Reddit is a mixed bag depending on the sub you are in, all depends on the moderators. If you want to fix social medias toxic name calling and everything else you should be forcing Facebook et el to have enough moderators to actually do the job well with interest in the various sub topics.
Google, Youtube and Facebook all forced real usernames for a time
They did? Haven't created a Google accouts in years.
At one point after Google bought YouTube, I signed into YT and was horrified to find that my username was replaced with my real name. I hadn’t been asked or alerted to a change, it was rolled out silently. I changed it back immediately, because holy shit that’s invasive. But yes, Google/YouTube forced real names (at least at that point in time.)
Welcome to TOR and I2P, ανώνυμοι. Also, you might try wireless mesh networks.
I'm kinda hoping a more mainstream darknet will appear. Basically like the role VPN providers have now but more .onion like. It's basically what common people use for stuff that's slightly at odds with the law but not too terrible. Like pirate bay. Soon adult sites and social media will fall in this category too if you desire anonymity.
Tor and I2P are too dark for the regular person to go to for their social media just because they want anonymity. There's too much really nasty stuff there. The kind of crime that actually harms real people, not some rich shareholders.
The problem of how to create anonymity even when the law forbids it, while still pushing back against the real crimes is a difficult one.
Basically I want my 2002 internet back but how?
Tor and I2P are too dark for the regular person to go to for their social media just because they want anonymity. There's too much really nasty stuff there. The kind of crime that actually harms real people, not some rich shareholders.
Uhm, no? You still have to actively search for and visit those sites, you don't just open tor browser and randomly land on dread
No but it's the association that makes you suspicious, gets exit nodes banned and just gives it a bad reputation. That damages more mainstream initiatives because nobody wants to be known as promotor of the silk road and csam network.
The services you're mentioning became as large and 'dark' as they are due to actually being secure services, any secure enough service will become like that eventually. Any service not like that is usually not secure enough unfortunately.
Tor is the only one that has that type of association because it's the biggest, so it always gets mentioned in the media.
Most people don't even know that there are other darknets like i2p.
On top of that, current Tor actually has pretty good latency and connection speeds when not on a bridge. Last time I tried it out, I was getting 80Mbps up/down. Several users here even regularly or exclusively access lemmy with Tor.
I think i2p should actually make an effort to promote higher base bandwidth sharing out of box because it scales easily since its completely decentralized and everyone is a node, unlike Tor. It could easily become more user friendly if nodes weren't starting off at like 128kbps speeds.
Plus like the other reply mentioned, you have to go out of your way to find the criminal stuff on darknets. Most users would probably be accessing clearnet stuff anyway, and .onion addresses on clearnet sites that have dedicated onion addresses like duckduckgo or some social media platforms.
As usual with Greek lawmaking, this is more a tactic to scare people and to use as a sledgehammer when the state wants to, rather than some grand scheme to force the population en masse to de-anonymize themselves. You have got to understand that Greece is undergoing democratic backsliding and was never a very strong rule or law state to begin with. Laws in Greece tend to be super strict but loosely enforced, which basically means the establishment, the police, the courts, can use them to throw the book at whomever they deem too dangerous. The Greek state is structurally incapable of being an actual totalitarian apparatus, but can be an effective authoritarian one when it needs to.
How, exactly, would they do that?
I'm sure they can force the big ones, like Facebook, but how on earth are you going to force all websites world wide for this?
The point is to make places like this illegal, such that we all have to use Facebook and other monitored services.
but how on earth are you going to force all websites world wide for this?
They won't, but if you regulate the FAAGs, you regulate about 90% of social media use.
again fellow humans. its why I 100% put all my real life information in my profile. its important to lay it all out there and be truthful as sincere beings of earth.
Back in the early 2000s, when the web was still somewhat safe, I used to post comments on a news site using my real name ... my reasoning being that if I was posting my opinion on something I should have the balls to use my rn.
Within about a year it started becoming more dangerous tho. I wasn't stalked but the responses became more personal and degrading, and the misogynists began showing up in force.
I get why Greece would want to do this, but as of right now it would be better if they made some hard rules for Meta et al to follow - with massive fines attached for being lax.
The beginning of mass surveillance...
top 50 comments