| The answer seems pretty simple to me 20:25 - Feb 17 with 2782 views | WarkTheWarkITFC |
A free application should be made by all people 16 and over to the government for an online ID similar to a driving licence number which needs to be entered and verified on each social media platform, online account and so on.
That way everybody can be held accountable for what they say online. Children prone to abuse and bullying and so on must wait until they are old enough. It allows the proper policing of social media accounts where permanent bans can be issued by the platforms themselves for continued breaches or serious offences.
Individuals will then have to be careful what they say online in the same manner they would act to peoples faces or run the risk of action being taken. It’s the only way to get some control over the monster that’s been created.
The internet is a wonderful thing but in its infancy it’s allowed too much evil to prevail. The platforms aren’t interested and the police can’t possibly police it as it is. Such a measure that revolves around an individuals real life identity is the way forward. It can still be an anonymous user online but with them knowing that they can face repercussions. |  |
| |  |
| The answer seems pretty simple to me on 20:33 - Feb 17 with 2728 views | LankHenners |
What an absolutely terrible idea. |  |
| |
| The answer seems pretty simple to me on 20:38 - Feb 17 with 2712 views | HARRY10 |
blimey that could kill it off over night ! | | | |
| The answer seems pretty simple to me on 20:48 - Feb 17 with 2672 views | WarkTheWarkITFC |
| The answer seems pretty simple to me on 20:33 - Feb 17 by LankHenners |
What an absolutely terrible idea. |
Why?
You need your own name to buy a house, have a bank account or drive a car.
Social media is getting to the stage where people need to be held accountable. This is one way. No reason why Zuckerberg needs your details but a central organisation could hold your details and provide an ID that you then register.
What’s the alternative? Let people say whatever they want to people as invisible entities? You can’t say these things in the street without being arrested. Why should you be able to hide behind a keyboard and do it? | |
| |
| The answer seems pretty simple to me on 20:54 - Feb 17 with 2645 views | Plums |
Have you seen how difficult single sign on is to manage in one organisation? Imagine it across companies and countries which is what you’re advocating. Sorry, not a chance. |  |
| |
| The answer seems pretty simple to me on 21:00 - Feb 17 with 2626 views | LankHenners |
| The answer seems pretty simple to me on 20:48 - Feb 17 by WarkTheWarkITFC |
Why?
You need your own name to buy a house, have a bank account or drive a car.
Social media is getting to the stage where people need to be held accountable. This is one way. No reason why Zuckerberg needs your details but a central organisation could hold your details and provide an ID that you then register.
What’s the alternative? Let people say whatever they want to people as invisible entities? You can’t say these things in the street without being arrested. Why should you be able to hide behind a keyboard and do it? |
Ignoring the impracticality of all that...
Who polices it? Who decides what counts as ban-worthy? How will they differentiate between genuine hateful messages and jokes between friends? These are the problems Twitter, e.g., has already. ID won't solve that, all it would do is provide an extra, unnecessary data protection risk.
None of the things you've listed are comparable, and you have to provide something basic like a phone number or email address to sign up now anyway.
Unfortunately people are always going to say mean things, what needs to improve is people's attitudes which is a societal change and social media companies need to invest in improving their systems for dealing with such things. | |
| |
| The answer seems pretty simple to me on 23:00 - Feb 17 with 2522 views | Ewan_Oozami |
| The answer seems pretty simple to me on 20:54 - Feb 17 by Plums |
Have you seen how difficult single sign on is to manage in one organisation? Imagine it across companies and countries which is what you’re advocating. Sorry, not a chance. |
APIs - look at how many things you can use your Google or Facebook id to get into nowadays - a data information disaster waiting to happen... |  |
| |
| The answer seems pretty simple to me on 07:16 - Feb 18 with 2418 views | TractorWood |
| The answer seems pretty simple to me on 20:48 - Feb 17 by WarkTheWarkITFC |
Why?
You need your own name to buy a house, have a bank account or drive a car.
Social media is getting to the stage where people need to be held accountable. This is one way. No reason why Zuckerberg needs your details but a central organisation could hold your details and provide an ID that you then register.
What’s the alternative? Let people say whatever they want to people as invisible entities? You can’t say these things in the street without being arrested. Why should you be able to hide behind a keyboard and do it? |
We currently have numerous laws under which one could seek recourse for offence. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theweek.co.uk/97552/hate-speech-vs-free-speech-
I'd argue we should go the other way and go full US free speech. It's a radical mindset change but I think Britain would benefit in the long term. |  |
| |
| The answer seems pretty simple to me on 07:29 - Feb 18 with 2390 views | WarkTheWarkITFC |
You think that AFTER seeing what America has become????? | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| The answer seems pretty simple to me on 07:32 - Feb 18 with 2384 views | DanTheMan |
If you enforce login via a real life account, how do businesses communicate with each other, among the many, many other connected parts of the internet?
How do you stop the potentially incredibly serious abuse for a Government agent who could access everything you've ever said online, including criticism of said Government?
Who can see these logins?
This is not a "simple" idea you're proposing. The infrastructure needed alone would be pretty massive. |  |
| |
| The answer seems pretty simple to me on 07:39 - Feb 18 with 2367 views | WeWereZombies |
You have obviously thought about this answer but could you think on what the exact question is that you are asking? |  |
| |
| The answer seems pretty simple to me on 08:09 - Feb 18 with 2310 views | GeoffSentence |
That would be another,very big, step on the march towards a surveillance society.
You are Xi Jinping and I claim my five pounds. |  |
| |
| The answer seems pretty simple to me on 08:11 - Feb 18 with 2308 views | itfcjoe |
Any supposed simple solution to a complex problem will invariably make things worse |  |
| |
| The answer seems pretty simple to me on 08:45 - Feb 18 with 2265 views | Guthrum |
Given most socal media is based and/or hosted abroad, how do you enforce such a scheme - short of blocking external sites, as the Chinese do.
Social media lessons in school might be more effective. Or give people more meaning to their lives than the self-centered bantz-search for lols and likes on the internet. [Post edited 18 Feb 2020 8:48]
|  |
| |
| The answer seems pretty simple to me on 08:49 - Feb 18 with 2243 views | Guthrum |
| The answer seems pretty simple to me on 23:00 - Feb 17 by Ewan_Oozami |
APIs - look at how many things you can use your Google or Facebook id to get into nowadays - a data information disaster waiting to happen... |
Given it is a government scheme it would a) not work; and b) lose the data (either irretrievably or to someone else). | |
| |
| The answer seems pretty simple to me on 09:02 - Feb 18 with 2218 views | Guthrum |
| The answer seems pretty simple to me on 07:29 - Feb 18 by WarkTheWarkITFC |
You think that AFTER seeing what America has become????? |
It has only really exposed what people are actually like. There is no moral imperative in society to be nice to others*. Nor any real encouragement to do so. Isolated and frustrated people, constantly told to be angry, are lashing out at anyone within reach.
* Even Christianity in the US has largely abandoned that side of its message in favour of extreme social conservatism. | |
| |
| The answer seems pretty simple to me on 10:53 - Feb 18 with 2123 views | JakeITFC |
Yes, I agree that anonymous posts on the internet should be stopped WarkTheWarkITFC. |  | | |
| The answer seems pretty simple to me on 11:01 - Feb 18 with 2110 views | WarkTheWarkITFC |
| The answer seems pretty simple to me on 10:53 - Feb 18 by JakeITFC |
Yes, I agree that anonymous posts on the internet should be stopped WarkTheWarkITFC. |
That would be really hilarious is everyone on here didn’t already know I was called Dan anyway. | |
| |
| The answer seems pretty simple to me on 11:13 - Feb 18 with 2086 views | GeoffSentence |
| The answer seems pretty simple to me on 11:01 - Feb 18 by WarkTheWarkITFC |
That would be really hilarious is everyone on here didn’t already know I was called Dan anyway. |
I didn't | |
| |
| The answer seems pretty simple to me on 11:25 - Feb 18 with 2057 views | Mookamoo |
Berners Lee is trying to fix things. https://contractfortheweb.org/
I think this was a reaction to the personal privacy breakdowns, but could be tweaked to fix online abuse.
From what i understand, he advocates each user has control their personal data and allows platforms access to it at the user's discretion. It's not too much to ask that the platform is then allowed real world information on the user to prevent abuse. Seems a fair trade for a 'free' service. |  | | |
| The answer seems pretty simple to me on 12:09 - Feb 18 with 1986 views | WeWereZombies |
| The answer seems pretty simple to me on 11:13 - Feb 18 by GeoffSentence |
I didn't |
Neither did I...Geoff | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
