Jump to content

Make verified ID a requirement for opening a social media account.


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Grandad said:

Is the world, and society in general, better or worse for a free unregulated social media?

 

 

 

I would say worse on the whole, although it probably depends where in the world you are.

 

Your government has to be pretty bad for it to be worse than than a free for all

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two points re social media. 

Firstly they have no problem identifying and taking down anything anti vax/ anti covid /pro trump. I could go on. Wether you agree or not with that message they are stifling debate. Why can’t they act with equal force against these racist numpties. It really can’t be difficult but do they want to?

 I had a numpty post a video on Facebook running around outside my business premises with his ******** out. I complained to Facebook but that didn’t breach their standards. 

If the social media platforms only control views they find acceptable ( despite them being illegal) then maybe the problem lies with them?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, The Wall said:

Didn't Southgate say a lot of the recent abuse on Twitter can't from abroad?

 


Dunno


I think racism exists all over the world


We should be careful not to dismiss what our players have faced this weekend as from abroad though 


 


 


Owlstalk Shop

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, @owlstalk said:

 


Dunno


I think racism exists all over the world


We should be careful not to dismiss what our players have faced this weekend as from abroad though 


 

Absolutely. But I think the point was would us giving our personal details to big tech stop some lunatic in Durban or Alabama ( chosen completely at random obviously) posting this abhorrent poo ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

 


Dunno


I think racism exists all over the world


We should be careful not to dismiss what our players have faced this weekend as from abroad though 


 

 

I presume he said it to make that point i.e. it's not necessarily an 'England' problem, as it's been presented in the media

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Plonk said:

Absolutely. But I think the point was would us giving our personal details to big tech stop some lunatic in Durban or Alabama ( chosen completely at random obviously) posting this abhorrent poo ?

 

Not if they're posting on a platform where you have to have verified ID to use it surely?


 


Owlstalk Shop

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Grandad said:

Is the world, and society in general, better or worse for a free unregulated social media?

 

 

 

Obviously.

 

The alternative is state regulated social media.

 

It's not even close.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, owlinexile said:

 

Obviously.

 

The alternative is state regulated social media.

 

It's not even close.

 

You believe this should be totally unregulated by the government?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get the logic but as mentioned above there are many more things that could be done already if the will really existed, Twitter especially loves to censor replies and accounts over fairly tame debates.

Yet it often seems to not really bother with bots or anything outrageous.

 

Certainly posting under real names is a definite no. If the details for an account are held I don't see why that'd be needed anyway though. I admire anyone brave enough to post anywhere under their real names but think unless you are very insulated from any comebacks over disagreement it's just too dangerous.

Lawsuits and employment tribunals will be through the roof.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, The Wall said:

 

You believe this should be totally unregulated by the government?

 

The problem when governments step in, is that they are often so far detached from the real world, the decisons that they then make for us in the cheap seats are in no way the right ones. Governement is filled with people who have no clue how the world actually works outside of a well paid cushy bubble. Worse still, theres MPs jumping on the the whole bandwagon with this now,  yet weeks ago they were stoking the flames of discontent with the whole race and BLM thing. Imagine being told what you can and cannot now post by people who cannot even put a pair of matching shoes on, or by a world leader who cant even brush his hair or y someone who thought it would be okay to fake cry on libe TV about the NHS and then go and break all the rules they set up Etc .... Etc..... Governments filled with these idiots. 

 

This issue with online abuse has to lie with the platform providers to step up, fix and heavily moderate. they have made billions off our data and information and done nothing for it in return. If advertisers suddently started pulling out of agreements becuasse of the issue, you would see how quickly they could fix it and make it all go away.

 

Big changes are needed but getting the government involved is not a good move, needed or required. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, OwlinOldham said:

 

This issue with online abuse has to lie with the platform providers to step up, fix and heavily moderate. 

 

And what if they don't?

 

What if they're run by people who only care about money and power?

What if they're not bothered about people being exploited and abused?

What if the advertisers aren't bothered either?

 

Twitter is an absolute sewer, but they're not going bust anytime soon.

 

Do you think the directors of a big tech company will act more responsibly than a democratically elected government?

Mark Zuckerberg doesn't need your vote in 4 years

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, billyblack said:

Genuine question. 

 

If racism has no place in socciety and the police cant or shouldnt fix it, whats the answer?

 

Time, sadly, in incremental steps towards a better place.

 

It wasn't too long ago that people would go to "the p*** shop", or "the chin***" for dinner.  It was acceptable/normal language then.  It was even more recently that men with long hair were called "puffs", "gypos", or whatever.  Times change, societies generally improve over time.  Now we have same-sex marriage, no-one but a few bat an eyelid.  Homophobia hasn't gone away, but we have a society that largely accepts same-sex marriage.

 

We still have racism and it exists out there right now, and look at the reaction to it.  Absolutely called out about it, from the PM to all political parties, to  the general public, media and public organisations; outright condemnation from all quarters.  This is progress, no matter how bad it looks.  We'll never be rid of it 100% in my opinion, not in my lifetime, likewise for most common crimes.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, The Wall said:

 

And what if they don't?

 

What if they're run by people who only care about money and power?

What if they're not bothered about people being exploited and abused?

What if the advertisers aren't bothered either?

 

Twitter is an absolute sewer, but they're not going bust anytime soon.

 

Do you think the directors of a big tech company will act more responsibly than a democratically elected government?

Mark Zuckerberg doesn't need your vote in 4 years

 

 

I think they will if they start losing users hand over fist to other platforms due to the content they allow. If user numbers go down, Ad revenue goes down and they start losing out on data harvesting too.

 

And if they dont change? Then its on us to force change instead. People power could wipe millions off a companies value in just hours if need be. Id also go as far to say that Government really only cares about money and power and they really dont give a damn about people being exploited or abused either. If they did, the every day items we import that were made using ill treated labour from abroad would not be allowed. 

 

Regardless, lets not get into an argument about it or get into politics. The fact is that change needs to take place and soon. How that comes about in a sensible way that doesnt remove the freedoms of those who have no wish to identify themselves is going to be the real interesting bit. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Manwë said:

 

Time, sadly, in incremental steps towards a better place.

 

It wasn't too long ago that people would go to "the p*** shop", or "the chin***" for dinner.  It was acceptable/normal language then.  It was even more recently that men with long hair were called "puffs", "gypos", or whatever.  Times change, societies generally improve over time.  Now we have same-sex marriage, no-one but a few bat an eyelid.  Homophobia hasn't gone away, but we have a society that largely accepts same-sex marriage.

 

We still have racism and it exists out there right now, and look at the reaction to it.  Absolutely called out about it, from the PM to all political parties, to  the general public, media and public organisations; outright condemnation from all quarters.  This is progress, no matter how bad it looks.  We'll never be rid of it 100% in my opinion, not in my lifetime, likewise for most common crimes.

 

Agree. Whilst ever there are human beings we will never be devoid of crime, greed, hate etc

 

But we can make it more difficult step by step.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Wall said:

 

I presume he said it to make that point i.e. it's not necessarily an 'England' problem, as it's been presented in the media

 

 

Quote

 

England manager Gareth Southgate called the abuse "unforgivable".

"I know a lot of that has come from abroad, that people who track those things have been able to explain that, but not all of it," he told a news conference.

 

- CNN

 

I'm not sharing it, but it's as yet, uncredited, but there is something doing the rounds on media (the Mirror columnist), that 94% of the abuse in the most recent abuse came from outside the UK, or something along those lines. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, OwlinOldham said:

 

I think they will if they start losing users hand over fist to other platforms due to the content they allow. If user numbers go down, Ad revenue goes down and they start losing out on data harvesting too.

 

And if they dont change? Then its on us to force change instead. People power could wipe millions off a companies value in just hours if need be. Id also go as far to say that Government really only cares about money and power and they really dont give a damn about people being exploited or abused either. If they did, the every day items we import that were made using ill treated labour from abroad would not be allowed. 

 

Regardless, lets not get into an argument about it or get into politics. The fact is that change needs to take place and soon. How that comes about in a sensible way that doesnt remove the freedoms of those who have no wish to identify themselves is going to be the real interesting bit. 

 

I dont believe anybody has to make themselves known publicly, but the details in the user accounts should be there and held accordingly. If people dont want to use that platform thats up to them. People not wanting to open themselves can join sites where ID's are verified. Then all the scummers can just abuse each other as nobody else will be listening

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...