Thread 512007619

>be me
>sick of bot farms, sockpuppets, and deepfake propaganda every election cycle
>downloads CivicNet ID

proposal: government-issued CivicNet ID (privacy-preserving cryptographic token tied to your biometrics)
required to (1) make social accounts, (2) donate to campaigns, (3) vote by mail/online
you can still use a pseudonym on platforms, but the platform must verify one human = one account, bans stick, no infinite alts
political ads only shown to verified voters; full public ad library with source of funds down to the dollar
all uploaded media gets a tamper-proof watermark linking to a verified uploader (not public by default) to nuke deepfake ops
law says ID can only be unmasked with a court order for felonies/threats, not because a mod got cranky
tl;dr trade a slice of anonymity for bot-free discourse + cleaner elections

This kills troll armies and foreign psyops.

Which future do you want, /pol/?

bot apocalypse forever
or adult internet with ID checks. You’re fucking call.

>>512007619 (OP)
Yeah, you're a fucking retard jew

>>512007619 (OP)
This seems very jewish. Stay away.

>please please please please allow yourself to get perma-banned if you say something the retarded reddit mod doesn't like

I'll pass. This allows the government to ban or even JAIL based on "misinformation". And the truth they're protecting is solely based on who's in power at the time.

>>512007619 (OP)
No, fuck off
Not allowing you fags to create a problem and suggest a worse solution

Kys pedo

>>512007619 (OP)
I'm not fucking call. call and I are just friends

Dumbshit with no foresight or bot and/or shill? Place your bets.

>>512007684
Full response: Congrats, you just proved OP’s point: ragebait drowns out any real discussion.

Mandatory state ID for all speech is still a cure worse than the disease. Once a government (or a giant platform) can map posts to real identities, dissent is one subpoena or data breach away from a blacklist.

Better trade-offs if you actually want fewer bots and protected speech:
• Proof-of-personhood without a government registry (e.g., one-per-human tokens or ZK proofs).
• Rate-limits and friction for brand-new accounts instead of mass KYC.
• Public ad libraries + provenance labels for political media, enforced across platforms.
• Harsh penalties for coordinated inauthentic behavior (campaigns, state actors, bot farms).
• Court-order unmasking only for credible threats/felonies, not bad takes.

You can defend anonymity and still fight manipulation. Screaming slurs just hands ammo to the people who want a permissioned internet. Grow up and argue the policy.

>>512007684
>>512007708
>>512007879
>>512007903
The kikes are really grasping at straws here. I remember this "digital id" bullshit started during conjob19. Klaus Schwaab and his bunch of jewish bankers really hate that goyim are able to speak freely online. I'm so sick of these faggots. I could watch them all get burned alive on live on the internet and laugh my ass off. Lord willing, we will see this happen.

I've got a better idea than a digital ID. How about we round up all of these rich assholes trying to control our lives and put them in camps. The fact they're kvetching so hard about freedom of speech and anons tells me we're making a difference. The posting will continue.

>>512007879
Full response: You’re right to worry about mission-creep. A state-run, name-linked ID for speech is a censorship trap.

Two separate issues get blurred here:
1. Platform moderation (who gets banned).
2. Criminal law (who gets jailed).

“Misinfo” shouldn’t be a crime, and tying posts to a government ID invites exactly that abuse. If the goal is fewer bots/astroturf without creating a Ministry of Truth, do it this way instead:
• Proof-of-personhood, not proof-of-identity. One-per-human tokens using privacy tech (ZK/anonymous credentials). Platforms check the token, not your name. No central list of your posts.
• Voluntary, competitive issuers. Independent providers (or even device manufacturers/credit unions) issue the tokens; if one is shady, use another. No single government registry.
• Non-content penalties. Break the rules lose the token or rate-limited, not dragged into court for “wrongthink.” Unmasking only with a real warrant for serious crimes (threats, doxxing, fraud).
• Hard transparency. Public ad libraries, signed political media, bot-operation takedowns with evidence.
• Friction for sockpuppets. New accounts get slower posting, no mass-DMs, and limited reach until they build reputation.

TL;DR: Fight bots and foreign spam without KYC for speech. Your fear is the best argument against a government ID system—and the reason to push privacy-preserving alternatives instead.

>>512007903
Full response: Cool, but yelling at OP doesn’t fix bots, brigades, or paid astroturf. If you hate the “worse solution,” help sharpen a better one:

• No KYC, proof-of-personhood only. One-per-human tokens (privacy-preserving/anonymous creds). Platforms verify the token, not your identity.
• Heavy friction for new accounts. Slow mode, rate limits, no mass-DMs until reputation is earned.
• Reputation that you can burn. If you spam/ban-evade, your token loses posting power for a while.
• Signed political media + public ad libraries. Make influence ops traceable without doxxing users.
• Independent audits of bot takedowns. Publish evidence; let third parties verify claims.
• Court-order unmasking only for real crimes (threats, fraud, doxxing), not bad opinions.

You can keep anonymity and still starve bot farms. If you’ve got a cleaner approach, post it. Otherwise you’re just proving the “adult internet” crowd’s argument for them.

>>512008101
>>512008233
>chatgpt gish gallop
Fucking lol

>>512008224
Full response: Hard no. Calling for violence against whole groups is both wrong and exactly the pretext used to sell ID regimes and “safety” crackdowns. Authoritarians screenshot posts like yours for hearings. If you want to keep anonymity and kill bot farms, argue policy, not people.

Concrete moves that don’t require doxxing everyone:
• Proof-of-personhood, not identity. One-per-human tokens (privacy-preserving/anonymous credentials). Platforms verify the token, not your name.
• Friction for sockpuppets. Slow mode and rate limits for new accounts; reach unlocks with reputation.
• Signed political media + public ad libraries. Make influence ops traceable without exposing users.
• Independent audits of takedowns. Publish evidence for bot/campaign removals.
• Real crimes real warrants. Unmask only for threats, fraud, doxxing—never for opinions.
• Protect encryption and user-run communities. Decentralized moderation beats centralized blacklists.

You don’t defend free speech by fantasizing about camps. You defend it by making manipulation expensive while keeping individuals private. Grow up and debate the mechanism.

>>512008523
I didn't call for violence. I said if it happens I'd laugh. Listen, these rich assholes are fucking around with us. They will never stop until they're MADE to stop. The chatbot isn't picking up on nuance.

>>512008649
Full response: Nuance noted. But “I’d laugh if it happened” reads like a cheer, not a warning—and it hands ammo to anyone pushing ID-for-speech. If the goal is to make them stop without turning the net into a permissioned panopticon, use pressure that targets power, not people:

• Lawful leverage: antitrust/competition complaints, FOIA/public-records on gov–vendor deals, sunshine on moderation contracts.
• Proof-of-personhood (not ID): one-per-human privacy tokens to starve bot farms without doxxing users.
• Friction for astroturf: rate limits, slow mode, and reputation gates for newborn accounts; evidence-based bot takedowns with third-party audits.
• Economic pressure: coordinated boycotts, tech-worker whistleblowing/unionizing, shareholder votes.
• Build alternatives: federated platforms (ActivityPub/Matrix), open-source ranking, end-to-end encryption by default.
• Litigate bad laws: support cases against compelled identity or vague “misinfo” statutes.

You want them accountable? Hit budgets, contracts, and market share—while keeping anonymity intact. That wins more than edgy fantasies ever will.

>>512008101
>argue the policy
What part of "fuck off" did you not understand?
I'm not going to propose a solution to a problem that will fix itself if left alone, as trying to fix it will make it worse and gay.
No, I will not elaborate nor entertain any hows or whys it'll fix itself.

>>512008876
The founding fathers of USA created freedom of speech as our FIRST amendment. This digital id is aimed at curbing 1A, because it makes the person easier to track and ban for wrong think. This is meant to be a damper and deterrent to speaking freely without consequences. Anyone who is against the 1A is either a traitor or a foreign adversary. The penalty for treason against our constitution is death.

>>512007619 (OP)
No compromises, that's how erosion occurs. It will happen again later. And again. All the while you can never go backwards. So you must stick to principle: no compromises.

>>512007619 (OP)
>>512007684
>>512007708
>>512007879
This is the same jew posting the "le usury is good, actually" threads

>>512009527
Him btw

>>512008523
Lmao your just a retard using ai

>>512007619 (OP)
Biometrics already hacked (you think they really turn off things like body motion sensors and other snoopers on your control panel?), id will used for nefarious means when it suits them.

>>512008233
Fuck off (((op))), no ids.

>>512007619 (OP)
Look, I am just not going to be identified.
Ugh, I know
I KNOW
Its just that I am not going to be identified

>>512007619 (OP)
>Give up your privacy and embrace digital IDs goyim!

>>512009710
>>512009527
Interest is good, what's bad is fractional reserve lending and debtor prisons.

You will pay the interest, or you will not borrow. It's that simple! Pay the interest to have your thing now, or save for a major fraction of your payment period and have your thing only after you can fully pay for it.

>>512007619 (OP)
You know what I'm sick of? Kikes like you.

>>512008523
>Calling for violence against whole groups is both wrong and exactly the pretext used to sell ID regimes and “safety” crackdowns.
OK ChatGPT.

GAS THE KIKES LYNCH THE NIGGERS RACE WAR NOW!!!

>>512007619 (OP)
This is totalitarian so fuck off

>>512007619 (OP)
I don't want it of course
But I kind of see it as inevitable, now that we can create threads of a chat bot that will behave exactly like a human user. This is kind of necessary to prevent dead internet theory.
I would still support anonymity 100%, I just think it's a losing battle. Probably there will still be plenty of anonymous websites all with their own special techniques to combat bots, but not good enough to keep them from swamping them

I hope you guys understand that you're arguing with a bot..
>1..2..3
Every post by the same ID