>>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.