Comment by llamaimperative
Comment by llamaimperative 10 months ago
1) No, Facebook does not confirm people’s real names
2) This isn’t a solution to vitriol, it’s a solution to inorganic amplification
Comment by llamaimperative 10 months ago
1) No, Facebook does not confirm people’s real names
2) This isn’t a solution to vitriol, it’s a solution to inorganic amplification
> in some cases
some != all
therefore, it is not a real-name only network.
I'm not asking for Facebook to become a confirmed real-name only network. I am not asking for anyone to be compelled to supply a confirmed real-name only network.
I am saying: I wish that one existed and caught on with consumers.
1) I don't have interest in at global scale
2) I'm not discussing the practicality of it
this is the way…
I find absolutely ridiculous every social media / free speech discussion if platform does not have proof of identity. while you and I may have right to free speech the bots etc do not. hence, there is no free speech without proof of identity imo
Of course there is free speech without proof of identity. The Supreme Court has ruled that the First Amendment protects anonymous speech. The right to speak anonymously is fundamental to the right to speak freely.
You haven't proven the identity of "bdangubic" to us yet here you are exercising your right to free speech.
I think anonymity is important for some kind of coordination problems (e.g. against an authoritarian government). A better solution is to have a nominal fee, maybe $10/yr to be platformed, that way it's expensive to bot.
They absolutely do require confirmation in some cases - https://www.facebook.com/help/1090831264320592
Of course that’s not foolproof and there are millions of bot accounts by facebooks own admission. But at the scale of billions of active users across the globe I’m not sure what approach could be 100%