hark

Except those who control the narrative will not face consequences for harmful messages they spread. For example, the trump administration spreads a lot of anti-trans messaging. They've been going after the funding of schools for what they deem "CRT and radical gender ideology" (https://thehill.com/homenews/education/5113202-trump-schools-executive-order-crt-gender-ideology/). Now imagine they go after online commentators which will be super easy because they've got their real names attached to their posts.

Ruzzia is a grey, third world toilet, that will be paying reparations forever once they finish losing.

Worked great against Germany after world war 1.

Just another once in a lifetime event.

Not hard to imagine, people already have to manicure their facebook and other social media accounts because employers look at them. Just because you don't want something attached to your name, doesn't mean it's stupid or bad. There are consequences for unapproved behavior and opinions, even if they're not wrong or harmful.

If you think anonymity is stupid, feel free to set your display name to your real name right here on lemmy.

That doesn't make any sense. You wouldn't have access to their ID. Even if you did, you're saying you can tell someone is an idiot by what? How they look? Their country of residence? Their age?

CinnamonRingCumGlaze86 will be significantly less able to use their 6th grade reading level to convince people that modern medicine is bad because Pre-Historical Witches didn’t have AIDS bro.

You don't need accounts tied to ID to ban such content.

I've got this crazy idea where we can use GPUs to render 3D scenes efficiently.

A broken system will eventually work when the broken pieces have been replaced.

I think that comes from Andrew Kelley having strong opinions, sometimes with harsh language added. It's like the internet is over-correcting for the much stronger and harsher early internet days, so he's admonished for being "unprofessional". I don't care for this sanded-down squeaky-clean vision of the internet that is being pushed for, particularly by the corporate crowd.

If your point is to stifle dissent, then sure. Whoever controls the narrative will make contradiction look unacceptable. If your name is tied to an opinion that may be construed as contrary to the dominant narrative, you will hesitate to post it, and if you do post it, then you will be taken down with very real consequences because of that tie to your real identity. Employers already look at social media to determine if your behavior is considered acceptable to them, even if you keep your professional life completely separate. Your proposal only destroys free speech further by making it worth less and less the cost of expressing.

Make no mistake, the excuse of protecting children from pornography is just that, an excuse, to restrict freedom of speech by putting into place the mechanisms to identify people and strike at them for daring to express their opinions. Pornography being in the form of books, magazines, tapes, DVDs, whatever physical media did not necessarily control access. There are many with stories of how they managed to gain access as children, either through a parent's collection or otherwise. Similarly, this internet ID bullshit can be defeated, but it'll be backed by stricter and stricter legislation to make defeating it illegal and they won't be prosecuting children or the companies providing the ID verification service, they'll be prosecuting adults using tools to defeat these mechanisms to express their opinions.

They certainly are real, but their machinations are misunderstood. They often consist of people in poor countries looking to make a buck. Follow the money. You'll find that even if you were to build a great firewall for your country of residence, troll farms will still reach you, and that domestic astroturf ain't any greener than foreign astroturf.

I'm not going to give up my privacy over your fear of foreign bogeymen.