The guy who wants to ban anonymity on attention networks (like Klaus and Yuval) because he did his own special psychosocial profile of anons that were mean to him and found them to be abhorrent, has WEF rats in his afterskool club? Color me shocked.
The guy who wants to ban anonymity on attention networks (like Klaus and Yuval) because he did his own special psychosocial profile of anons that were mean to him and found them to be abhorrent, has WEF rats in his afterskool club? Color me shocked.
Yup. Even before that, I was surprised when he gave airtime to people like Australiaβs former PM. I cut him loose at that point. The globalist corruption is widespread.
Many people of very long-standing membership in The Liberal Party of Australia RESIGNED BEFORE Johnny HOWARD became PM., and have never re-joined - sadly.
What is wrong with anonymity on a social platform for those that wish it ?.
As we've seen with the convid lockdown protests (cancelling of bank accounts/ terminations from employment and refusal to be able to fund raise from a willing public etc)- those who express dissenting views can and will be targeted by Governments and Officials for their views and opinions online - and to be clear those views and opinions were for simply disagreeing with the official narrative. Not because they were actually seeking to do violence or some hate speech nonsense.
It should definitively be an option, for those that wish it.
Yes, oppressors can be brutal. I grew up in communism and I was there when it fell apart. There is a price to pay for sticking your neck out, and there is also a price for not doing that. Everything at the right time, and everyone should decide when and how.
The conspirators, the tyrants, the spies, they all rely on anonymity. Hiding behind anonymity is core to everything that is broken in our society. Are we considering that?
But more important, the internet as a social forum is about to collapse because of bots, deep fakes, AI driving all this. And guess what, bots and fakes all rely on anonymity, and the big actors (states, spies, large corporations) have virtual monopoly on the technology. When I heard Jordan Peterson being concerned about anonymity it was in this context.
We need an identity system that we can trust. And it might be possible to have pseudonymity that is derived from real identity (zero-knowledge proof maybe), who knows. I don't think we have a solution yet, but hiding behind anonymity as the main strategy cannot possibly work.
The guy who wants to ban anonymity on attention networks (like Klaus and Yuval) because he did his own special psychosocial profile of anons that were mean to him and found them to be abhorrent, has WEF rats in his afterskool club? Color me shocked.
Yep that was revealing
Yup. Even before that, I was surprised when he gave airtime to people like Australiaβs former PM. I cut him loose at that point. The globalist corruption is widespread.
Many people of very long-standing membership in The Liberal Party of Australia RESIGNED BEFORE Johnny HOWARD became PM., and have never re-joined - sadly.
Howards protΓ©gΓ© Tony Abbott brought forth much amusement to the people of Australia. But he was very busy as a new PM and child immigrant from the UK, who wanted to bestow on the WEF "Prince" Phillip an Australian knighthood.
Doesn't he (Peterson) believe communism/what ever the WEF thinks, is the way to go to start with? OR did I misunderstand something I read?
All i know he gets a lot of views and viewers on HIS side but he is not to be trusted. He sounds too much like an actor
Revealing indeed.
Anonymity is a major issue which is only getting worse with AI, he definitely got that right.
ARC is a different story, that's trying to solve a problem at the same level.
Not sure if i misunderstood you.
What is wrong with anonymity on a social platform for those that wish it ?.
As we've seen with the convid lockdown protests (cancelling of bank accounts/ terminations from employment and refusal to be able to fund raise from a willing public etc)- those who express dissenting views can and will be targeted by Governments and Officials for their views and opinions online - and to be clear those views and opinions were for simply disagreeing with the official narrative. Not because they were actually seeking to do violence or some hate speech nonsense.
It should definitively be an option, for those that wish it.
Yes, oppressors can be brutal. I grew up in communism and I was there when it fell apart. There is a price to pay for sticking your neck out, and there is also a price for not doing that. Everything at the right time, and everyone should decide when and how.
The conspirators, the tyrants, the spies, they all rely on anonymity. Hiding behind anonymity is core to everything that is broken in our society. Are we considering that?
But more important, the internet as a social forum is about to collapse because of bots, deep fakes, AI driving all this. And guess what, bots and fakes all rely on anonymity, and the big actors (states, spies, large corporations) have virtual monopoly on the technology. When I heard Jordan Peterson being concerned about anonymity it was in this context.
We need an identity system that we can trust. And it might be possible to have pseudonymity that is derived from real identity (zero-knowledge proof maybe), who knows. I don't think we have a solution yet, but hiding behind anonymity as the main strategy cannot possibly work.