Social media users will need to verify their identities under new decree 147, prompting fears it will undermine expression and expose anonymous dissidents
Wait, how is it draconian to stand by your words? This will make it hard to use botnets to kickstart colour revolutions, makes people accountable for their words and sure as shit won’t stop dissidents from complaining. We’ve had whistle-blowers and dissidents before social media. How is this law bad? Now companies like google and Facebook can’t inflate their numbers? Oh no, the horror.
Forcing people to identify themselves on major social platforms then arresting people for any speech critical of the government is what makes it a bad law.
Not true. In vietnam you can create anonymous accounts and still will be able to after this. This law is another step in tightening the restrictions towards the goal of no anonymity.
Anonymity should only be available to those smart enough to be so. Already too many people share what comes to their mind without consequence and forethought causing a mass increase in far right sentiment and violence. Hate crimes are at an all time high. This is a good law, in fact, every country should have it.
It’s a bad law and no country should have it. I’m against age verification as well, since it’s a step toward forced identification. My area passed age verification, which means I need to set up my network with a VPN so my family is safe from corporations (and thus government) from having even more information about us.
Anonymity is critical for a free society. And yeah, freedom has its own costs, such as hate crime, which I’m well aware of since my SO and therefore kids are minorities. But freedom to publicly criticize your government would be significantly curtailed without anonymity.
Sorry about your luck, but it just so happens your local government doesn’t agree with this opinion. You’re now going to be jailed and beaten until you’re formed, at which point you will be killed. Big brother is watching you
Wait, how is it draconian to stand by your words? This will make it hard to use botnets to kickstart colour revolutions, makes people accountable for their words and sure as shit won’t stop dissidents from complaining. We’ve had whistle-blowers and dissidents before social media. How is this law bad? Now companies like google and Facebook can’t inflate their numbers? Oh no, the horror.
Forcing people to identify themselves on major social platforms then arresting people for any speech critical of the government is what makes it a bad law.
But the government can already accomplish the latter without needing the former. It does make their job much easier.
Not true. In vietnam you can create anonymous accounts and still will be able to after this. This law is another step in tightening the restrictions towards the goal of no anonymity.
Anonymity should only be available to those smart enough to be so. Already too many people share what comes to their mind without consequence and forethought causing a mass increase in far right sentiment and violence. Hate crimes are at an all time high. This is a good law, in fact, every country should have it.
It’s a bad law and no country should have it. I’m against age verification as well, since it’s a step toward forced identification. My area passed age verification, which means I need to set up my network with a VPN so my family is safe from corporations (and thus government) from having even more information about us.
Anonymity is critical for a free society. And yeah, freedom has its own costs, such as hate crime, which I’m well aware of since my SO and therefore kids are minorities. But freedom to publicly criticize your government would be significantly curtailed without anonymity.
Sorry about your luck, but it just so happens your local government doesn’t agree with this opinion. You’re now going to be jailed and beaten until you’re formed, at which point you will be killed. Big brother is watching you
You’re saying that almost as if you tried to imply that colour revolutions are a bad thing.
please try to name one country that is better today than before those thinly-veiled CIA “revolutions” happened
Most of them would be if it weren’t for the thinly veiled counter-revolutionary movements backed by Russia and Iran.
lol yeah right
When half your family is amongst the inevitable dead of said revolution, would you please repeat what you just said?
They are
Colour revolutions are bad by definition. The CIA is always bad, everything they have always done has been bad.