good, then make the punishment heavy enough so that even if a few are caught, they are made examples of. I am thinking if the illegal lobbying money is higher than a certain amount he is forced to step down and the company is run by a board of truestees for a year. Will they be able to find ways around it? Sure they are resourceful and have an army of lawyers shamelessly trained at finding loopholes, but it will be much harder than now which is basically a walk in the park for them.
lol and in the UK they put ads like they champion against fascism and surveillance. To them every ideology and concept is just a transportation device to more revenue.
"In a world where a growing number of billionaires are lashing out against philanthropy,"
Except they are not, they are quite happy to use "charities" for agenda pushing at best, money laundering and tax evasion at worst and call it philanthropy.
Neither credit cards nor cellphones can not be used for the particular kind of oppression mentioned in my post definitely not en masse. They definitely can not be as efficient as ID verification for any kind of oppression. So cellphones and credit cards actually add some value to your life while NOT being very efficient oppression tools. ID verification won't add anything to your life while harboring capacity for being a very efficient oppression tool. Bad apps in cellphones can violate alot of aspects of your privacy but still not nearly as efficient as a goverment having direct access to online activity tied to a digital ID. So your examples aren't really relevant.
Best case scenerio; in school they will just hear of a way to go around the block and use these sites while you not noticing and having a false sense of security. Worst case scenerio, they will find another dodgy social media website that does not enforce these verifications and be exposed to much more horrible content than main stream social media. Blanket bans are almost always less efficient than a parent getting digital literacy and imposing these rules by custom methods.
Why does it have to be originally introduced with oppression in mind? Why not realize it provides a nice framework for it and use it instead? US toyed around with the idea of ID verification for anything that connects to internet. It is probably not going so smoothly. This could as well be a smaller experiment. We are talking about a goverment that jails eighty year olds for saying free palestine, not hard to imagine them wanting to do the same in the internet. It is crazy how far rabid zionist lobies can push goverments into oppressing their citizens.
Nah it is Netanyahu who is riding Keir directly and whipping him at the same time. What a pathetic excuse of a human. Next extension of this will be to jail anyone who says free Palestine in the internet. Such a convincing way to prove there is no genocide lol.
It will only be deanonymised for UK citizens though (and any other country that applies some sort of ID verification). Any Russian LLM bot can still spread lies in the internet claiming to be from the UK so no problem solved there.
Worst yet, today it is deanonymisation "because think of the children", tomorrow it is putting people who say "Free palestine" in social media to prison.
Really depends, some people are assholes some people are in need some people are in need and also are assholes. You can't bin everyone into one group. I am pretty sure reporting theft would be part of one's job, whether justified or not. Make your judgement and decide whether that person seems like really in need and worth risking your job. If so go for it, I am all in for being a decent human being to non assholes. But if someone regulary shoplifts in a store because you don't report I would take it to mean that they don't really care whether if you lose your job or not.
Really depends, if you see a guy in an expensive suit shoplifting food than honestly that could be annoying enough to report. Or if it is someone who does that regularly or damages the shop while doing so which in this case if you don't report puts your livelihood in risk too. If it is a one off food theft from someone who looks like is in need, sure. But I don't think it is always that black and white.
Why would you even risk yourself for a company who doesn't give a shit about you? Observe and report is the absolute maximum you should do even if you are allowed to physically intervene.
good, then make the punishment heavy enough so that even if a few are caught, they are made examples of. I am thinking if the illegal lobbying money is higher than a certain amount he is forced to step down and the company is run by a board of truestees for a year. Will they be able to find ways around it? Sure they are resourceful and have an army of lawyers shamelessly trained at finding loopholes, but it will be much harder than now which is basically a walk in the park for them.