Accountability in a faceless society

[NottsRam77]

Just hearing about the horrible, terrible and sickening events in manchester and obviously before that events in london, paris and brussels... and of coarse syria

just got me thinking

the internet and social media is probably the biggest and most powerful comunication tool in the world, to a degree probably more so than the mobile phone

how and why can we live in a world where internet service providers allow people to be able to go onto the internet a post racial slur, cyber bullying, pictures and videos of violence and brutality with no accountability to the perpertrator what so ever, no accountability, no responsibility

as far as im aware to access most websites, domains, social media groups or pretty much anything on the net u need a valid email address

Well what if email addresses could only be obtained if they had a valid passport number attached.

no passport number, no email address

so anything u post, somone somewhere knows who u are and u are accountable 

i know its not fool proof, but surely theres spmething there to make the world a better and safer place

god knows but it just seems wrong to me that any cretin or idiot can post what they want to who they want and not be responsible for what they say

Im sure there are many people that will say they dont want to live in a big brother society but after events like last night and london i think it just highlights the need for radical thinkinfg to try and combat other peoples sick ideas

[David]

Interesting topic given the timing and myself offering a platform to post on the internet.

Your email suggestion wouldn't work, it's too late now to introduce such a system. Putting myself in the firing line here but website owners should be ultimately responsible by monitoring the platforms they give users to post on the internet.

It's too easy to put platforms like this on social media online and sit back, remember the DET forum with it's one moderator who wouldn't be seen for days? Turned into a horrible place to be on, as can Facebook and Twitter these days with the anonymity.

Bots and automated systems can only do so much, filters can be easily circumvented and when a company like Twitter that loses 2 billion in the last 10 years it's no surprise they are struggling to cope. You need humans, moderators to step in. 

That's not to say some progress isn't being made, Google Facebook troll arrested and you will be given plenty of examples, heres a recent one over comments made about Bradley Lowery.

http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/police-make-arrest-after-facebook-12355941

Some will argue they should never have been arrested, freedom of speech. Not sure arresting them is the right move, I think the Police are just starting to show some force but the Police do not have the resources to spend time on internet trolls. Had the kid not been Bradley Lowry who has been in the media so much, but another child it would have probably flew under the radar. 

You really need to target the site owners, Jesus I really am setting myself up here but if you hold them fully responsible and issue large enough fines to ensure steps are taken to ensure malicious content is not posted online I'm sure companies like Facebook would dip into that $10 billion profit they recently announced. 

*Twitter/Facebook losses/profits from a very quick Google search. 

[Sith Happens]

I am with the idea of some sort of identification system when using the internet.

I agree emails are too far gone now to implement this sort of system.

What would be wrong though with some sort of credit or debit card identification to become a member of an online community? Once introduced all members of any community have to register their details to continue using (within a certain amount of time). I am fairly sure most communities require an email to join, so either an email goes out advising the user they need to register, or they are prompted when they log in.

I appreciate its not fool proof, but a lot of internet trolls are small time bullies who probably couldnt be arsed to go to the trouble of obtaining fake details just in order to create an account so they can be an online bully.

For children and young adults parents would have to provide the card details so they would have more visibility of what sites their children are logging onto.

 

[uttoxram75]

Terrorism has been around a lot longer than the internet.

 

[NottsRam77]

Potentially yes, it should be the website owners responsibility

The problem is david is not everyone is sensible, level headed and rensponsible as yourself

there are people in the world that just want to hurt others through various channels and its those people that need to be contrrolled and monitored.

why cant email addresses be changed to comply?

deadline is set, 1 year, 2 years in advance 

by this date u either have to validate your email address with a passport or sign up to a new account with a new provider where u will still need to provide a passport, national insureance or nhs number.

after this date all email addresses without will become obsolete.

is it not feasible? 

Given the reasoning behind it and what it hopes to achieve would it not be worth the inconvenience?

i dont know mate, im just perplexed people can still post the evil bile they do and can do it with no/ minimal consequences

 

 

9 minutes ago, uttoxram75 said:

Terrorism has been around a lot longer than the internet.

 

Obviously.

but the internet gives it a platform and the exposure its never had before which surely isnt a good thing 

its also a tool that terrorist groups like isis can use for their propaganda and inspire other radicalists so surely if it can be turned to help us instead of recruit and inspire for them it has to be looked into?

i dont know

im just putting it out there

just wanted to get it off my chest after seeing so much hurt on tv today  

[StringerBell]

Jesus Christ no.

Anonymity on the net is a basic aspect of modern liberal society, especially vital for those who are vulnerable to actual crimes should their true opinions be known. Gay muslims for example. You shouldn't have to identify yourself. I wouldn't want my views known to my employer or future employer  and I don't think there's anything wrong with my views. But that's he climate we live in.

If a particular website doesn't like something somebody posts it can ban them. Identification for posting racial slurs? And do what? Go round their house and give them what for? Dox them to their employer? Then what else is it going to be used for? I bet Count Dankula, who is facing a year in prison for making a joke video at the expense of Nazis, wishes he was anonymous right now.

[NottsRam77]

Im thinking more for the autorities not any tom dick or harry to view and access.

anomymity on the net is a bad thing im sorry i disagree strongly with u, no good comes of it

but thats just my view,

[uttoxram75]

2 minutes ago, NottsRam77 said:

Potentially yes, it should be but the website owners responsibility

The problem is david is not everyone is a sensible, level headed and rensponsible as yourself

there are people in the world that just want to hurt others through various channels and its those people that need to be contrrolled and monitored.

why cant email addresses be changed to comply?

deadline is set, 1 year, 2 years in advance 

by this date u either have to validate your email address with a passport or sign up to a new account with a new provider where u will still need to provide a passport, national insureance or nhs number.

after this date all email addresses without will become obsolete.

is it not feasible? 

Given the reasoning behind it and what it hopes to achieve would it not be worth the inconvenience?

i dont know mate, im just perplexed people can still post the evil bile they do and can do it with no/ minimal consequences

 

 

Obviously.

but the internet gives it a platform and the exposure its never had before which surely isnt a good thing 

Not as big a platform as being plastered over every news bulletin on primetime tv around the world.

There's no answer mate. The only thing that could make things worse is curtailing individual freedoms in the name of security. The bstrds have well and truly won if we have to give up our way of life because of them.

 

 

[StringerBell]

17 minutes ago, NottsRam77 said:

Im thinking more for the autorities not any tom dick or harry to view and access.

anomymity on the net is a bad thing im sorry i disagree strongly with u, no good comes of it

but thats just my view,

Well maybe the authorities but I thought they already could? I'm not sure I'm no expert on tech stuff.

Internationally at least, without a shadow of a doubt people would be killed if they didn't have anonymity. Even here the guy who stopped the NHS virus is now saying he's got to move house after being doxxed. I wouldn't want my name out on the open on here because I wouldn't trust people not to use my information against me. Contacting friends, employers etc. 'Look, see what he said here' and all that.

[1of4]

52 minutes ago, Paul71 said:

I am with the idea of some sort of identification system when using the internet.

I agree emails are too far gone now to implement this sort of system.

What would be wrong though with some sort of credit or debit card identification to become a member of an online community? Once introduced all members of any community have to register their details to continue using (within a certain amount of time). I am fairly sure most communities require an email to join, so either an email goes out advising the user they need to register, or they are prompted when they log in.

I appreciate its not fool proof, but a lot of internet trolls are small time bullies who probably couldnt be arsed to go to the trouble of obtaining fake details just in order to create an account so they can be an online bully.

For children and young adults parents would have to provide the card details so they would have more visibility of what sites their children are logging onto.

 

I'm very limited in my knowledge of how t'internet works but I've seen news reports of systems being hacked and bank details being stolen, so I'd be reluctant to give anyone my card details. Also I'm sure Dave wouldn't want the responsibility of keeping all our card details safe when we join this forum

[uttoxram75]

4 minutes ago, 1of4 said:

 Also I'm sure Dave wouldn't want the responsibility of keeping all our card details safe when we join this forum

With @Boycie as his Fiduciary advisor what could possibly go wrong?

[Sith Happens]

2 minutes ago, 1of4 said:

I'm very limited in my knowledge of how t'internet works but I've seen news reports of systems being hacked and bank details being stolen, so I'd be reluctant to give anyone my card details. Also I'm sure Dave wouldn't want the responsibility of keeping all our card details safe when we join this forum

I'm guessing if this sort of technology was introduced it would be managed by a third party. I'm not sure Dave would have to store our credit card details in a folder on his hard drive alongside his Xmas card list  I don't see it being any different to buying a product online, we happily provide details to them. Aslong as they are PCIDSS compliant or whatever its called it will be safe.

[DarkFruitsRam7]

45 minutes ago, StringerBell said:

Jesus Christ no.

Anonymity on the net is a basic aspect of modern liberal society, especially vital for those who are vulnerable to actual crimes should their true opinions be known. Gay muslims for example. You shouldn't have to identify yourself. I wouldn't want my views known to my employer or future employer  and I don't think there's anything wrong with my views. But that's he climate we live in.

If a particular website doesn't like something somebody posts it can ban them. Identification for posting racial slurs? And do what? Go round their house and give them what for? Dox them to their employer? Then what else is it going to be used for? I bet Count Dankula, who is facing a year in prison for making a joke video at the expense of Nazis, wishes he was anonymous right now.

I usually completely disagree with your political opinions, but I think is bang on. Wonder what @StivePesley thinks? One small step in Internet moderation by the government may lead to another and, before you know it, you're at risk of a 1984 situation happening.

[David]

26 minutes ago, 1of4 said:

I'm very limited in my knowledge of how t'internet works but I've seen news reports of systems being hacked and bank details being stolen, so I'd be reluctant to give anyone my card details. Also I'm sure Dave wouldn't want the responsibility of keeping all our card details safe when we join this forum

I'm perfectly fine with it, if anyone wants to forward me their credit card details (preferably not maxed out) I will keep them safe.

In all seriousness you do raise a valid point, members details on this site are like a house, we have a CCTV camera out front, locks on the doors and deadlocks, burglar alarm fitted. Your passwords are written on a piece of paper and torn up into single letters then hidden under the floorboard with a few extra to put them off the scent.

When you see the site go offline with an update, sometimes they changing the alarm code, new locks, I'm on every update to ensure I do everything I can to not just help keep this forum run smoothly but secure. Without licking my is arse here not all forums do, some are running software that is EOL (end of life) and don't receive any updates. 

It's not a major issue as long as you use a separate password, what can they do with that if they got hold of it? 

Your details are secure, but if someone really really really wants those details and has the time and know how it's possible. Don't mean to scare anyone here with that possibility, the same applies to most websites.

I wouldn't want to chuck your credit card details under my floor boards as well unless I could afford 24/7 armed guards covering all doors.

Even if it was a check and no details stored there's a window of opportunity for those details to be taken as you type them in. This site is encrypted totally but not all will be, I expect in time the clever ******** will figure out a way to bypass encryption and web security moves on to something else.

All that a side I don't think it's even necessary and if Mr Terrorist is determined to stay off the grid he will get hold of card details illegally. All the other Tom, Dick's and Harry's you want to catch for malicious posting will be dumb enough to catch through their IP address.

[Rev]

1 hour ago, NottsRam77 said:

Im thinking more for the autorities not any tom dick or harry to view and access.

anomymity on the net is a bad thing im sorry i disagree strongly with u, no good comes of it

but thats just my view,

The trouble with giving authorities power, they will always abuse it or look to monetise what they know.

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/councils-using-terrorism-powers-spy-12373855

Just one of thousands of examples.

[David]

17 minutes ago, reveldevil said:

The trouble with giving authorities power, they will always abuse it or look to monetise what they know.

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/councils-using-terrorism-powers-spy-12373855

Just one of thousands of examples.

I know I should be bothered by that but I'm not, stay on the right side of the law and you have nothing to fear.

If giving the government possible access to my browsing history, text messages, phone records help them prevent terrosim go for it, I would like to think my data would never be accessed and the powers only used to track terroists/criminals. 

Obviously it does leave a hole open to abuse and profit from, when you outweigh the pros and cons I would take the risk.

Not everyone will agree with that but with technology today I don't see another solution, sat back watching kids get bombed safe in the knowledge the government doesn't know what supermarket I did my online shop today doesn't sit right with me.

No guarantee that access would prevent every terrorist attack but if it helped stop one bombing I say it's worth it. Few weeks time the country will be out voting to put someone in power if the country, let's go one step further and help them the best we can to stop these sick ******* for good.

[NottsRam77]

5 hours ago, uttoxram75 said:

Not as big a platform as being plastered over every news bulletin on primetime tv around the world.

There's no answer mate. The only thing that could make things worse is curtailing individual freedoms in the name of security. The bstrds have well and truly won if we have to give up our way of life because of them.

 

 

People would still have the freedom to say and express what they want over the net, that wouldnt change, no ones taking away the freedom of speech

But what it would mean is that they are then accountable for what they say

It would then be no different to standing on a soapbox in the middle of a high street in this country.

you can say what u want but u are accountable for what u say, a computer screen and a random username shouldnt be a mask for people to be able to stir racial hatred, recruit radicalists to a evil ideology or allow child grooming to be able to happen just because these people sit behind a fake username and email addresses 

hence my call for accountability

But anyhow it wont happen it was just an idea

 

[Highgate]

5 hours ago, David said:

I know I should be bothered by that but I'm not, stay on the right side of the law and you have nothing to fear.

If giving the government possible access to my browsing history, text messages, phone records help them prevent terrosim go for it, I would like to think my data would never be accessed and the powers only used to track terroists/criminals. 

Obviously it does leave a hole open to abuse and profit from, when you outweigh the pros and cons I would take the risk.

Not everyone will agree with that but with technology today I don't see another solution, sat back watching kids get bombed safe in the knowledge the government doesn't know what supermarket I did my online shop today doesn't sit right with me.

No guarantee that access would prevent every terrorist attack but if it helped stop one bombing I say it's worth it. Few weeks time the country will be out voting to put someone in power if the country, let's go one step further and help them the best we can to stop these sick ******* for good.

Privacy is important to many people though, there are plenty of things that people do that are perfectly lawful, but they would rather other people didn't know about it. If we hand over all our personal freedoms to governments in exchange for more security, or at least the perception of more security, doesn't this mean the terrorists have succeeded in altering our society for the worse? I'd think they would likely consider that to be something of a victory.

Heartbreaking the see attacks like that in Manchester, but i think the best response is the carry on with our freedoms intact in defiance of the terrorists intentions.

[GboroRam]

9 hours ago, NottsRam77 said:

People would still have the freedom to say and express what they want over the net, that wouldnt change, no ones taking away the freedom of speech

But what it would mean is that they are then accountable for what they say

It would then be no different to standing on a soapbox in the middle of a high street in this country.

you can say what u want but u are accountable for what u say, a computer screen and a random username shouldnt be a mask for people to be able to stir racial hatred, recruit radicalists to a evil ideology or allow child grooming to be able to happen just because these people sit behind a fake username and email addresses 

hence my call for accountability

But anyhow it wont happen it was just an idea

 

The other concern for me would be the global nature of the net. You may or may not be comfortable with the UK authorities having access to all you say and do - what if you lived in Russia? Still comfortable? Or China, or Uganda? It would have to be a world wide solution, or the criminals would set up shop from a country that doesn't play by the rules and all the hard work is undone. 

I agree something needs to be done, but the balance is impossible to get right. 

[Stive Pesley]

14 hours ago, BurtonRam7 said:

I usually completely disagree with your political opinions, but I think is bang on. Wonder what @StivePesley thinks? One small step in Internet moderation by the government may lead to another and, before you know it, you're at risk of a 1984 situation happening.

Sting and I definitely agree on some stuff - and this is one of them.

I've been on the internet since 1994, started out via the Compuserve service that let you subscribe to internet mailing lists and Usenet, and then later some basic web browsing. Anonymity, bullying  and trolling have been there since the start so it doesn't really phase me. There is just a lot more of it. 

The alternative? It would simply never work. Every single time they have tried to regulate something on the net, there is an army of people coming up with clever workarounds. This is what happens when the users are far cleverer than those who seek to regulate.

I do take your specific point about accountability though. I think most people realise that we are all accountable and if we do break the law, they have the power to find us via our ISP. Plenty of people don't though - judging by the vile stuff I was reading yesterday. So for me the issue isn't about accountability, but about where the laws are drawn around what is/isn't acceptable. Too many cases where people get charged for stuff that may be disagreeable but could be argued falls within freedom of speech. As opposed to the comment I saw on my Facebook saying that "we will only get rid of terrorism when we kill all the smelly black muslims" (OK they didn't spell it as perfectly as that but you get the point..)

Then you have Katie Hopkins tweeting that we need "a final solution" to rid the country of muslims. Is that acceptable? to publicly wish a holocaust on muslims?