OK.

Here's an easy explanation.

Someone you don't like somehow gets voted into power and begins trying to enact changes towards a social group you belong to.

Building anonymous systems is one way to avoid Bad Actor X from having Big List Y, leading to Atrocity Z.

Having a really successful social network isn't a goal post, it's just a result.

Great -- it made a zillion dollars, meanwhile we've built the biggest leakiest information trove on individuals, for individuals to be exploited, ever imagined.

▲

jart 15 hours ago | parent [-]

Already happened with USG. You know who doesn't discriminate against my group? Big tech companies. If they can step up and take on more responsibility for identity verification in our society, then my social group will be less oppressed. The California Republic must lead the way.

▲

16bitvoid 15 hours ago | parent | next [-]

They may not themselves, but they'll happily sell your info or give it up to avoid losing money to someone who would.

	▲	15 hours ago \| parent [-]
		[deleted]

▲

heavyset_go 14 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> You know who doesn't discriminate against my group? Big tech companies.

Yes, they just give megaphones to, and make bank on, the propagandists that are responsible for the current moral panic that's resulted in the US government discriminating against LGBT people.

These are the same companies that facilitated propaganda that led to hate and violence like this[1]. A deeper look with plentiful citations is here[2] from the Harvard Systemic Justice Project.

To give you an example that happened here in the US, a friend recently moved back to the city because his neighbors felt emboldened to constantly call him slurs on Facebook when they disagreed with him. He couldn't use local Facebook groups without bigots following him around and calling him slurs. They felt emboldened after this[3], knowing Facebook would do nothing about it. Discriminatory harassment over Facebook after their policy shift drove him from his own home. Facebook's policies allowed a community to successfully rid itself of a minority it didn't want to see or hear.

[1] https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/amnesty-report-finds-face...

[2] https://systemicjustice.org/article/facebook-and-genocide-ho...

[3] https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/social-media/meta-new-hate-spee...

▲

jart 11 hours ago | parent [-]

The first amendment protects free speech. The people must have their say.

▲

heavyset_go 10 hours ago | parent [-]

We both know that the First Amendment binds the government and doesn't bind private entities.

	▲	jart 10 hours ago \| parent [-]
		What do you want tech to do? Use agents to deploy an apparatchik to every man woman and child? Wouldn't that leave people like you out of a job? What would you do all day? Tech platforms should take no part in the social disagreements of the people. They should be neutral unbiased providers of digital space.