Programming

hideshow 2 child comments

parent

[–] hirihit640@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child)

Your original "pick two" comment implies that you can pick "anonymous" + "free of bots", or "available to everybody" + "free of bots". I can't think of any system that would satisfy those.

Which is what we already have today.

What we have today is only "available to everybody". The token/ID system adds anonymity

hideshow 2 child comments

parent

[–] who@feddit.org 1 point 2 weeks ago* (1 child)

Your original “pick two” comment implies that you can pick “anonymous” + “free of bots”, or “available to everybody” + “free of bots”. I can’t think of any system that would satisfy those.

The former can be had on a system accessible only by a restricted group of people, through terminals that have no automation interfaces. Think of a local private library with a bulletin board: Only members can enter, and once inside, anyone can post using the provided tools, but there are no tools that bots could use, and there's nothing connecting an individual to what they post on the board. Of course, a system like this would not be available to everyone; it wouldn't work as an internet service, for example.

The latter can be had by requiring an access token issued to each user. Bots could then be either ejected quickly by revoking their owner's token when discovered, or prevented early by requiring all access to be through public terminals that have no automation interfaces. Of course, any system that issues an access token to an individual cannot be anonymous if revocation is to be meaningful.

The government would keep track of whether or not they issued you an ID,
The token/ID system adds anonymity

I wish that were possible, but no, it is not. If a government (or any other authority) keeps track of whether they issue someone an ID, then they must also have the ability to connect IDs to individuals. Such an arrangement can only be anonymous if everyone involved is a good-faith actor choosing not to abuse that ability, which history demonstrates is not a realistic assumption.

hideshow 2 child comments

parent

[–] hirihit640@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

through terminals that have no automation interfaces...but there are no tools that bots could use

If people still have access to general computation (for example a computer at home), somebody could just run a bot at home, ask beforehand what the bot wants to post, then go to the terminals.

One the other hand if we assume it's feasible to ban all general computation, then you can achieve all three "anonymous", "available to everybody", and "free of bots". Just use the postal mail system.

any system that issues an access token to an individual cannot be anonymous if revocation is to be meaningful.

If a government (or any other authority) keeps track of whether they issue someone an ID, then they must also have the ability to connect IDs to individuals.

Simple idea off the top of my head, building off GNU Taler. Citizens are allowed to get one Taler wallet from a central authority. The wallet is pre-loaded with $1 of a special currency. That currency can only be used to buy a social media account from the government for $1. Since GNU Taler transactions keep the buyer private, the government doesn't know who bought which account. The government can still ban accounts, without knowing who is behind them.

And sure somebody could give their account to somebody else. But the system still satisfies the "anonymous" and "available to everybody" requirements.

Edit: formatting