and they would need a birth date WHY? they would need to populate that information from here, WHY? especially since this was not brought into being because this was it’s use case, but because a state improperly demanded it, at the same time they are demanding other authoritarian surveillance over the populous right now? no i don’t think so. User name is more then sufficient
by your claim, the field can have any series of numbers, that there is no way to determine if it is accurate, and the law that this was done to appease is bad, as in not able to obtain its expected result. and so the data is useless.
if some api/program/government wishes to get my information, they can ask me so that i may decline. there is no use case that these fields are a benefit to the user. and as such must be wrenched out with the fervor reserved for denying a fey creature your name.
if the argument is that these entities can get my name by other means anyway, then this data is redundant and useless.
let’s also talk about that then. we need to remove that immediately
the discussion happens right now, because i said so, because others are talking about it. and the data is useless when anything can be put in, it’s not used for anything, and it can’t be verified. it fails all three tests in determining usefulness
the laws are bad, and you can push fighting for anonymity and freedom down the road because letting the camel stick its nose under the tent don’t bother anyone, and it’s too easy to just ignore…. but the laws are made for a purpose, and they will change. and uh oh, the camel has flipped the tent, you can’t fight to remove it because now systems are built around it being there. now it’s a much harder fight because we didn’t fight when it was easy.
again after seeing everything that has happened you call sounding the alarm for this as a slippery slope… i am sorry, but i question either your motives, or your foresight.
because it’s too late at that point, which is the whole point and issue!
if the field is necessary, but the data is useless, then it shouldn’t be there. if the data becomes required then it should not be there. so the result, it should not be there
with mass adoption of enshitification. and with the world in general. calling things a slippery slope fallacy is a long and losing gamble.
if the field was put in because of a law, then it’s for a reason, if the data isn’t important, or enforced, then it is useless and should not have been added.
no no no, you misunderstand, this is malice, but the reason backing it is stupid and short sighted. i mean, unless the game plan was to run off their customers like a movie troupe
i don’t recall that weed was ever used for those things, other then just as a copeing mechanism, i think the argument is that it was better then the other narcotics by a country mile.
unless you are talking about charletons, but like we got people saying magic rocks cure cancer so like why would we need to validate their nonsense?
oh! that sounds proper journalism, i haven’t seen that in ages
i participated in the largest national no kings protest… and was basically used as a back drop for trumps birthday parade. a protest does not work unless it has leverage, and if the media is hostile to your cause… well there goes the leverage.