https://archive.ph/2D2wm
Wouldn't this require linking a government ID to your account?
>>533615145Wow, another WEF nation pushing digital ID. What a coincidence.
>>533615304Yes. And?If it helps the nation and the economy grow, what's wrong with it?https://www.theregister.com/2026/04/08/japan_privacy_law_changes_ai/
good this will cut down on illicit crime done via social media
>>533615401How could this help anything? Social media companies are already perfectly capable of requiring ID if they want to, which it seems like they don't if they need to be forced to by law.
>>533615632Line must go up, goy. Don't be an antisemite
>>533615145Das it! No moru sosa media for you, I take your phone now
>>533615680But HOW would this make any lines go up?
>>533615145Good. This way they can learn about the holocaust and the need to cut off their genitals 24/7 without any distractions or outlets for their misery.
>>533615715It makes training AI on local languages and cultures, for local purposes easier. How is this hard to understand?
The entire internet is botted to hell and back by India, Pakistan, China, Nigeria, Bangladesh, and BRICS-oriented nations. How do you stop this botting? Require ID. Buying 50K SIM cards is easy. Getting 50K government-issued IDs is NOT.
>>533615495thought crimes? things dreamt up online or in your mind?
Who cares what these chongers do, Japanese are weird as shit… the females are total freaks no wonder why their population is in decline. They play Nintendo and max their Apple Pay cards on phone games
>>533615770Even if it does which doesn't really make sense, I already addressed the fact that companies can do this on their own and yet are disinclined to.
>>533615908The earlier laws prohibited collecting that data without consent.
>>533615145invents Nintendocan't handle the microdosis of reels and shorts
>>533616017So? I never even considered nonconsensual data collection. You can collect data from consenting people easily.
>>533615145Fuck, I thought that said weight-based filtering.
>>533616177They already had mechanisms for collecting that data from people who gave consent. Now they have a much larger base to collect data from.If the government brings laws to restrict social media for the youngsters (which will probably require government ID), companies will just collect all data and train on that. This will also remove junk/falsified data, making the pre-training data processing easier.
I really wish RapeApe would make a post on /g/ or something as a sticky detailing how bad the botting situation has become.It's draining massive amounts of resources, global server access and space, and other infrastructure. Cloudflare and AWS and other networking systems are being pummeled with this shit.You have these shitheads setting up SIM farms and otyher centers dedicated with putting as much fake content and media out as possible to disrupt business, finance, infrastructure, and user experiences.Every memeflag on this website is some bastard in a hovel or Israel trying to make using the board as nasty as possible. Memeflags are supposed to be used to hide users talking about their countries without fear of their governments finding out they use the board, but it's been completely co-opted like the rest of the internet to push bullshit.Pic somewhat related.
>>533616333But they can already require government ID if they want to, and they DON'T want to.
>>533616502They couldn't "require" IDs before the relaxation in privacy laws. Companies couldn't collect government data without consent.It's also a zero-sum game, users could shift to competitors. But if the government mandates IDs, that risk is removed.
>>533616592>Companies couldn't collect government data without consent.Again I'm not talking about nonconsensual data collection.>To use our service, you must submit a government ID. Do you consent to this?That's totally doable. No mandates required. And yet none of them will set up such a system unless forced to by the government.
>>533616718>To use our service, you must submit a government IDYou clearly don't know which laws are being discussed. That notice would have been illegal. You couldn't restrict services based on data sharing.
Friendly reminder that Facebook is the one pushing all of this
>>533616783You're referring to laws about collecting data without consent. This is consensual. And BTW you chose to hide your Indian flag with an ancap flag so why are you simping for big government?I've given you far too much time already, I should've stuck with conventional wisdom and never replied to a jeet.
>>533616910Completely wrong.
>>533616931You couldn't restrict a service based on requiring (yes, even in the notice you used "must") government data.I like how you didn't address the competition part. It would have been a huge risk if other competitors didn't shift to requiring government IDs as well.
