Comment by akoboldfrying
8 days ago
I honestly don't know what you think quoting my entire original post achieves, other than making it clear that I did in fact mention "web of trust", thus undermining your claim that I'm a stooge for big tech.
I wouldn't let that bother you, though. Life must be exciting when you know that everyone else is secretly hellbent on authoritarianism.
> thus undermining your claim that I'm a stooge for big tech.
Strawman. Your web of trust comment doesn't exonerate you from proposing to ban anonimity, doing the bidding of, not big tech, but I opportunistic lobbying tech and governments.
Web of trust is not "good" if you try to impose it on others, it was a comment of "create your own thing with your own friends" instead of pushing your bullshit unto us.
> I wouldn't let that bother you, though. Life must be exciting when you know that everyone else is secretly hellbent on authoritarianism.
I mean. If you were capable of actual arguments instead of just strawmen... Your life would be exciting too. As it is, you just parrot narratives.
For someone who enjoys saying "strawman" so much, you certainly enjoy offering your own strawmen.
> proposing to ban anonimity [sic]
Nowhere do I propose to "ban" anonymity. Strawman.
> Web of trust is not "good" if you try to impose it on others
Nowhere do I "try to impose it on others". Strawman.
I'm done here.
You're very dishonest.
> I think that, ultimately, systems that humans use to interact on the internet will have to ditch anonymity. If people can't cheaply and reliably distinguish human output from LLM output, and people care about only talking to humans, we will need to establish authenticity via other mechanisms. In practice that means PKI or web of trust (or variants/combinations), plus reputation systems
Oh! I didn't use the expression "I propose" therefore "I'm not proposing it". Give me a break.
I'm glad you're done. Your final words were just denying your initial words. Fitting.