Last week’s repeal of Obama-era net neutrality rules had people melting down, with CNN declaring it the “end of the internet as we know it.”
Not surprisingly, the internet Monday is exactly the same as we knew it last week — boiling over with hot takes. Keep in mind this piece was published by Bloomberg View back in August, but Bloomberg decided to retweet it over the weekend, apparently to capitalize on all of the net neutrality panic.
Twitter should ban anonymous accounts — and if it won't, regulators should step in https://t.co/KKMBeRxlLL pic.twitter.com/la4gv3xbf8
— Bloomberg Opinion (@bopinion) December 16, 2017
What’s that again? “Regulators” should step in? Leonid Bershidsky calls his policy “the obvious solution” to trolling, fake news, and cyberbullying.
Social networks should be obliged to ban anonymous accounts. If they refuse to do so voluntarily, government regulators should force the issue.
…
This would immediately resolve the problems of fake names, anonymous bullies, troll armies and hate-speech law violations. There would still be cases of identity theft, but the platforms could easily alert a user if a new account attempted to use his or her card data.
We have to hear that one more time: government regulators should “force the issue” with social media companies? Really?
Frak no.
No way. No how. Not happening. https://t.co/CXYvrLFUig
— Goo T. Gwaba (@GooGwaba) December 16, 2017
— NeoN: Automataster (@neontaster) December 16, 2017
This is a horrible idea on so many levels. https://t.co/lwY61vctLe
— Mike Masnick (@mmasnick) December 18, 2017
Tell you what… when you start putting the name of the actual Bloomberg employee who wrote this on the tweet, I'll give it some consideration. https://t.co/qRahNtF1cU
— BayAreaFrau (@bayareahausfrau) December 17, 2017
Interesting take from Mr. Bloomberg View https://t.co/yBqZ19qZpC
— Siberian Fox (@SilverVVulpes) December 16, 2017
https://twitter.com/TheSickDork/status/942084016907354116
https://twitter.com/TylerPreston20/status/942066877953699846
https://twitter.com/hboulware/status/942095580511264768
This is the stupidest thing I've read today. And I've read lots of Last Jedi takes today. https://t.co/ZzM2QXhY3q
— SpaceDetectiveComputer (@Hal_RTFLC) December 17, 2017
https://twitter.com/MichaelCarusi/status/942755953954443264
Bots and con artists are problem, but regulation of #Twitter ? This doesn't sound possible, reasonable and potentially dangerous to whoever isn't in power. https://t.co/qB7BYAkXc0
— Samuel (@ModerateInAll) December 18, 2017
So it should be harder to get a Twitter account than it is to vote in some places? https://t.co/qaZqsWL0c8
— Saving Ferris ⚕️ (@StreetDoc_67) December 18, 2017
https://twitter.com/liars_never_win/status/942108964250144769
Sounds like a job for the powerful Twitter Regulatory Agency. https://t.co/2VQyCQdyUp
— NeoKong (@The_NeoKong) December 16, 2017
Classic liberalism. If we don't like it, use the govt to force you to stop. https://t.co/nHHQoe0CDM
— Carl Gustav (@CaptYonah) December 16, 2017
This is what allowing government to "regulate" things gets you. https://t.co/EaspepXVw2
— Maggie McNeill (@Maggie_McNeill) December 16, 2017
*puts an Oprah costume on*
YOU GET A BAN!
AND YOU GET A BAN!
AND YOU GET A BAN!
AND YOU GET A BAN!
AND YOU GET A BAN!
AND YOU GET A BAN!
AND YOU GET A BAN! https://t.co/eShpSvrncI— Dr. Kedi Schrödinger ☃️ (@ThanksKedi) December 16, 2017
Regulators cannot ban anonymous speech. Anonymous speech is protected by the First Amendment. Supreme Court adjudicated that 50 years ago. https://t.co/0orAVl0KSZ
— Robert Barnes (@Barnes_Law) December 17, 2017
Preeeeeety sure government regulation of twitter would not go the way you are fantasizing about. ☕ https://t.co/sEVvDleAOS
— Chad Felix Greene (@chadfelixg) December 16, 2017
UP NEXT:
Wearing mandatory name tags out on the street so Progressive political militias know exactly who to punch and how to track those people down at home. https://t.co/CMhx52UTX3— D.W.Robinson (@_DWRobinson) December 17, 2017
https://twitter.com/GlomarNeverDies/status/942048588292648960
https://twitter.com/_AndreaUrbanFoX/status/942322722146623488
https://twitter.com/DavidGX/status/942371837467594752
https://twitter.com/frozenbinarydev/status/942097833896931328
If you don't have the socio-political capital to live and work in DC or NYC, you don't deserve to express yourself on social media. That's the real opinion here. https://t.co/0CW3h2TsH0
— Dexter De La Paz, wendigo trainer (@DogmanRespecter) December 16, 2017
https://twitter.com/ETDEUMPURITAS/status/942129691158335488
That’s tempting: we’ve seen some ridiculous tweets from verified blue-check elites we’ve never heard of.
Twitter should do whatever it deems best for its business and regulators should leave Twitter the hell alone. For Pete’s sake. https://t.co/Vr3rZQsDRz
— Ken Gardner (@KenGardner11) December 17, 2017
Related:
‘You’re really bad at this’: Twitter issues guidelines for removing verification from accounts