I'm not here to advocate either way for anonymity (two cents: providing privacy requires strong legislation and rigorous enforcement, Germany does well in this regard I think), simply improved trust infrastructure the country badly needs (which would be an efficient medium by which to improve trust online). No problems with my CAC, despite OPM's failure. Elect better legislators and improve working conditions for technologists in government if you want better security posture (which we should). There is a reason USDS has to hack the GS pay scale to get good people into positions of leverage.
Facebook already requires you to use a government issued ID to identify yourself if they question your profile [1]. Not a legal requirement, Facebook's requirement. Twitter also requires government ID to get a blue verified checkbox [2], or to report fraud.
TLDR: I will take a somewhat ineffective government, warts and all, with the understanding work is necessary to improve it over fatalism and apathy that brings about total dysfunction.
> I'm not here to advocate either way for anonymity
Is trust and anonymity somehow disconnected in your mind? Before you answer that, I'll point out that I didn't say pseudo-anonymity.
> No problems with my CAC, despite OPM's failure.
So you're either a post breach boot or you haven't yet noticed a personal impact. While I've never had the desire, due to the contents of my OPM file, I could never do any business in China under my own name without drawing a disruptive amount of attention. That may or may not be a problem in the future, nobody can say. But it can be said it should have never happened in the first place, as there was ample well reasoned warning and precedent. Anybody else remember the clipper chip? What about that "golden key" stupidity?
Whatever policy Facebook has at the moment is completely beside the point. What you are talking about would require the force of law. This proposal has been floated numerous times, tying online activity to a federally issued identifier.
I hold contractor status, and I would never step foot in China (for obvious reasons). I think we see things fundamentally differently, and I wish you well.
I don't wish you ill, but I wish you and your ideas had no effect on me. Which is more to the point - you are focusing on the wrong part of the problem. Trust and disinformation isn't the problem, the problem is the second order effects. It would be easier to reduce the potential damage that useful idiots and victims of propaganda can do to everyone else, than it would be to pull off the impossible trust+anonymity+benevolentFed scheme.
Facebook already requires you to use a government issued ID to identify yourself if they question your profile [1]. Not a legal requirement, Facebook's requirement. Twitter also requires government ID to get a blue verified checkbox [2], or to report fraud.
TLDR: I will take a somewhat ineffective government, warts and all, with the understanding work is necessary to improve it over fatalism and apathy that brings about total dysfunction.
[1] https://www.facebook.com/help/159096464162185
[2] https://help.twitter.com/en/managing-your-account/twitter-ve...