|
|
|
|
|
|
by stephengillie
3983 days ago
|
|
|
> For the deputy Silvio Costa, "this simple requirement will certainly curb the attitudes of those who cowardly hide behind anonymity to disseminate criminal messages in the network. ["] And also those who hide behind anonymity to disseminate legal, even helpful messages across the network. Having an online alias allows many shy, repressed, abused, and frightened individuals the opportunity to chat, interact, and discourse about their lives without fear this information will be used against them. > ["]Also," he continues, "individuals who insist in this type of conduct will be more easily identified and properly prosecuted." More of the "If you've got nothing to hide, then you've got nothing to worry about" attitude. This suspicion is so hostile to normal traffic that its chilling effect is undeniable. It's very sad to see. |
|
|
It's worse -- these CPF numbers have nothing special but a simple checksum at the end. It is trivial to generate them and, if we get a used one, check the actual owner from our IRS website.
So we can assume everyone with bad intentions will simply use one from anyone else and the law will have no effect on criminals but will terrorize people who need/want to keep their PII private. Also, I suppose everyone will infringe that law at some level, opening the door to selective prosecution of "undesirables" or someone opposing the powers that be.