>>108266619The arrests will be a bluff like in the UK. No one is actually getting in trouble. Why? Because it's too risky. If cops actually tried to arrest the wrong people, even in the UK, they'd get killed. The examples they use will be actors or straight AI fabrications. Otherwise I guess I agree with you in that their goal is a chilling effect on free speech.
>>108266620Spy satellites have been around for decades, as have stealth jets, not to mention the ubiquity of drones. Do they not exist? Are they a bluff? How do you know? I actually am interested and want to know why you think Intel backdoors like Intel ME and Minix are fake. What about Ring and Flock? Are CCTVs fake and just for show? I'm not being combative. If you have a reason to think it's a bluff please share.
>Currently you can bypass most tracking, use others wifi, and by almost entirely anonymous onlineHasn't steganography and fingerprinting nearly killed this? And aren't 99.999% of users opening their assholes to Cloudflare, including you and me right now, questioning the Jews? Why do they need IDs when we're all screaming at the top of our lungs about the JQ?
>to track them easierHow much easier does it get when 99% of people are phone users exclusively using gaped, compromised Android and Apple? And the rest use Windows and Mac, with a tiny amount of Linux who for the most part congregate on stable distros like Debian, Ubuntu, Mint, Arch, etc all of which are completely fucked in the ass by Intel ME or AMD TrustZone?
>The government is not some supertech entity years ahead of the private sectorHow do you explain the admittedly tiny handful of examples like Julian Assange's interview with clear AI artifacts (usually fucked up collars or eyes as they blink)? They had to be at least 5-10 years ahead of when it leaked to the public. Not to mention how 3D CG were at least 15 years ahead of Hollywood, rendered on government supercomputers.
