In reply to:
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
106d
The statement critiques the push for digital IDs, suggesting ulterior motives such as financial gain and behavioral control. It questions the necessity of digital IDs for border control and highlights potential risks like data centralization and hacking. The tone is skeptical and cautionary, aiming to raise awareness about privacy and control issues.
- The statement aims to prevent harm by warning against potential misuse of digital IDs. [+1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- It respects privacy by opposing data centralization and surveillance. [+2]Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement promotes understanding of privacy concerns but could be more balanced in its critique. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- It engages in constructive criticism but could avoid implying malicious intent without evidence. [-1]Principle 4:I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.