Slashdot Mirror


Google's CEO Warns Kids Will Have to Change Names to Escape "Cyber Past"

Google's Eric Schmidt says that people's private lives are so well documented now that the young will have to change their names when reaching adulthood to avoid their youthful indiscretions. In an interview with the Wall Street Journal Schmidt says: "I don't believe society understands what happens when everything is available, knowable and recorded by everyone all the time." A fresh start from the stupid things you did as a kid seems like a good thing. Now we just need a way to get rid of the dreaded family photo album.

44 of 706 comments (clear)

  1. Either that by Drakkenmensch · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... or we'll collectively learn that throwing rocks in the neighbour's window is NOT a life-tainting event that will destroy your life forever? Criminal records are, in theory, forever, and even killers get to move on when their sentences are done.

    1. Re:Either that by Smidge204 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      even killers get to move on when their sentences are done.

      Sex offenders... not so much.
      =Smidge=

    2. Re:Either that by butterflysrage · · Score: 4, Insightful

      but, but, but.... that guy applying for a job said something mean 20 years ago! We can't hire him, what if he is the same as he was when he was seven years old? Our company can't take that chance!

      --
      the preceding post was not spell checked... suck it.
    3. Re:Either that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Agreed. There's one great, big collective stick up our asses about kids being kids and doing stupid shit and/or just having fun. To hell with changing their names, how about the rest of us just grow the fuck up?

    4. Re:Either that by Nadaka · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I am going to have to interject here.

      Back in the day, you do something stupid and brag to your friends about it in person. Now kids are bragging about doing stupid things on facebook, myspace and twitter. Not only do hundreds or thousands more people know about it, but a record of it exists for all time.

      Another problem is facebook and other people tagging you in their pictures. You don't even need to have a facebook account and you can be unknowingly leaking information to facebook that could make you unemployable in the future.

    5. Re:Either that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, it'd be better if they just killed their victims.

    6. Re:Either that by ovu · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Not to mention that emerging facial recognition features in photo sharing sites will render name changes an exercise in futility. Society's going to be forced to loosen up.

    7. Re:Either that by epp_b · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'd rather work with someone who has a Facebook page full of comments, a selection of interests and some drunk pictures than the antisocial guy with no life.

      Darn. That's me :(

    8. Re:Either that by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sex offenders... not so much.

      You have to remember that in an insane society ruled by religious wackos whose mental disease revolves around fighting "sin" killing is a far, far, far, lesser crime than all things sex-related.

      You see killing is a forgivable sin (after all you can't have religious wars without killing and the "holy book" of the month is full of mass murder in the name of spreading the lunacy) but controlling sex resides deeply at the very core of the warped, hateful, controlling, jealous egos of the zealots.

      It is no coincidence that the ravings on the subject of "morality" coming from the Taliban officials and US "born again" politicos are so similar.

    9. Re:Either that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Or Felons, You get popped for any small infraction, (It's amazing what is a felony these days.) and you are screwed for a very long time after your sentence is over, and for some things, forever.

      I did 8 months for firecrackers (That weren't actually illegal, but the lying feds convinced a jury that they were.) because I pissed of a sheriff who stood by and let some children die (Sheriff Stone of Columbine) and ten years later, I still can't get a decent job, and I will never again work in the two fields I'm best at. Computer Security and Firearms training. and in many states, can't even vote for change or reform, or ever hold public office. All because I stood up for what was right.

      So much for getting to move on...

    10. Re:Either that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Why would you not hire someone because they get drunk in their off times? Wouldn't their performance and history of performance be a lot more important?.

      Here's what one *VERY LARGE* employer has to say about why you wouldn't hire someone because they get drunk in their off times:

      APPLICABLE ADJUDICATIVE GUIDELINES

      GUIDELINE G: ALCOHOL CONSUMPTION

      Paragraph 21. The Concern. Excessive alcohol consumption often leads to the exercise of questionable judgment or the failure to control impulses, and can raise questions about an individual's reliability and trustworthiness.

    11. Re:Either that by tacarat · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Unfortunately the label is occasionally applied too broadly and in ways that probably weren't intended. Even if the charges and label get cleared, the financial costs would be great and the damage to one's reputation may not be repairable. It's hard enough to find people that RTFA, much less the follow up stories.

      --
      "Common sense will be the death of us all"
    12. Re:Either that by Abstrackt · · Score: 4, Interesting

      So you're saying that people who've been victims of sex crimes would be better off if they committed suicide?

      I think AC is saying that it would be better for the sex offender if they killed their victims, not that the victims killed themselves. From the sex offender's perspective anyway.

      --
      They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it's not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance. - Terry Pratchett
    13. Re:Either that by Chibinium · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A society that has forgotten to forgive will hold a grudge against itself forever.

    14. Re:Either that by Randseed · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah. The ones who actually knowingly committed a sex crime. Not those who went to a prostitute, urinated behind a tree in a park, got accused of something with no proof except some ten year old saying so, people named as rapists by some teenage girl who got caught by her father at a party she wasn't supposed to be at, naked and covered in two guys' semen, and made up the story to try and get out of trouble (true story), had sex with their 16 year old girlfriend when they were 18, had sex with some 16 year old in a club that she used fake ID to get into, and any of the rest of that crap. Unfortunately, with crap like 's Law it's just a profit-making, life-destroying industry that the government has created so that politicians can get votes.

    15. Re:Either that by Randseed · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Yep. A prominent pediatric neurosurgeon killed himself down here a number of years ago after he got in an argument with someone and they made a malicious report of child porn to the authorities. They searched his place and found nothing, but as a result his life was destroyed. His career was over. His family life was ruined.

      He hung himself in a closet.

    16. Re:Either that by Lumpy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      usually demanded by sexually depraved individuals. The most anti-sex people are at their core highly perverted.

      Honestly EVERYTHING commanded by any religion about sex is only there to control the population.

      "God HATES you for masturbating..." What a fucking horrible thing to say to a child, yet it is said daily in almost every single house of worship across this planet. (I know there are some relatively less twisted religions out there, but they are not common). Humans by NATURE are sexual beings. It's by the warping of the human mind and abuse we make people afraid of sex or even hate sex. Sexual abuse, Emotional Abuse, plain old teaching kids lies, manipulation, etc....

      If ANY religion teaches hate, then it is not real, It's nothing but made up by man, designed only for the control others through shame and coercion.

      I'm certain I'll be modded into oblivion as I'm speaking out against religion. Disclaimer: I am a Christian, and I utterly despise the fear, uncertainty and doubt that other Christians preach.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    17. Re:Either that by operagost · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You're making a scapegoat of religion-- and what religion I don't know, because you seem to assume that all religions have the same values. The fact is, laws are made by both the religious and nonreligious. Both the people and their elected representatives are complicit when rights are violated. Your vague "religion" that values modesty over peace is merely a straw man you've constructed to distract us from the problem and allow us to recuse ourselves from it.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    18. Re:Either that by postbigbang · · Score: 4, Funny

      Modded? No. But tonight, a search engine harvester is coming here. Your link will be cross associated with your other citations. The SE will make a note of that for later correlation.

      And when Jesus comes back, the first place he's going to is Google to find out who's gonna get a big smite. That's what Schmidt's saying. Eric will make a little query, and the shit's gonna fly in YOUR direction, heathen.

      Oh, wait....

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    19. Re:Either that by Courageous · · Score: 4, Insightful

      He knows that. He's being figurative. You, however, aren't getting the message. Because while it is not literally true, the sentiment is entirely true.

    20. Re:Either that by amRadioHed · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I just have to point out, the response that you'd rather have bad thing X happen to you then bad thing Y happen to your children says nothing about the relative badness of X and Y. It just says you'd rather have bad things happen to you then to your children.

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    21. Re:Either that by HungryHobo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      different scales,

      "be murdered"
      vs
      "rape my children"

      It's normal for people to add weight to harm to their offspring vs harm to themselves.

      but if you want to compare crimes to make the scales make sense then use the same victims.

      So it should be

      "kill my children"
      vs
      "rape my children"

    22. Re:Either that by bjk002 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      ... or we will have the apocalyptic end so many seem to desire.

      The zealots will refuse to "loosen up", and the rest of us will refuse to be zealots.

      --
      Opinion:=TMyOpinion.Create(Me);
    23. Re:Either that by I'm+not+really+here · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Amen. First, your comment about how horrible it is to tell a child that God hates them for any reason is spot on. Second, I am so glad that there is another Christian that understands that Sex is a beautiful gift from God and is something to be reveled in (of course I believe that for numerous sociological reasons, in addition to common sense and biblical teaching, it is best when between two consenting married adults who have had no others, and has negative consequences when done outside of a solid marriage relationship... With no one to compare to, your significant other is the best for you for now and for always!).
       
      Christ was all about love and Paul was all about loving one another, serving one another, and marriage (though he honestly points out that marriage can be a distraction for many in the ministry, and he's right, it does distract, but for most people, that trade off is worth it).
       
      Christians need to realize that teaching fear of sex to children is creating maladjusted sexual beings who will never fully be able to enjoy guilt free sex with their spouse.
       
      Oh, and let's get rid of that ancient (and wrong) notion that Men should dominate women in the marriage, please? "Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands.

      Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish." Ephesians 5:22.
       
      So the wife should treat her husband as the church treats Christ, with respect, awe, adoration, and love, but be careful all you guys who say "aha!" because the men are then told that in marriage the husband is to love his wife as Christ loved the church and give himself up for her. Men, our wives are expected to respect, love, and adore us, but in return, we are to sacrifice everything (even if it means death) to show our wives love. Now that's religion that is good for the soul, and that's the foundation of a good marriage, a solid community, and a good life.

      --
      Before commenting on the Bible, please read it first
    24. Re:Either that by RzUpAnmsCwrds · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The fact is, laws are made by both the religious and nonreligious.

      In the US, not really. At the federal level nearly 100% of our representatives are either Christian or Jewish; the same is true to a somewhat lesser extent at the state and even local levels.

  2. Irony by SilverHatHacker · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Funny how that's coming from the guy who's indexing it all so we can find it easier.

    --
    Funny may not give karma, but +5 Informative never made anyone snort coffee out their nose.
    1. Re:Irony by Jahava · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Funny how that's coming from the guy who's indexing it all so we can find it easier.

      While Google may be the dominant information indexer, what they're doing doesn't require any special magic. Anybody can be indexing some or all of the information is out there (it's publicly-available, after all). Google being both dominant and public gives us a good idea of what can be done, but if Google didn't exist or limited itself, others would surely step in to fill that gap. It doesn't make what Mr. Schmidt said any less true.

      To some degree we should count ourselves lucky that Google is both dominant and public. Imagine all of that information (still) being used against you, but you not having any idea of the vast quantity and depth of correlation that could be done.

  3. Scary by bieber · · Score: 4, Insightful
    FTA:

    "We're trying to figure out what the future of search is," Mr Schmidt said. “One idea is that more and more searches are done on your behalf without you needing to type. "I actually think most people don't want Google to answer their questions. They want Google to tell them what they should be doing next."

    Surely he jests. I know Google hasn't always been the most steadfast guardian of personal privacy, but coming right out and stating that you want your company to become so intertwined with peoples' lives that it will plan their future for them? That's just creepy...

  4. Re:Your Favorite Youthful Indiscretion? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I once bought an Alanis Morrisette album. (posted anonymously for obvious reasons)

  5. Remember when you used aliases to post online? by stagg · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This kind of schlock comes from the same corporate minds that have been pushing for real names and credit card information to be associated with all online interactions. I'd like to go back to taking anonymous aliases for granted again please.

  6. Re:Big Brother Is In The Building by easterberry · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Except that in this case they aren't actually, you know, DOing anything. Evil or otherwise. He's talking about a problem that the internet as a whole creates and would be equally rampant with or without Google which Google has practically no effect on.

    It's not an article about Schmidt releasing some new antiprivacy system, it's just a point he's making that the internet makes your past easily accessible to everyone forever. Hell, it's more Facebook than Google who's responsible. But no. Feel free to shoot the messenger.

  7. Or maybe by EraserMouseMan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    People will grow up and learn that stupidity has consequences. Then train their kids to live productive giving lives instead of wasting their youth on idleness and pointlessly looking for lines to color outside of just to prove they are different.

    Instead of planning on changing your name when you grow up you can choose be responsible instead.

    1. Re:Or maybe by Kevin+Stevens · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So when you were younger you never:

      Made fun of or teased anyone in a way which now as an adult you would regret?
      Held views that you now would be embarrassed by?
      Were an ardent fan of music or specific bands that might have promoted views of lifestyles you no longer want to be associated with?
      Enjoyed songs or lyrics that may have others think you are depressed, angry, or prone to violent behavior?
      Drank alcohol before you were of legal age, or attended parties that might give the appearance that you were drinking before legal age?
      Experimented with drugs, or you associated with people or groups that may give the appearance that you experimented with drugs?
      Said anything that could be misunderstood for you saying that you partook in illegal activities including drug use.
      Spoke in a style (IE LOL, or 1337 speak) that you would be embarrassed by as an adult, or maybe you are not personally embarrassed by on a personal level, but on a professional level you don't want others to see?

        It's not about being responsible. Schmidt is just pointing out that now everyone has to essentially conduct their lives as if they are politicians and be very aware of who could be recording their actions and how they could be perceived. This is somewhat acceptable as an adult, but it is an unfair burden to put on kids, especially when a 14 year old is really incapable of understanding how putting lyrics to their favorite rap song on their Facebook page may look down the road to someone doing research on them when they are interviewing at an investment bank.

  8. Criminal records by SirGarlon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Actually, there is that little box on a job application asking "have you ever been convicted of a crime?" I never paid it any mind because it's easy to say "no" when that's the truth, but some people have to make a calculation. Is it better to check the box and hope they still get a chance to explain in the interview, or leave it blank and hope it never comes up that they lied on the application?

    So having a criminal record can, indeed have long-lasting effects. Remember, the question is usually "have you ever."

    (As aside, a friend of mine had to answer "have you ever been arrested, which led to the amusing story of him and four other high school kids breaking into the gym because they got locked out during a late track practice... charges were dropped but technically that was an arrest.)

    --
    [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
  9. Forward thinkers by travdaddy · · Score: 5, Funny

    "the young will have to change their names when reaching adulthood to avoid their youthful indiscretions"

    OK guys, I have to admit, girls are WAY ahead of us on this one.

    --
    Adidas To Bring Back Sneakernet
  10. Re:Getting old by MozeeToby · · Score: 5, Insightful

    All these stories that you hear about Google, and especially Schmidt, aren't anti-privacy stories. In fact, I would argue that they're more along the lines of honest warnings. Most of what he says echos what is common sense the the nerd community:

    "If you don't want people to know about something, don't post it online." How many times have we said nearly this exact same thing to our friends and family? I know I have, especially to my younger, less experienced relatives.

    "I don't believe society understands what happens when everything is available, knowable and recorded by everyone all the time." He's right, society doesn't understand and until people learn to look past minor indiscretions society never will. Until that time, the only way to have a fresh start is to give people a name that doesn't have all the past associated with it. He's not saying, "We're going to post all your data and theirs nothing you can do about it!", he's saying "the data is out there and we need to find ways to deal with it on a personal and on a societal level".

  11. Not a new discussion by BenFranske · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is not a new discussion... there have been people thinking about this for some time. In March of 2006 I wrote an article on my blog about it (reproduced below) which eventually led to me consulting with Public Radio on a show they were doing at the time about online public information (you can listen to an archived copy of that at October 12, 2007: Your Exposed Life on MPR

    My Original Article 3/24/2006:

    I've often wondered who will be able to run for political office in forty or fifty years. People, especially youg people, seem to be so naive about posting things online. For years online forums and message boards have been a place where people vented. Now sites like Myspace, Facebook and others are creating such a low barrier to entry that almost every middle and high school child in the United States has some kind of web presence. What many fail to understand is that once something is posted or "said" on the internet it never goes away...ever. The internet is also quite easy to search if you know what you're doing. This dangerous combination means that everything you write to a message board can be found at some point in the future and "can and will be used against you". Any kind of off-color comment or joke you ever made online, even if your intention wasn't to hurt anyone, is public knowledge.

    Employers already know about this. BusinessWeek recently ran an article called "You are what you post" that talked about some of the implications for job seeking but I think the arena where this will really get the consultants salivating is politics. There are so few people who are able to hold their tongue and never offend anyone. In the past politicians have relied primarily on obscuring and making it difficult to find embarrassing things about their past. When today's teens start running for political office these things will only be an internet search away. Remember that posting to that email discussion list about STDs you made when you were 15? How about that time someone on a message board got you mad and you called them a racial slur? You may have forgotten these incidents but the internet has not and neither will your enemies.

    I wonder if the politicians of the future will need to be groomed from birth to have no defects and think very, very carefully before ever speaking. On the other hand our society may end up becoming more accepting of faults which would not be an all bad outcome. This remains to be seen but in the meantime those of us who have always tried to think about how what we say today could come back (for better or worse) in the future are going to be much better off than the indiscriminate masses.

  12. What is new? by dov_0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think in the West we had a strange unnatural period where for the first time in human history there was enough individuality and wealth across the general populace that we could actually keep our lives private. This is not a luxury that most peoples and cultures of the world either have now or have ever really had. The only difference now is that instead of being recorded in the memories of all our the members of our community and anyone they happen to talk about it with, it is recorded electronically.

    --
    sudo mount --milk --sugar /cup/tea /mouth /etc/init.d/relax start
  13. Re:Getting old by smartr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    We're moving to a point where things you don't want people to know are showing up online without any action taken on your part. Someone snaps a photo of you, someone else tags it, some 3rd party web application aggregates it. The only action on your part was doing something stick up their ass society doesn't approve of. I think Schmidt is wrong. I think it's business that needs to change... or fail as our 20 year old somethings adapt and make their own businesses to replace them. I think the politics will be particularly entertaining 40 years from now.

  14. Alice's Restaurant by bsDaemon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The reminded me:

    "Kids, this-piece-of-paper's-got-47-words-37-sentences-58-words-we-wanna-
    know-details-of-the-crime-time-of-the-crime-and-any-other-kind-of-thing-
    you-gotta-say-pertaining-to-and-about-the-crime-I-want-to-know-arresting-
    officer's-name-and-any-other-kind-of-thing-you-gotta-say", and talked for
    forty-five minutes and nobody understood a word that he said, but we had
    fun filling out the forms and playing with the pencils on the bench there,
    and I filled out the massacre with the four part harmony, and wrote it
    down there, just like it was, and everything was fine and I put down the
    pencil, and I turned over the piece of paper, and there, there on the
    other side, in the middle of the other side, away from everything else on
    the other side, in parentheses, capital letters, quotated, read the
    following words:

    ("KID, HAVE YOU REHABILITATED YOURSELF?")

    I went over to the sargent, said, "Sargeant, you got a lot a damn gall to
    ask me if I've rehabilitated myself, I mean, I mean, I mean that just, I'm
    sittin' here on the bench, I mean I'm sittin here on the Group W bench
    'cause you want to know if I'm moral enough join the army, burn women,
    kids, houses and villages after bein' a litterbug." He looked at me and
    said, "Kid, we don't like your kind, and we're gonna send you fingerprints
    off to Washington."

    1. Re:Alice's Restaurant by cthulu_mt · · Score: 4, Funny

      That reminded me:

      I need to take out my trash.

      --
      Virginia is for lovers. EVE is for griefers.
  15. Re:Getting old by klui · · Score: 4, Informative

    When the "internet" was generally available in the form of social networking sites like Slashdot, somebody thought the Usenet Netiquette FAQ was obsolete so people ignored common sense and wrote whatever thought that popped in their heads. I'm not sure if people actually paid attention to the Netiquette back in the mid 1990s but at least they should be aware of such a thing. http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1855

  16. Re:Call me a extremist if you want by Midnight's+Shadow · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Honestly tossing a rock through a neighbors window is barely a crime especially when the child ends up having to pay to replace the window. How in the world did you go from that to burning down an orphanage?

    Ok, do me a favor and get off your fucking high horse. I have a criminal record and I spent time in jail because of it (among other consequences). There are very few crimes that should follow someone around for their whole life - sexual offenses and first degree murder spring to mind - others are usually just people doing stupid shit without thinking at the time. Should I really be turned down for a job because I got into a fight 10 years ago in college but have kept my nose clean since then? That is kind of like dooming someone to a career of wishing windows for writing down a wrong answer on an exam in 5th grade. Actions should have consequence but they should fit the crime.

    The only people who never did stupid shit are those who have never done anything. Those of us with criminal records were just stupid enough to get caught and charged for doing it.

    --
    "God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh. " -Voltaire
  17. Re:No history is worse than bad history by pclminion · · Score: 4, Insightful

    When I interview these recent grads and see nothing out there, I wonder, did they have NO life or did they manage to erase their past?

    I am too busy living my life to spend any time whoring it out on social sites to thousands of people I don't even know. But I suppose having a sense of privacy makes me some kind of sociopath with skeletons in the closet. I don't understand the need some people have to tell everybody every thing they do. Do you also have sex with every person who happens to come within 10 feet of you? Why the hell are people so promiscuous with their "friendship?"