Slashdot Mirror
Fake Names On Social Networks, a Fake Problem
disco_tracy writes "The leading social networks demand that members use their real names, and they're not afraid to evict violators. Many Facebook users have quietly complied, despite the problems that rule creates for political dissidents, stalking survivors and others. Much of this discussion has centered around people in physical or financial danger of having their identities revealed. But there are broader reasons for social networks to stop pushing real-name policies."
several hundred people around the world have had their name legally changed to Anonymous Coward
The single main reason that âoesocial networksâ push the real names issue is quality of their database for the use of marketers that buy services from the social networks. That, and the Three Letter Agencies make extensive use of social network data mining. But itâ(TM)s mostly the marketers, the more they know about *you* the more they can sell *you*. "Social networks" do this to improve the quality of their product (you).
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
Ah; a story on how hiding behind pseudonyms is no bad thing..
..followed by a comment thread in which lots of people hiding behind pseudonyms insult each other in ways they would not do if their names were actually attached and the comments could follow them home.
"Oops, I always forget the purpose of competition is to divide people into winners and losers." - Hobbes
For those of you who don't RTFA -- you do exist, right? -- here are the "broader reasons:"
Mind boggling, I know. Even more so when you consider than an entire article was written around those three points.
Why? because of Stupid HR people.
I have a friend that has 3 PHD's in Archaeology and is a Viking Historian that heads up the local SCA Viking group. he had to change his name to a viking name to keep schools from googling him and labelling him as a "wierdo that dresses up" and losing teaching positions.
I have another friend that worked in the medical field and was getting questioned daily by his HR department demanding he "friend them" on Facebook. so he changed his name to a made up one, made a new "real profile" that is empty and friended them through that.
Give us laws that protect us from Assholes in the HR department, I.E. let me sue my boss for $34,986,231,15 for not giving me a raise because I posted a LOLCAT animated gif on my facebook wall.
They cant fire me for living in a blue house with yellow flowers growing outside, but yet the idiots in Washington think it's ok to let them do it because I am friends with people named Dave.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
This really bothered me, don't know about the rest of you:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/02/16/945768/-UPDATED:-The-HB-Gary-Email-That-Should-Concern-Us-All
PERTINENT QUOTES/EXCERPTS:
"According to an embedded MS Word document found in one of the HBGary emails, it involves creating an army of sockpuppets, with sophisticated "persona management" software that allows a small team of only a few people to appear to be many, while keeping the personas from accidentally cross-contaminating each other. Then, to top it off, the team can actually automate some functions so one persona can appear to be an entire Brooks Brothers riot online... And all of this is for the purposes of infiltration, data mining, and (here's the one that really worries me) ganging up on bloggers, commenters and otherwise "real" people to smear enemies and distort the truth... "
and
"They are talking about creating the illusion of consensus. And consensus is a powerful persuader... And another thing, this is just one little company of assholes. I can't believe there aren't others doing this already. From oil companies, political campaigns, PR firms, you name it. Public opinion means big bucks. And let's face it, what these guys are talking about is easy."
and
"To the extent that the propaganda technique known as "Bandwagon" is an effective form of persuasion, which it definitely is, the ability for a few people to infiltrate a blog or social media site and appear to be many people, all taking one position in a debate, all agreeing, for example, that so and so is not credible, or a crook, is an incredibly powerful weapon."
---
* I'd suggest reading the whole article in the link I put up above & not only because of the quotes I pulled from it to get your attention here, but also because it largely BACKS THE FACT THAT EVEN PSEUDONYMS DON'T MATTER, because they're easy to create via alternate email accounts, TOR endpoint proxies usage, OR anonymous proxy server usage on the part of those seeking to be "many from 1"!
(Yes, I'd read that folks - because it MAY ADVERSELY AFFECT YOU ONE DAY ALSO & be "levelled against you" (I hope not)... & I KNOW I've had it happen to me, here, & others spots online (I busted clone52431/clone53421 & others doing it in fact, the "trolltalk.com" pack of admitted trolls around here in fact & years ago from arstechnica people @ Windows IT Pro -> http://www.windowsitpro.com/article/internals-and-architecture/the-memory-optimization-hoax#feedbackAnchor (Jeremy Reimer mainly))).
APK
P.S.=> That's for anyone that tries to say I am "full of it", etc./et al - though I know that most of you KNOW this type of crap really does go on online, & how/when/where/why IF NOT BY WHOM as well as why...
... apk
Especially considering that as long as you don't pick an overtly false name, you won't be banned. I know people that use fake names on facebook and google+, and they haven't had problems. If this comes down to human rights and privacy, pick a name that isn't obviously false. It doesn't get at the root of the problem, and the managers of these networks never will, but it's a simple solution to use until these social networks realize how futile these bans really are.
The author seems to think that the social networks have this rule because somehow it betters mankind. Obviously that is not true, the reason is that it betters the social media to have more accurate information about you.
This whole article misses the point entirely.
I wonder what follows to real names.
Real profile picture photo?
Real town, school, work place?
Why?, does it make any difference to advertisers to have a name attached to a profile?, would they target that specific product differently if my name is A or B?, I would guess they will try to sell to who I am, and that doesn't change with my name...
What constitutes a "real" name? Take a look at Sun Yat-Sen, for example. Which one do you think is THE real name? The original name? Baby name? Genealogy name? Courtesy name? School name? Eventually, Sun Yat-Sen was famed in China because of the pseudoname he used in Japan. And Yat-Sen itself is a school name.
--
Error 500: Internal sig error
I think it is needed because even though I have locked down my security settings as much as possible I know that HR people snoop around too much. I use my nickname from when I played football and rugby. I am only friends with my friends and family who know this nickname, so I don't think I am hiding behind. Am I hiding from HR and background companies that snoop out on social networks, absolutely. I don't have to the social network so my employer or potential employer can look for photos of me drinking or what not. Maybe if HR did not look for things not related to work or background companies didn't exist or security settings were actually real fake names wouldn't be needed. However, they do and fake names are needed
Just because you are wrong and I called you out on it doesn't mean I am a Troll.
My friend in college couldn't make a facebook account because his last name was "Queen", and facebook deemed it fake.
That, however, was a few years ago, he's since made a profile (and myself 2 fake ones), so I assumed that the restriction on fake names was lifted.
What do I know, I'm just an idiot, right?
Stalking survivors? Er? Is it possible _not_ to survive stalking?
I have a friend that has 3 PHD's in Archaeology...
!!!
Three PhDs? In the same subject?
Why?
http://www.geoffreylandis.com
will be allowed to be anonymous and have fake id. The age of the Spooks. U're future is going to suck unless
you change it. It sucked in the USSR, don't know why you people would want it here
I got banned from a site for not using my real name, I was astonished. I rarely use my real name, for obvious privacy reasons, and security. Data is too easily accessible and insecure on the internet. In the old days everyone used aliases. People are so stupid these days they probably give out their real phone # online too.
it's bad for business. the same policy killed friendster:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071101/194615.shtml
friendster started deleting fake names. this was the height of friendster's popularity, 2003. so people left in droves for this new funky site called "myspace"
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20030813/2010251.shtml
1. if you do not learn from history, you are doomed to repeat it, GOOGLE PLUS I'M TALKING TO YOU
2. the BOTTOM LINE you idiots. this policy hurts your BOTTOM LINE. just ask friendster, circa 2003
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
first name drag? or prom?
Adding 127.0.0.1 www.facebook.com to your internal DNS solves all sorts of issues. At home and on your portable devices, add this to your /etc/hosts. It works perfectly.
I have a series of 30 fake Facebook accounts that I created back in the day for Farmville (before I came to my senses and quit that particular timesink.) They all have legit looking names at first glance, such as Betty Farmer or Charlie Gardener, using the eLouai Candybar Dollmaker to generate unique looking profile pics. They all have working email addresses generated from my personal domain. The login information was shared with about 20 other people for Farmville purposes, and the accounts are still in use by those silly people still playing. (The accounts also now play Mafia Wars and a bunch of other games.) Other than an initial "this email address doesn't appear to be valid" notice and verification check, Facebook has been mum about these highly suspicious looking accounts.
Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
What I don't understand is why there is the constant expectation that every service offered MUST provide for everyone.
If a social network doesn't permit fake names, and you want to use a fake name, then go elsewhere. If there is no elsewhere, then isn't this a great opportunity for some entrepreneur to create an anonymous social network?
My mom always said, "Jim, you're 1 in a million." Given the current population, there are 7000 of me. God help us all!
We all know that Syfy is really the Sci-Fi channel. Why do they think they have to hide behind an alias. They claim that somehow people were not able to find them by their real name when “Sci-Fi” was typed into a search engine. They want us to believe that somehow the oddly spelled alias “SyFy” gives then an unique and searchable identity in this digital age; that the alias somehow actually makes them more recognizable and less anonymous.
I don’t buy it I am 1000000000% certain that that they are using the alias to bully and trick their fan base into watching movies like Sharktopus.
All jesting aside, If the SyFy can change its name for the digital age to become more recognizable and unique then so can people.
Demanding people display their real names online is not identity vetting. Vet my identity correctly and accurately then you should know me by my alias without needing my real name to be listed publicly.
They are lying about why they want everyone to use their real names. Just ask Bob Smith about what happens when he uses his real name online.
Is anyone else reminded of the Seinfeld episode where the whole apartment building had pictures up and Jerry didn't want his picture up? Or when Jerry didn't want to use a name tag? Real life is anonymity, you don't instantly know someone's name just because you walked up and talked to them. Did Voltare or The Artist (formerly known as Prince) have any problem hiding under their pseudonyms? I mean I can list great people who used pseudonyms all day long!
If I walk up and introduce myself as Ted, and strike up a conversation with you, you've now established a reputation with Ted. Not knowing that my name is actually Coolhand2120 is not going to change my reputation with you. Not knowing that I've said other things to other people as someone else is really none of your business anyway.
Needing to know what I've said to everyone is the product of a over inquisitive busy bodies. The fact the government wants to track what you're saying on the internet should give anyone paranoia. Do I have to register with my real name and government ID card before I talk in a town square now? The action (if it were to be purposed by government) in and of itself should be a violation of my right to free speech.
Frederick Bastiat (1801-1850) The Law
Move ninja warrior from g4 to it + pick up all hunting and other lesser sports from versus and kill the poor PQ universal sports sub channel and move all the stuff on it to nbc sports network 2.
I don't know why people get their f'ing panties in a bunch over crap like this.
If you don't like a company's policies, then don't use the service. It's that simple.
If you don't want HR to find you doing god-knows-what with god-knows-who online, then don't post it online for everyone to see. It's that simple.
Hi, I'm the author of the Discovery piece (and yes, I'm posting under my real name). One detail I couldn't get into that post was the credit-card issue--at first, I thought that a Facebook or a Google+ could just query Visa or AmEx or whoever and get a name match. It turns out that it's not so easy. Neither of the two usual card-verification schemes actually confirm a cardholder's name:
* asking for CVV2 numbers just proves that the person has the card in their hand (or has memorized those digits);
* AVS, or address verification system, only checks the numbers in the billing address.
There are other services that claim to verify names nearly instantly--but as gurps_npc notes, the real reason neither Facebook nor G+ bothers is because they don't want to discourage people from signing up.
- RP
For a long time I was in agreement that requiring real names was pointless, against privacy, blah blah blah.... More recently however I have begun to think otherwise, these social networking sites are based around YOUR identity, that way people find you, recognize you, and identify with you. I got sick of myspace because many people where changing their names weekly, trying to incorporate as many random characters as possible. Actually finding people I knew became next to impossible, on facebook I have found people I haven't talked to in years by recognizing their name.
As stated, there isn't really anything stopping you from using a fake name, in truth the only thing it really requires is that the name you choose looks real and that you don't change it often. I'm fine with that, there are people I know who have a made up name that they use on every site, that has become the identity I know them by online, and they feel safe in the knowledge that it is separate from their offline life.
All Im really saying is that I don't see many legitimate arguments against real names, as many people have pointed out its not really enforced, especially if your name looks legitimate. More people are accidentally banned by a bunch of people getting mad at the person and flagging the profile than facebook stumbling on to your name and locking the account. On the other hand the supposed rule of you having an identity that you are in some effect standing behind is what sets these social sites apart from all the forums filled with trolls.
Unfortunately, I'll never get back the time I just wasted RTFA. Rob Pegoraro's "analysis" is a little shallow for a 5th grader, but inexcusable for Georgetown-educated married man, or a "journalist" with over 10 years at the Washington Post. A decent programmer would see the criterion problem right off the bat, but someone with a degree in International Relations ought to recognize there's no international consensus on how parents name their children. Characterizing the task of finding "obviously fake" names among 100's of millions as "trivial" illustrates both ignorance and a lack of reflection. So what exactly is someone's "real" name? The law in the U.S. punts on that question, recognizing any name by which an individual is known in his community (*unless* your the artist "formerly known as Prince"). Its really a beautiful rule if you think about it, leaving a man to be the master of his own identity. Ahh...apathy is outweighing my interest in finishing this post.
I only recently discovered a workaround. I had previously stayed away from places that demand my real name like Facebook. I used the form of my name in a different language, not a translation but a standard transliteration. Their requirements never say which writing system I have to include my real name, only that I have to include my real name. My real name written in the Arabic or Japanese writing system is still my real name, but it's not much use to those who would otherwise find me.
The requirement is there to help the corporations, not their users. (snip...)
would do 99% of the work of verifying identity.
A legitimate attempt at verifying users' identities is exactly what I don't want; it makes their data more valuable, and for the benefit of using a nickname in front of people I already know? I'm more concerned about Facebook et al. getting my personal information than my friends. Also, with a credit card charge, it's not just your name that they get; they get a billing address too.
If you read what the top executives at Facebook say--and if you then spend some time talking on background with some of them--it's clear that this company wants to become the layer of identity or authentication that it apparently feels should have been put into the Internet's original architecture. (I linked to that Vint Cerf interview because it has him explaining, at about 6:40 in, that the Internet needs identifiers but not fixed identities... oh, and because the video features me bantering onstage with Vint Cerf.) Facebook Connect logins and Facebook social plug-ins exist because they extend your Facebook identity across the rest of the Web--and at some sites, your Facebook identity is now the only way to leave a comment.
- RP
I'm asking these questions with a genuine level of curiosity....
What impact do people think having real names genuinely has on advertising?
Is the advertising industry really that effective?
How much notice do people actually take?
Are people really conditioned to buy stuff or even switch brands just because there's an advert?
If I'm making a purchase beyond the weekly shop, I tend to look at suppliers websites, reviews etc - I wouldn't go out and spend my hard earned cash on something just because there's an advert telling me to do so.
Personally speaking, heavy advertising and a hard sell are a positive disincentive for me to do business with the organisations concerned. I've walked out of a shop, partway through a purchase [without paying] because the sales droid would not accept that I didn't want the up-sells and I'll never buy some products because of their persistent and incredibly annoying TV adverts.
These days I'm less tempted by impulse buys and know / research into what I want -- so adverts have little effect on me.
I guess I'm just not in the target audience for many of the advertisers -- or perhaps it's a cultural thing and life's different in the US
The namespace for numan beings is relatively finite, and collisions abound. I am not unique in my relatively small town, at my relatively large employer, etc. at least by the part of my name I use daily. But on the web, I am actually very close to unique in my pseudonym. I have it linked with my real identity in many places. I have used it long enough that the muggles in my life even recognize me by it. But on all my social networks (save Twitter) it is at best a nickname. Makes you feel like these folks don't grok the internet.
Over on G+, ESR has been arguing for the removal of anonymity, pseudonymity, and noms de plume. He claims, repeatedly, that if people are "accountable for what they say" they will behave better online. He calls it the solution to the "Sexygirl69 problem." a "problem" only in his own mind.
Everyone who points out how badly people behave on Facebook under their real names is dismissed with a wave of the hands, as if reality doesn't trump hypotheses. And to add to the insanity, he said that "important people" should be more equal than others and have the right to their celebrity names.
I have the /right/ to call myself anything I want, and as long as I'm not trying to defraud anyone, it's nobody's business. This is the same rule as in meatspace, and in meatspace, courts have sided with anonymity time and again as a fundamental right.
As the discussion progressed and ESR's intransigence became more evident, in a final fit of pique I left the discussion (didn't post a you all suck post, just stopped posting) and deleted the circle. Trying to talk to house plants would be more productive.
The result of this has led me to believe that ESR is no longer a "champion of freedom" but rather the opposite. His way or the highway. And since his opinion has weight in certain circles, I find this rather frightening.
--
BMO
Facebook would not be where it is today if people chose names like sexykitteh69 or RedskinsFan420.
Besides making it easier to find people you know, using a real name makes the site look more professional. If you want to hide your identity, use a fake name that sounds real so it gives the appearance that everyone uses their real name. Obviously fake names cheapen the site.
To me, a fake name is when you use someone else's name, and that is a problem. But using an alias (as in "sgunhouse" for me) is not a problem. Not that I use FB or the other "big" sites, but I use this name everywhere else.
I've visited a couple of my friends' facebook or myspace pages and had no idea why anyone would want to be there. And I'm not into texting, why would I want Twitter?
I'm sure the search engines or whatever have lots of information on me, but my real name and home address are not something I spread around.
Appear to come from a different country and name yourself "Raoul Sexout", and say that you are a male escort specializing in cougars.
http://www.xroxy.com/
I killed da wabbit -Elmer Fudd
Ah; a story on how hiding behind pseudonyms is no bad thing.. ..followed by a comment thread in which lots of people hiding behind pseudonyms insult each other in ways they would not do if their names were actually attached and the comments could follow them home.
The ability to be more honest than you're willing to while using your real name is precisely the reason why pseudonyms are important. What you're complaining of is the desired effect.
Curbing other people's freedom is too high a cost to keep you from being offended by some random troll.
Google states that they don't allow pseudonyms. I'd argue that in doing so, they are giving me an expectation of an assurance that the person with whom I want to communicate is who he says he is. When I get a request from "John Jones in Norfolk, Virginia", I expect that it really is John Jones from Norfolk, Virginia. Likewise, if I get a request from "FancyPants8 in some town", I have no such expectation.
So here's how to fix it to please both camps: Google allows pseudonyms, but they add a prominently visible field to show if the user is "validated" or not. If the field shows "validated" (presumably after some Google-provided, yet-to-be-determined validation process) then it means that I can be reasonably sure that the person is who he claims to be. If the field isn't "validated" or is "anonymous", then I know that the person has either not yet validated, or he has no intention to. In either case, it would give me the ability to better filter who and who I do not associate with.
My mom always said, "Jim, you're 1 in a million." Given the current population, there are 7000 of me. God help us all!
I recall some early dating sites used credit cards to verify identity. This doesnt help you to go after the high school crowd which usually dont have CCs in their own name.
So, which name is fake? The one on my birth certificate? Or the one everyone knows me by?
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
If requiring real names killed Friendster, why would it not have also killed Facebook?
A friend of mine was recently harmed by the Google+ real names policy. Partly because she was female, partly because she has a high online profile (hence no names). Using real names introduces vulnerabilities to your life that others can exploit. If you're wondering why there are only 10% females on G+, now you know part of the answer.
Real picture WON''T be next? Are you kidding?
It doesn't [make a difference to advertisers]. It maters to the real people looking for your profile because they know your real name:
That's incorrect.
If a photo shows you with a particular eye color, hair color, skin pigmentation, or disability, this is all information that can be used to target you for special attention for certain products.
If it shows artifacts, you might be targeted for other products; for example, if you wear eye glasses, have a visible hearing aid, have a TTY device in the background, bachelor shelves (Ikea might like to know that one), a poster for a movie or a band, etc.. If it's a boy band and you're a guy, well, perhaps you'd get a different kind of marketing.
Information leakage in what you'd expect to be "non-useful" data you present on social sites can be phenominal.
-- Terry
I have lived many years without Facebook and expect to live some more ones without its "benefits".
I remember the first BBS systems I used required mailing a photo of an identification card (and permission slip if under 18) to the SYSOP to prove identity. I was too busy feeling thankful that they put the time and money into buying a phone line and running a free service to be offended that they wanted to make sure cool people like me were the ones using it.
For the vast majority of web services I wouldn't tolerate it. For facebook, I'm okay with it... because the only thing I use it for is as a place for old friends to reconnect. Hopefully people will switch to Google+ for that, time will tell.
And is it Mr. Book, Ms. Book, Miss. Book or Mus. Book?
And Google I always thought was just Google, like Prince is just Prince and Cher is just Cher. I figured Google+ to be Mrs. G. Google set up an information network because men like to know, and she set up a social one because women are social.
Anyway, I notice both Face Book and Google are not getting kicked off anything. Nor are Jay Hovah and Bud Dha. But Al A is out for having a single letter last name. Is this some kind of anti-muslim prejudice thing?
Facebook, G+, etc.. want to be the repositories of who is who so they can sell it. Forcing people to use their real identities legitimizes them. If they want my real name and valuable information they 1) will pay me lots of money. 2) meet me in public. Because. 1) information about me is not free. 2) i can look them in the eye and know they are not batshit.
Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
There is also the fact that anyone can buy a Visa gift card with cash, register it under any name and address they want, and use it anywhere.
What impact do people think having real names genuinely has on advertising?
If you want to spam them with standard mail (you know, the thing the postman carries ...) or you want to run a credit check on them ... you need their real name and not much more really.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
Especially where it says "G-Damn I love me..." @ position 2:50 on the YouTube player control!
( I hate swearing though, it's wrong to use the name of the Lord in vain is why - only bad thing I have to say about it )
HOWEVER.. in this case? Well, listen -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DysNAn68Dqc&feature=related
(Because THAT is my answer, to you... enjoy!)
* It's DROWNING POOL'S "Tearing Away"...
APK
P.S.=> I hope you like football too, one of the GREATEST RUNNERS EVER (& my fav. team of all time as well) is featured to the music, in his best run highlights, & that's Ricky Williams...
... apk
I noted the idiots from arstechnica (not all of them, some are my friends online, DosFreak being one), they're the ones that "turned me on" to it actually going on online, "way back" in 1998 or thereabouts & later in 2003 (they stalked me all over the place online, talk about freaks/sick, etc.-et al).
E.G./I.E.-> First, they were caught red-handed in it pulling it @ MajorGeeks (possibly its predecessor 3dFiles.com, not sure anymore) & gave the owners + admins headaches, & later @ Windows IT Pro Mag forums also... caught in it, both times no less: Talk about DUMB, or rather, not giving a hoot about their personal reputations!
Funniest part is, I caught one of their forums members who blasphemously called himself "GOD" doing it @ arstechnica itself, & he sent me all these bogus harassing emails along with "another fellow" MWNH (The Man With No Head), who was using the SAME EMAIL (talk about stupid) ACCOUNT !
Yes - it was he (or rather, both are same fellow), & he tried to "lie his way out" in front of 1,000's there to no avail saying they were "sharing an email account" (yea, right...).
I ribbed on him for it, & it all stemmed from a simple question to they all:
"What have any of you EVER coded that has done well online or in publications etc. in the trade/field of the computer sciences in comparison to what I've shown you some of what I have?"
Not a SINGLE ONE had, not a one (& they were supposed to be the "big brains" online yea... not!).
The one I noted called "GOD" was in particular a real prick (he is also known as "The Man With No Head" there, funny that, considering he has SO MANY HEADS (identities there)).
I said to he in response (which set him off & he made that stupid mistake of getting caught):
"Only 'GOD' writes code with no bugs - because the CODE WITH NO LINES HAS NO BUGS... & you 'must have faith' that it actually works & will do the job, since 'God' wrote it!"
Everyone started laughing @ he there, & that 'multiple persona' of his "oddly disappeared" (again, 'not').
Nicest/funniest part was that folks there actually enjoyed my humor & said I was the funniest person they ever had there, here -> http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=550261
PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT FROM "FUNNIEST ARSIAN EVER" POST:
"dotorg Registered: Apr 23, 2002 Posts: 14814 Posted: Wed Apr 07, 2004 11:09 am I miss Crommy, JJ, APK, and Frank (the Spank). All made my crappy days at work better."
Ah, anyhow/anyways:
* I guess what I'm trying to say is, you have to be PRETTY STUPID to do that kind of underhanded LOW bullshit to be honest about it in using multiple pseudonym trolling online...
Simply because, once you're caught in it, & odds are STRONG you will be (because one of your "pals" (yea, right, there's NO LOVE AMONG DEMONS) will probably get 'ticked off" @ you & blow you in for it with that "illustrious type" (not)).
(And folks wonder WHY I don't bother registering here... Oh, I would, except AndyK was a member here before I, & I do not think he posts here anymore, not for years, but, he "locks me out" of "APK" & I won't settle for being anyone else but me... because "I don't care about anyone else but me" (quoting "DROWNING POOL" here -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DysNAn68Dqc&feature=related )
APK
P.S.=> Plus, there's an old adage of "Everything comes out of the wash" so-to-speak, sooner or later is why I stated what I have & used that example. I can't respect anyone that pulls it... it's the province of what I personally call "NOT MEN" (in other words, weasels) - & then when they get "busted" for it? They have to live it down, problem is... you can NEVER really "live down" that type of b.s. imo @ least because nobody will trust you
"political dissidents, stalking survivors and others" - *THIS* is your argument?
Did it ever occur to you that *maybe* facebook and myspace weren't designed with "political dissidents" in mind as their target user?!
That's like me selling a new laptop with a bigger screen, and you saying it sucks for blind people.
and... "Stalking survivors" - well I guess if you're a survivor you aren't being stalked anymore? Or if you are, get a restraining order - or don't add the people stalking you to your friends list!!!
The point (which the poster of TFA, among others seem to be missing) is: If you don't like it, don't freaking use it. Stop bitching about it. I happen to like Linked-In and other places where you have people's real names instead of crap like "CaPtNpeniZ". Also, on SNS sites where people use whatever display name and profile photo they want (like Mixi), I lose track of who is who. Someone comments on my story and I only see their nickname and think "Now who is that IRL again?"
Many of you are paranoiacs, aspies and socially inept. Therefore social networking sites are something many of you just can't comprehend.
To people who have friends and like interacting with humans (some of us even interact with females), social networking sites are very useful. FB and G+ get their value from really connecting real me with the real girl who was in my geometry class back in the day. She and i could be posting in the same slashdot threads and never know it, But because she uses her real name on FB i can reconnect with her and maybe even... meet her in person.
For every site that expects you to use your real name there are at least 100 that you can use to be an anonymous fucktard. Let people with social lives have their fun and manage their risks. Stop condescending to people who WANT to connect with people as their real selves.
Utilizing the synergization of benchmark e-solutions to pre-workaround action items!
then he says: "Stop condescending to people"
Right. Insulting people (largely falsely) in the subject and first line of your post is a *great* way to show your social skills.
So, not to condescend of course, but nobody's stopping you from using Facebook as you'd like. Well, maybe if that real girl from geometry used a pseudonym so you couldn't reconnect that would stop you. Maybe that's what you want stopped?
Oh yeah and f**k FaceBook for no longer letting me use an alias or fake name...I had to change my name from ***** Swizzelistic Papa to ***** ****** and I hate it entirely...It is a total privacy invasion aka violation of privacy...I have thousands of FaceBook friends with fake names...I don't give a damn who they are or what they do, this is still hypocritical and totally unjust.. So f**k whoever reported me or f**k the FaceBook team for not using consistence among other something thousand FB users who also have fake names... I am totally embarrassed to say all the truthful things about me, even if they are illegal and have my real name used, because then someone could easily track me down and arrest me or give me a court trial...This is totally unfair and I demand my rights back or an apology from those responsible!!!!!!!!!!!!!