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
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
Did Voltare or The Artist (formerly known as Prince) have any problem hiding under their pseudonyms?
Prince Rogers Nelson is his real name and he had to use a pseudonym, the unpronounceable Love Symbol, because Warner Bros. trademarked his real name which is pretty much his identity. It's no better than stealing someone's soul if you ask me. If we are not allowed to use pseudonyms on social networking sites, how will we be assured that we won't someday be hoodwinked out of the right to use our given names like Prince was? I'd much rather lose a pseudonym that I created than the name that my parents gave me at birth.
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
Ironically, i just tried to search for "Erik Raymond" on G+ so i could see for myself what he's been saying, and apparently there are more than ten people with that name currently on G+, and it's not readily apparent at first glance which is the relevant one in this case. It's too bad he doesn't have some kind of unique nickname, something we might call a "pseudonym", which would make it readily apparent which one is the person i'm interested in.
This Space Intentionally Left Blank