Google Wants You to Use Your Real Name on YouTube

Just like a slashdot poll by danbert8 · 2012-07-23 04:31 · Score: 5, Funny

Somebody always bitches about the lack of options. Maybe Google should have included a "My name is Cowboy Neal" option?

--
Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?

Re:Just like a slashdot poll by fractoid · 2012-07-23 04:43 · Score: 4, Insightful

Trolololo- no. Lack of options in a multiple choice question is almost always a way to manufacture a false N-chotomy for the reader. Referendum-type votes do it all the time to manipulate the results. If the question is "Why would you not like to reveal personally identifiable data online" then one of the fields should be either free-form, or "because I'm not a complete muppet."

--
Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
Re:Just like a slashdot poll by jeffmeden · 2012-07-23 04:45 · Score: 4, Insightful

Trolololo- no.
Lack of options in a multiple choice question is almost always a way to manufacture a false N-chotomy for the reader. Referendum-type votes do it all the time to manipulate the results. If the question is "Why would you not like to reveal personally identifiable data online" then one of the fields should be either free-form, or "because I'm not a complete muppet."
If they did add that, they would need to also include (and make default) the option that is almost certainly the correct one: "I want to troll with no repercussion."
Re:Just like a slashdot poll by rtfa-troll · 2012-07-23 04:46 · Score: 3, Funny
There is a European Union decision that people have the right to use Pseudonyms. Google has said they accept this. The only reason that "Cowboy Neal" isn't accepted is that is that their policy demands that names be convincing as normal every day usage. So; for now two suggestions
1. All slashdotters should agree that our future kids will be named "Cowboy Neal" (no requirement to rename existing kids - especially the ones old enough to resist).
2. Everybody should, for now, sign up to Google+ and Facebook from a European union hosted system with a fake but real sounding name and fake data
3. When the children get to an age to legally sign up, we can use their names as a precedent to get the "Cowboy Neal" option open for everybody
4. If either Facebook or Google+ resist on either point 2 or point 3 then be ready to take them to the European Court of Human Rights;
5. For great justice
--
=~ s,(.*),<sarcasm>$1</sarcasm>,g if any_point_you_wish();
Re:Just like a slashdot poll by cayenne8 · 2012-07-23 04:49 · Score: 3, Interesting

Isn't it just simple to by pass this...by not having a Google or FB account...or at the very least, NOT telling Google about a G+ account when creating a new YouTube account?
Hell....my YT account is with a non-gmail, throw away account...set up with another throw away acct...etc.

--
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Re:Just like a slashdot poll by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-23 04:51 · Score: 5, Insightful

There would never be any repercussions to begin with.
But there are valid reasons to remain anonymous, including avoiding getting fired/not hired by insane employers or staying out of sight of insane people. No need to stifle people's speech, either. The Internet is great because there is so much anonymity. Otherwise, more people would be afraid to speak their mind. Much less interesting.
Re:Just like a slashdot poll by fractoid · 2012-07-23 04:55 · Score: 3, Insightful

So between our two viewpoints, it comes down essentially to what your motivation is in posting. Any way you look at it, the only reason to wish to post anonymously is to avoid some form of repercussion (whether identity theft, stalking/harassment, or simply being outed as a douchetard.)

--
Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
Re:Just like a slashdot poll by causality · 2012-07-23 04:59 · Score: 5, Insightful

So between our two viewpoints, it comes down essentially to what your motivation is in posting. Any way you look at it, the only reason to wish to post anonymously is to avoid some form of repercussion (whether identity theft, stalking/harassment, or simply being outed as a douchetard.)
Whatever happened to the concept of "it's just not your business?" It's the idea of "if I wanted you to know or thought you were entitled to this information, I would provide it willingly without being prompted for it." Is that disappearing along with the idea of focusing on what is being said rather than making everything into a petty personal matter focused on who is saying it?

I mean sure, Google can do what they like with their properties. That doesn't make it a worthy or noble idea, though.

--
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
Re:Just like a slashdot poll by fractoid · 2012-07-23 05:03 · Score: 2

But there are valid reasons to remain anonymous, including avoiding getting fired/not hired by insane employers or staying out of sight of insane people.
Which of these reasons (or any other for that matter) for remaining anonymous are not fundamentally driven by concern regarding repercussions?

--
Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
Re:Just like a slashdot poll by cheekyjohnson · 2012-07-23 05:05 · Score: 4, Insightful

That they can doesn't mean they should. It also doesn't mean they can't be criticized for it.

--
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
Re:Just like a slashdot poll by jedidiah · 2012-07-23 05:10 · Score: 4, Insightful

Not all "repercussions" are the fault of the person who seeks to be careful and not expose himself.

--
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Re:Just like a slashdot poll by Empiric · 2012-07-23 05:17 · Score: 2

Bear in mind, that almost any (even possible) repercussion generally makes it, on a cost/benefit basis, just not worth posting at all. At least not about anything but the most trivial, uncontroversial stuff (see people's Facebook/Twitter posts when they know their family/friends may be collectively passing judgment, let alone future employers). People will censor themselves and/or soften their presentation on the controversial topics, such as politics and religion.

IMHO, what historically made the internet great as a discussion medium is precisely the freedom to speak your mind, and your full mind, on whatever the topic may be. I think we would have lost a lot of quality frank discussion with the "chilling effect" of "everybody's you know is watching you, and realistically, most of those are just hoping for seeing something to indulge themselves in taking offense to".

--
~ Whence do you come, slayer of men, or where are you going, conqueror of space?
Re:Just like a slashdot poll by residieu · 2012-07-23 05:19 · Score: 4, Funny

Meep Meep Meep Meep Meep Meep Meep
Translation: Just because I'm a muppet, doesn't mean I want people knowing my real name.
Re:Just like a slashdot poll by Tom · 2012-07-23 05:20 · Score: 2

Whatever happened to the concept of "it's just not your business?"
It was slaughtered by the corrupt politicians when they realized that fear makes for much easier ruling than visions.
Now it's "if you've got nothing to hide..."

--
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
Re:Just like a slashdot poll by JesseMcDonald · 2012-07-23 05:25 · Score: 5, Insightful

Any way you look at it, the only reason to wish to post anonymously is to avoid some form of repercussion...
Or perhaps you just believe anonymity improves the quality of the discussion—since you don't know who anyone is, there is less basis for personal attacks and more pressure to debate the substance of an argument, rather than the person who made it. The fact that you can participate in discussions without revealing your ethnicity or gender has always been one of the online community's strengths; forcing people to reveal their real names undermines that implied equality.
A "real name" policy also tends to favor those with popular names (John Smith), who remain effectively anonymous, at the expense of those whose names are relatively unique.

--
"The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Bastiat
Re:Just like a slashdot poll by shentino · 2012-07-23 05:27 · Score: 4, Insightful

I have plenty to hide, and it's stuff I simply do not wish to share.
I do not trust strangers to not abuse my private information.
Staying out of jail is not one of my motivations.
Re:Just like a slashdot poll by cpu6502 · 2012-07-23 05:28 · Score: 4, Insightful

>>>Any way you look at it, the only reason to wish to post anonymously is to avoid some form of repercussion (whether identity theft, stalking/harassment, or simply being outed as a douchetard.)
No. Shit. Sherlock.
Your comment shows you don't think long term, or wide. I want to avoid the repercussion of employers, governments, et cetera using my comments from 10, 20, 30 years ago against me. (Example: Finding a reason not to hire me. Or finding a reason to put me on a Do Not Travel list.)

--
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
Re:Just like a slashdot poll by cayenne8 · 2012-07-23 05:30 · Score: 2

Well, I go with the far simpler, no G+ and no FB accounts at all thing.
But I do have gmail....and to keep things separate, when I'm on one of my computers that is using the web interface for gmail...I open a different browser with my YT account...so that they don't inter-mingle.
Not that much of a problem....

--
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Re:Just like a slashdot poll by cpu6502 · 2012-07-23 05:36 · Score: 4, Insightful

>>>Which of these reasons (or any other for that matter) for remaining anonymous are not fundamentally driven by concern regarding repercussions?
There's repercussions, and then there's misinterpretations. I've had people unfriend me simply because I said I was libertarian. More scary: A government might choose to put me on a Do-Not-Travel list, because I said on a youtube post (of a girl with her jaw blown-off) that it should not be bombing Libya. With anonymity I am free to post; with realname I have to be afraid.

--
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
Re:Just like a slashdot poll by Plunky · 2012-07-23 05:42 · Score: 4, Interesting

You could create more accounts and constantly log in/out to avoid it but that's a pain in the ass.
You can do youtube in one browser and G+ in another... but it's still a pain in the ass.

Surely if this becomes a significant problem, an extension could be written to allow a browser to have a unique set of cookies per page-domain? Such that a page loaded from www.youtube.com would look like a different user from the one who loads www.google.com.. of course, there would be tricks to get around that, such as tracking referrerals and such, but a privacy extension could handle that too.. I guess even 'Private Browsing' mode could be extended along these lines.. I don't think this war will ever end, and there will be many gains and losses along the way.
Re:Just like a slashdot poll by Austerity+Empowers · 2012-07-23 05:44 · Score: 2, Informative

Have you considered that Google doesn't care if you use your real name or not? But chances are, if you use your real name you're not going to troll with racist, inane, idiotic, offensive, inflammatory, poorly spelled, quasi-literate trash which describes 99.9% of youtube posts.
You can still do it, but you have to be determined. If you care, and you want to remain anonymous and post, you can still do it. Chances are you are not one of those filling the place up with bullshit.
Re:Just like a slashdot poll by Tom · 2012-07-23 05:48 · Score: 5, Insightful

I have plenty to hide
Of course you do. One of my more common answers to "if you've got nothing to hide..." is: "So you're ok with me installing a camera in your bedroom?"

--
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
Re:Just like a slashdot poll by nbauman · 2012-07-23 05:50 · Score: 2

That's not what the writers of the Federalist Papers thought.
Re:Just like a slashdot poll by hoggoth · 2012-07-23 05:53 · Score: 5, Insightful

> "I want to troll with no repercussion."
Bullshit. I like things that are irreverently funny. I like things that are sexy. I don't believe in a magic old man with a white beard watching over us and getting pissed if I wack off. The majority of my extended family would have a problem with all of these.

--
- For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
Re:Just like a slashdot poll by gmuslera · 2012-07-23 05:57 · Score: 2, Funny

Just don't call your son Bobby Tables
Re:Just like a slashdot poll by Moses48 · 2012-07-23 06:00 · Score: 5, Insightful

I think the problem here is that everyone is a dissident in some circles. So while I hold opinion A and like to promote it, my (family/boss/co-worker/government) don't know that opinion and will keep treating me normal. If I start publicly promoting opinion A then I would be disowned/fired/disasociated/killed.
So we are all dissidents in that respect when we want to remain anonymous. Early supporters of rights for minorities and females would fall into this category. If you try and define what is legitimate to disagree with anonymously and what isn't, then you have already ruled out dissidents from opposing you without being subject to your prejudice/judgement/punishment.
Re:Just like a slashdot poll by cheesybagel · 2012-07-23 06:05 · Score: 2

We are talking about fscking video comments of LOLcats and Trololos here. Why the heck should they be proper or sane?
Re:Just like a slashdot poll by Cheech+Wizard · 2012-07-23 06:06 · Score: 2

That's what I do. I have my general use browser (Firefox), and I "save" Chrome, Safari, IE, Camino, and Opera each for different things I do. While I don't use TOR or anything to hide my IP it does keep cookies separated. Personally I'm not at all worried about using my real name, though. When I Google search my full, real name there are hundreds of me in the US alone.
Re:Just like a slashdot poll by StripedCow · 2012-07-23 06:13 · Score: 5, Insightful

Also, the internet never forgets. So a teenager who makes some stupid comments may regret this for the rest of his life.
Me now != me in five or ten years.

--
If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
Re:Just like a slashdot poll by Jah-Wren+Ryel · 2012-07-23 06:21 · Score: 3, Interesting

Try running firefox with these options:
-ProfileManager -no-remote
That will let you have separate profiles within firefox. You'll have separate configurations for each profile which means things like different extensions, different bookmarks and different skins (I use different skins to make it easy to tell what "task" instance of firefox is the current one).
One flaw with both your multiple-browsers and my multiple-profile approach is flash cookies - if you use flash in any browser, they all use the same cookie storage. I work around the problem by using the BetterPrivacy plugin to delete flash cookies after 5 minutes.

--
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
Re:Just like a slashdot poll by cayenne8 · 2012-07-23 06:24 · Score: 4, Insightful

When you speak in public, your name IS our business. You can stand behind your words or you can keep quiet. Choose.
Persons at risk are excepted: children, whistleblowers, dissidents, people discussing medical conditions. If you're not one of them, you have no legitimate reason to hide under your Klan bedsheet.
Why should it all not be protected speech that is capable of being disseminated anonymously?
Who is to be the judge of what speech can be protected anon or had to be 'stood by in public'....
To truly allow free speech....you must take the good with what you perceive to be the 'bad' and possibly distasteful, otherwise....someone has to be the judge over what is and isn't permitted.
And, one great way to allow true freedom of speech...is to allow it anonymously.
People are allowed in this country to whistle blow....be pro or anti-gay, and yes....you can think racist thoughts and should be able to freely speak them (and no, it isn't just white people not liking blacks). Do you find it distasteful....ok. But it has to be allowed....otherwise something *you* find to be important, might be later become distasteful to someone with more power than you, and if you could not express your views anon...they you're viewpoint might be squashed.
Remember, it wasn't that long ago that many things could be freely discussed, that just are not politically correct in the past 5-10 years. What if in 5 years...popular culture and thinking swings, and it becomes politically incorrect for you to speak what you find to be an important topic for discussion or call to action?

--
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Re:Just like a slashdot poll by ToadProphet · 2012-07-23 06:30 · Score: 2

When you speak in public, your name IS our business. You can stand behind your words or you can keep quiet. Choose.
Excellent. Could I have a list of all the stupid things or potentially offensive you said as a teenager or 'in public' to share with your your employer and others?
Let's get over this notion that things that are recorded and archived are equivalent to transient things said in context in a public place, ok?

--
It's on America's tortured brow, That Mickey Mouse has grown up a cow
Re:Just like a slashdot poll by jvkjvk · 2012-07-23 07:25 · Score: 5, Insightful

I have no idea where you get avoiding repercussions is a bad thing.
That is simply a stupid argument.
OF COURSE I want to be anonymous to avoid repercussions.
I find it obvious that one needs to avoid repercussions when discussing controversial and/or political topics with a worldwide audience.
I find it obvious that both governments, corporations, groups, and individuals might decide to act in a way I would find objectionable, based on comments I have/will make.
Please let me know what you find wrong with that.
Re:Just like a slashdot poll by Jafafa+Hots · 2012-07-23 08:14 · Score: 4, Informative

Actually they DO care. They have deleted accounts with names they decided were "not real."
G+ does not allow people to use pseudonyms, officially.

--
This space available.
Re:Just like a slashdot poll by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-23 09:15 · Score: 5, Interesting

It is a common reaction, but it's wrong -- it validates the assumption in the question, that there is something to hide.
This. is. false.
The question is not whether or not I have something to hide. The question is with whom I choose to share what.
Hence, my reaction usually is along the lines of "If I have something I desire to share with you, I'll let you know."
PS: delicious to post this as AC...
Re:Just like a slashdot poll by Kjella · 2012-07-23 09:37 · Score: 2

When you speak in public, your name IS our business. You can stand behind your words or you can keep quiet. Choose.
Yeah, damn those Federalist Papers, without them we could still have our crumpets and tea (properly taxed by Her Majesty the Queen, of course). Or as someone else put it:

Protections for anonymous speech are vital to democratic discourse. Allowing dissenters to shield their identities frees them to express critical minority views ... Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority. ... It thus exemplifies the purpose behind the Bill of Rights and of the First Amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation ... at the hand of an intolerant society.
But hey, piss on the constitution and everything the US was built upon and call it patriotic as so many do. I have a few more you can adopt, "war is peace", "freedom is slavery", and "ignorance is strength". The first one is already done with the permanent war on drugs/terrorists/jaywalkers, the second you're already working on by taking the freedoms away and the last one, well I think there's been plenty in this thread already. In short, go fuck yourself.

--
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Re:Just like a slashdot poll by war4peace · 2012-07-23 10:10 · Score: 2

Bullshit. My Youtube videos, comments and activity reflect the same mindset that my Slashdot posts do. All my online activity is similarly shaped, for that matter. This means a very small amount of trolling (I only tend to troll very stupid people and that very rarely). However, there are reasons for my real name to be left aside. For example, I am pretty sure that my current employer might see my World of Tanks interest to be not in line with the business. It's easy to get the wrong impression about someone, or to have a right impression skewed by some of his activities. It's human nature.
If your boss is a metal hardcore fan and checks Youtube for your name, sees you are an Eminem fan, he might be pushed into liking you less or even hating you out of simple subjectivity. A Hummer car afficionado might loathe your eco-friendliness; a vegan could detest your affiliation to an Youtube Grill Club. The possibilities are endless and cover gaming, music, TV shows, even pets. Why should one increase risks of being disliked by someone with more power just by displaying their true names, on Youtube, no less?
If benefits greatly outbalance risks, then I'm all for it, but I am yet to be convinced there are any benefits.

--
...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
Re:Just like a slashdot poll by gmhowell · 2012-07-23 11:43 · Score: 2

I have plenty to hide
Of course you do. One of my more common answers to "if you've got nothing to hide..." is: "So you're ok with me installing a camera in your bedroom?"
Trust me, you aren't going to see anything there other than a demonstration of sleep apnea.

--
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
Re:Just like a slashdot poll by BeanThere · 2012-07-23 13:21 · Score: 3, Insightful

That's fucking stupid. Even Nelson Mandela operated under false names at times, and for good reason - he could have been murdered simply for believing in freedom and equal rights. And what about all the Jews in WWII Germany, you think the ones trying to sneak out of the country should have openly shouted their real identities on the streets rather?

Comment removed by account_deleted · 2012-07-23 04:33 · Score: 3, Insightful

Comment removed based on user account deletion

The names Coward... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-23 04:33 · Score: 5, Funny

Anonymous Coward

You HAVE to tell them why? Uh..... by P-niiice · 2012-07-23 04:33 · Score: 2

No, you don't have to tell them why. you can choose to choose later if you ....choose to, hehe.

Good move on Google's part... by MitchDev · 2012-07-23 04:35 · Score: 5, Insightful

Take one of the biggest, most popular sites in the world and start driving people away from it.

Re:Good move on Google's part... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-23 04:53 · Score: 4, Funny

An AC saying other people don't need anonymity when posting. Either excellent trolling or someone's irony meter exploded.
Re:Good move on Google's part... by hcs_$reboot · 2012-07-23 04:56 · Score: 2

Take one of the biggest, most popular sites in the world and start driving people away from it
...and Google+ people along with them

--
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
Re:Good move on Google's part... by Hatta · 2012-07-23 05:52 · Score: 5, Insightful

ACs do from time to time post insightful comments. /. would be poorer for the lack of them.

--
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Re:Good move on Google's part... by Joce640k · 2012-07-23 06:10 · Score: 2

Take one of the biggest, most popular sites in the world and start driving people away from it.
These are the people who don't mind clicking to dismiss an advert for every single video. If those adverts didn't make them go away, nothing will.
(PS: Get NoScript if you want rid of them...)

--
No sig today...
Re:Good move on Google's part... by Shikaku · 2012-07-23 07:00 · Score: 2

In reply on how to "subscribe" to channels by RSS, this link is an RSS feed:
http://gdata.youtube.com/feeds/api/users/CHANNELNAME/uploads
Replace CHANNELNAME with channel name obviously.

Benefits to not having a Google+ account growing by SuperKendall · 2012-07-23 04:36 · Score: 5, Interesting

So if you don't have a Google+ account, would it bring up any warning?

At first I didn't join Google+ because Google literally would not let me - I had a paid Google Apps account and giving them money meant you were dirt as far as they were concerned, they wouldn't let you join Google+ for months (I guess they figured they were already collecting the personal information they wanted from you through your account so strip mining your Google+ data was irrelevant).

After paid accounts could join, I thought - why should I if they didn't want me at the start?

Turns out to have been a great choice, getting better by the day.

Really makes you think twice about having a Google account for anything, although there's really no great replacement for some of the services they offer...

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley

Re:Privacy Concerns Aside by Skarecrow77 · 2012-07-23 04:38 · Score: 4, Interesting

I know I should be annoyed at the elimination of anonymous options, and in most any other setting I would be, but youtube? yeah I think I'd like to see this play out. just don't make a universal case out of it google.

Oh no. Please. Not Google+. by ZackSchil · 2012-07-23 04:38 · Score: 3, Interesting

Is Google seriously trying to use the power of Google+ to twist people's arms on a real name policy? Google, you can't do that until the service is actually popular! My Google+ profile is just some bullshit I made to check out the service. I can delete it or fill it with fake info any time I want. It means nothing to me. If you insist on linking it to services I don't want it linked to, I'll just stop using the service I like less. Which is gonna be Google+!

Re:Oh no. Please. Not Google+. by fractoid · 2012-07-23 04:47 · Score: 3, Insightful

My Google+ profile is just some bullshit I made to check out the service. I can delete it or fill it with fake info any time I want.
You sure? I think you mean you can ask them and hope they delete it, or you can fill it with fake info which is irrelevant because the contents of your gmail archive contains far more than enough to uniquely identify you. /tinfoil >.>

--
Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
Re:Oh no. Please. Not Google+. by gl4ss · 2012-07-23 05:04 · Score: 2

..but they have to or they'll miss their google+ usage targets and don't get so big bonuses..
on the other hand, there's a shitload of accounts like this: http://www.youtube.com/user/emi
and shitloads of takedown notices generated that don't have a real responsible person named for them.

--
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.

Why Google Why by magsk · 2012-07-23 04:39 · Score: 5, Interesting

I have historically been a believer in google, and thought they where one of the few companies who put principles like free information etc ahead of profit (my naivety). But moves like this are further cementing my belief that something is rotten at google, and it started to get real bad once Page became CEO. The one good thing about this is that it opens up the doors for competitors to take business from google imho, creating competition.

Re:Why Google Why by ShieldW0lf · 2012-07-23 04:59 · Score: 2, Insightful

I have historically been a believer in google, and thought they where one of the few companies who put principles like free information etc ahead of profit (my naivety).
But moves like this are further cementing my belief that something is rotten at google, and it started to get real bad once Page became CEO. The one good thing about this is that it opens up the doors for competitors to take business from google imho, creating competition.
I want the freedom to have access to the information about who is saying what, and this is a step in the right direction. Eventually, my slashdot pseudonym will disappear into my one identity for all to see, and that's ok too. If we're all going to have control over our political voice, we have to behave like politicians and be public figures... they go hand in hand. Anonymity is the tool of the disenfranchised... it's better NOT to be disenfranchised, and that requires the end of privacy.

--
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
Re:Why Google Why by Petron · 2012-07-23 06:43 · Score: 2

You cannot force people to use their real name... Especially on a free service that has no requirements to sign up for.
-Yours Truly,
Abe Froman

--
if (it != oneThing) it = another;
Re:Why Google Why by thetoadwarrior · 2012-07-23 07:16 · Score: 2

You mean so people can't be honest out of fear of being labeled a communist, nazi, racist, freedom hater and whatever else people feel like calling them and holding everything they've said against them forever.

People can argue it will stop trolling and harassment but it won't. People do that shit on TV, in real life and they do it on facebook under their real name. The thing that will be hurt the most removing anonimity is freedom of expression against your government, corporations and anyone else that's happy to throw your ass in jail for no good reason.

I tried this this morning... by xxxJonBoyxxx · 2012-07-23 04:41 · Score: 3, Informative

I tried this this morning...and still registered fine with a fake/temporary account to make comments on videos. I think all this means is that your posting aliases are more likely to be interrupted by a space than before.

On the other hand, when Google does mine, they'd probably wonder why I watch so much Dora the Explorer on my business account. (It's tied to my business cell phone, which I use most often to keep my daughter entertained.)

Re:I tried this this morning... by c · 2012-07-23 04:48 · Score: 5, Funny

> On the other hand, when Google does mine, they'd probably wonder why I watch
> so much Dora the Explorer on my business account. (It's tied to my business cell
> phone, which I use most often to keep my daughter entertained.)
Yes, we were kind of wondering about it. Thanks for clearing that up. It's been added to your file.
The Google, Inc. Team

--
Log in or piss off.
Re:I tried this this morning... by aevan · 2012-07-23 05:53 · Score: 2

I feel your pain..one of my computers at work has a history of Beiber and OneDirection for pretty much the same reason, Thankfully: headphones.

"Why are you signing out first?"
"Some shames you just cannot live with."

Amusingly though, even if you're not signed in youtube still knows what that computer has seen from which to draw recommendations.

Re:Privacy Concerns Aside by cellocgw · 2012-07-23 04:41 · Score: 2, Funny

Oh, I thought you were going to link to this http://xkcd.com/386/ .

But actually I was going to post: "What: real people actually post comments to YouTube?"

--
https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw

Re:Benefits to not having a Google+ account growin by Eightbitgnosis · 2012-07-23 04:41 · Score: 4, Informative

I don't have a Google+ account, and do not see any prompt when commenting on youtube

It could be worse... by AliasMarlowe · 2012-07-23 04:42 · Score: 4, Funny

For instance, if redtube required you to use your real name...

--
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire

Re:It could be worse... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-23 04:52 · Score: 2

might want to include the NSFW tag there ... just to be safe
Re:It could be worse... by ichimunki · 2012-07-23 05:05 · Score: 5, Insightful

You must be new here. Slashdot links should *all* be considered NSFW until proven otherwise.

--
I do not have a signature
Re:It could be worse... by KhabaLox · 2012-07-23 05:20 · Score: 2

Hey this isn't 4cha.... oh, nevermind.

--
Ceci n'est pas un sig.
Re:It could be worse... by sarysa · 2012-07-23 05:35 · Score: 5, Interesting

I know you're joking, but I'm actually going to defend 4chan here. Yeah it's anonymous, and there's lots of things going on there that'd make a soldier who has done two tours in Iraq blush, but their culture of anonymity is surprisingly more mature than YouTube's. Everyone knows what's going on and why they're there, and that mutual understanding makes it somewhat civilized.

YouTube, on the other hand, is full of generally "normal" people with little to no internet savvy who spew bile from the heart. They're generally not trolling for shock value, they have hearts full of hate.

I'm starting to see why various powers rose up throughout history under the banner of controlling the populace. It never works, but I can see why...

--
Charisma is the measure of someone's ability to lie with a straight face.
Re:It could be worse... by Flere+Imsaho · 2012-07-23 09:03 · Score: 3, Funny

YouTube, on the other hand, is full of generally "normal" people with little to no internet savvy who spew bile from the heart.

That's not the organ I would have said they use...

--
It gripped her hand gently. 'Regret is for humans,' it said.

Re:Privacy Concerns Aside by ackthpt · 2012-07-23 04:45 · Score: 2

Obligatory:

http://xkcd.com/481/

The comments on YouTube videos are a plague of idiocy, racism, hate-mongering, astro-turfing...

Something has to be done, no?

Yeah, link them to your Google+ which requires a "real name"*

* my real name is Bob 4. Apples.

--

A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar

Re:Privacy Concerns Aside by HarrySquatter · 2012-07-23 04:50 · Score: 2

Something has to be done, no?

Nothing has to be done. Just down vote the comments and you will no longer see them.

Internet, free marketplace of ideas anymore? by acidradio · 2012-07-23 04:50 · Score: 2

So much for the Internet staying this amazing free marketplace of discourse. Since we all have jobs and need to make a living we need the anonymity afforded by these sites to say what we truly want to say. I used to get into great discussions and debates with people on various news websites, until they all started requiring you to post under your Facebook account. Conveniently my full name, photo, job title and employer get tagged in with those posts. So basically now all of my posts have to be something my employer would approve of; they are a conservative Midwestern insurance company and probably wouldn't approve of many of my ideas. You will all tell me to remove my employment information from my Facebook page but why should I have to?

Re:Privacy Concerns Aside by w_dragon · 2012-07-23 04:52 · Score: 3, Funny

I'll see your xkcd and raise you a ctrl-alt-del

Re:Privacy Concerns Aside by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-23 04:56 · Score: 5, Funny

First they came for my LOLCats, but I did not LOL...

YouTube comments are like sugar by Andrio · 2012-07-23 04:57 · Score: 3, Insightful

I love YouTube comments. They are * hilarious*. No matter what the video is of, you find that the comments always degenerate to the most bizarre, hate-filled arguments imaginable. It makes for some hilarious reading.

But, like sugar, you can't have too much of it. It quickly becomes nauseating. Best is to get a small taste and then take no more. Just like too much sugar will eventually destroy your pancreas, too many YouTube comments will eventually destroy your faith in humanity.

--
The Internet King? I wonder if he could provide faster nudity.

Re:Privacy Concerns Aside by Skarecrow77 · 2012-07-23 04:59 · Score: 2

right, thus the "don't make it a universal case".

The problem with the slippery slope arguement is that people think it applies to everything. there are outlieing cases.

it's entirely possible to say "hey, you know what, maybe we don't let members of the public own thermonuclear weapons" without that meaning that everything else in the catagory of "weapon" from fully automatic assault rifles and flamethrowers down to potato guns and super soakers needs to be banned too.

Re:Privacy Concerns Aside by HarrySquatter · 2012-07-23 05:01 · Score: 2

Spoken like a dictator. The benefits of anonymus speech far outweigh the fact that you might get inconveienced by some racist posts on Youtube. You have no freedom to not be offended.

Re:Privacy Concerns Aside by causality · 2012-07-23 05:02 · Score: 5, Insightful

Obligatory:

http://xkcd.com/481/

The comments on YouTube videos are a plague of idiocy, racism, hate-mongering, astro-turfing...

Something has to be done, no?

What should be done is so easy, so simple, that its value is often overlooked.

What do do? Expect adult people to be able to handle speech they dislike. That means overlooking it, ignoring it, countering it with speech they consider better, or simply not viewing whatever it is they have a problem with.

I'm telling you, emphasizing that would make for a better world.

--
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein

Re:Privacy Concerns Aside by Bomazi · 2012-07-23 05:03 · Score: 4, Funny

I I thought he was going to link to this one: http://xkcd.com/202/ . It is one of my favorites.

Re:Big Content Requirement? by Tridus · 2012-07-23 05:06 · Score: 5, Insightful

No, it's more likely a reaction to the pathetically low quality of Youtube comments.

Similar to how Rotten Tomatoes disabled commenting on Dark Knight Rises reviews entirely when the trolling shit to everything else ratio got so skewed that they couldn't ignore it anymore.

Too many people online think that "anonymous" = "license to be a complete fuckwad".

--
-- "So they told me that using the download page to download something was not something they anticipated." - Bill Gates

Re:If you don't like Google's policies... by 0123456 · 2012-07-23 05:08 · Score: 2

Your whining is annoying to others.

I note you don't use your (full) real name to comment here.

Re:Privacy Concerns Aside by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-23 05:13 · Score: 4, Funny

I'll see your xkcd and raise you a ctrl-alt-del

You said "raise you"... as if to say you were providing something more ... but... you linked to Ctrl-Alt-Del... error... error... ERROR... DOES NOT COMPUTE... DOES NOT COMPUTE... DOES NOT COMPUTE...

Re:Benefits to not having a Google+ account growin by swillden · 2012-07-23 05:15 · Score: 3, Interesting

I had a paid Google Apps account and giving them money meant you were dirt as far as they were concerned, they wouldn't let you join Google+ for months (I guess they figured they were already collecting the personal information they wanted from you through your account so strip mining your Google+ data was irrelevant)

Actually, there were technical challenges with enabling Apps accounts. I don't know what they were exactly, but I think they had to do with ensuring that nothing broke for big enterprise users of Apps.

When Google+ came out there was huge internal demand for Apps-enabling it -- I'm sure it wouldn't surprise you to know that many Google employees have their personal domains hosted on Apps -- and if it could have been done any faster, it would have. For those intervening months the question was raised in virtually every TGIF (weekly company-wide meetings during which, among other things, employees have the opportunity to question management in front of the whole company) and the Google+ team was getting really apologetic by the time it finally rolled out.

--
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.

Comment removed by account_deleted · 2012-07-23 05:21 · Score: 5, Insightful

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Privacy Concerns Aside by cpu6502 · 2012-07-23 05:22 · Score: 5, Insightful

The part the summary left out: If you refuse to use your real name, then you can no longer reply to youtube comments. The option is disabled. AND the reason I don't want my realname is because I know how google & the internet operates. I can still find posts under my real name from 1988! The last thing I want is my youtube comments hanging around for 60 years for anybody (especially a future employer) to find and develop a profile about me. Or dig-up potentially embarrassing comments that I later regret saying (when I'm older/wiser).

I haven't used my realname online since 2002, because I don't want to have an online history that employers, governments, et cetera can use to develop a personality profile.

--
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"

Re:Benefits to not having a Google+ account growin by modecx · 2012-07-23 05:22 · Score: 5, Interesting

As of today I found if you have a google+ account and opt to not use your real name in lieu of a username, you can't post replies to comments, even to your own videos. They didn't warn this would happen when you denied to use your real name, and it was immensely frustrating to not have a working reply button, and more so to not know why. Well, there it is.

While I have no habit of spewing vitriol, and write every comment as though I am accountable, I also have no want or desire to make it easy for any number of stalkers to come straight to my own front door; and without compromising their anonymity! Even if I were comfortable with putting my real name out there and associating it with my YouTube content, there's such a small handful of people in the world with my name that it's effectively unique. Talk about opening yourself up to ambush.

What did I do, you might ask? I deleted my G+ identity, and nothing of value was lost. I can now keep in touch with my subscribers. If they keep this up, I will have to abandon their services, and I won't feel the least bit of remorse.

--
Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.

Google Wants You to Stop Commenting on YouTube by Sir_Sri · 2012-07-23 05:23 · Score: 2

Google Wants You to Stop Commenting on YouTube

There, fixed the summary headline.

Re:Time for a new king of the Hill. by Quiet_Desperation · 2012-07-23 05:25 · Score: 2

I tried to start Moogle, where all search items and images were redone in the style of the Final Fantasy series, but people attacked me and chased me into the hinterlands. I was not at all happy with that response.

Re:Privacy Concerns Aside by TheGratefulNet · 2012-07-23 05:36 · Score: 2

simply, THIS.

if you force us to expose ourselves, many of us just won't. we'll go away from that site. I have stopped posting to anything google based, personally. I never reg'd on FB or T and never will.

its a shame that the internet is going down the Tubes (sorry..) but since it is, those parts of it that aren't worth it, just don't get my attention anymore.

the fact that employers and governments are so invasive and so insistent on 'checking you out' - that's enough of a chilling reason to avoid posting using real ID's online. and they wonder why people object to using real ID's. boggle...

in a way, its almost like an IQ test. if you don't use your real ID, you have 'passed the test'. not so good for those who have yet to learn about how things can (and will) be used against you.

--

--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."

that attitude doesn't work by circletimessquare · 2012-07-23 05:41 · Score: 3, Interesting

because, as a look at youtube posts, or slashdot browsing at -1 proves, it destroys the forum

a communication channel will be abandoned by serious people if there is no signal and just a lot of useless noise. tragedy of the commons. so you need to police the commons

perhaps youtube could embrace moderation instead, but either way, you WANT to squelch, aka, censor, useless anonymous speech

i would be posting anonymously if i were in syria

but in the usa, if i post anonymously, my intentions are not in the interest of a good forum, but just abusing the forum for some antisocial problem of mine

there's always 4chan. for everything else serious, you need moderation or integrity of word and speaker with real life ids

--
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it

Re:Privacy Concerns Aside by 0123456 · 2012-07-23 05:41 · Score: 3, Insightful

so the "fire in a crowded" theater guy should retain his anonymity?

If they had, they wouldn't have ended up in court in a blatant violation of the First Amendment.

You do realise that the 'fire in a crowded theater' argument was an attempt to justify government censorship of political speech by anti-draft activists in WWI?

No, didn't think so.

And with no G+? by History's+Coming+To · 2012-07-23 05:42 · Score: 2

I don't have a Google+ account exactly because of this issue. I wasn't happy using my real name, and as I use a lot of Google's other services I deleted my G+ account to avoid impacting other services. So if I allow them to pull my G+ name, what happens?

--
Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.

any real name? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-23 05:42 · Score: 2, Funny

Is any "real name" ok, or does the "real name" have to be yours?

Re:Privacy Concerns Aside by Hatta · 2012-07-23 05:51 · Score: 3, Insightful

I haven't used my realname online since 2002, because I don't want to have an online history that employers, governments, et cetera can use to develop a personality profile.

That's exactly why Google wants you to use your real name. The more personal profiles Google has, the more valuable its ads are. The solution is, don't use Google products.

--
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!

Re:Privacy Concerns Aside by steveg · 2012-07-23 05:53 · Score: 3, Interesting

My real name is probably more anonymous than my Google gmail address. I use the gmail username in a number of places, but it's relatively unique -- I don't think I've ever seen anyone else use it.

My real name, however is incredibly common -- no one would *ever* be able to tell it was *me* from the name. Which is one of the reasons I came up with the name I use for for gmail -- there's no way I could ever find a name relating to my real name to use on any service that has more than a few people on it. It's always taken. I got away with it on Slashdot, but that was on a much smaller Internet.

--
Ignorance killed the cat. Curiosity was framed.

Threre's something to be said about anon posts... by Petron · 2012-07-23 05:55 · Score: 2

“Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.”
-Oscar Wilde

--
if (it != oneThing) it = another;

Because you need your real name for some things by MaizeMan · 2012-07-23 06:09 · Score: 2

The difference is you can choose to not mention your username in, say, a job application, and there is no way to link your real name to your activity online (assuming you haven't done anything stupid that links the two). You are also under no obligation to provide your username on your drivers license, legal documents, or when checking into a hotel. Setting up a new username and account with no connection to your previous online presence is also much more simple and effective than trying to set up a new and unlinked real-world identity.

Re:Privacy Concerns Aside by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-23 06:10 · Score: 2, Informative

The part the summary left out: If you refuse to use your real name, then you can no longer reply to youtube comments. The option is disabled.

This is false, I've logged in, told it I don't want to use my real name, and am still able to comment.

I'm going to take a less than popular position.... by mark-t · 2012-07-23 06:14 · Score: 4, Interesting

... on this issue and say that I actually don't have a problem with Google doing this.

This is *NOT* because I believe the premise that if you've done nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide, because, in fact, that premise is wholly specious (anyone who claims to genuinely believe that statement is true must be either a liar or else a public nudist).

Rather, I don't have a problem with Google doing this simply because I firmly believe in the principle of personal resposibility, and if a person is not prepared to be held personally accountable for the things that they do, then I'm afraid I'm just going to have a hard time recognizing any alleged right that they might have to do it. That's not to say that I don't think that people are entitled to privacy... giving people privacy shows them respect, and I resolutely believe that every human being is entitled to that level of respect. There is, however, a distinct difference between privacy and public anonymity. I don't see how not giving people anonymity in public disrespects them as individuals, so I simply don't see the importance of it.

--
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'

Comment removed by account_deleted · 2012-07-23 06:15 · Score: 2

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Privacy Concerns Aside by cheekyjohnson · 2012-07-23 06:16 · Score: 2

The fact that a few people may abuse their anonymity is not, to me, a justification to take it away from everyone. I don't care for TSA or Patriot Act mentalities where everyone is punished.

While I hope "bad guys" get caught (depending on what we're talking about), don't catch them at the expense of innocents.

--
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!

Comment removed by account_deleted · 2012-07-23 06:18 · Score: 2

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:PIGS OPEN FIRE ON BABIES by DarwinSurvivor · 2012-07-23 06:27 · Score: 3, Funny

Why the hell would you bring your baby to an anti-violence protest?!?

Comment removed by account_deleted · 2012-07-23 06:32 · Score: 2

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Privacy Concerns Aside by snspdaarf · 2012-07-23 06:33 · Score: 2

I can still find posts under my real name from 1988!

While I get your point, I'm still gonna call bullshit on the 1988 date.

Well, I can find stuff I posted to usenet from May of 1983, so I guess your bullshit call is, well, bullshit.

--
Why, without your clothes, you're naked, Miss Dudley!

Hmm kindof funny on that by RobertLTux · 2012-07-23 07:02 · Score: 2

You do know that Google really does not NEED for you to display your real name since THEY ALREADY KNOW YOUR REAL NAME (assuming your G+ account is correct). Im thinking this is more about enabling folks to google %John Doe% and see everything you have posted (assuming that there are small number of John Does online).

KIDS DO NOT TRY THIS AT HOME
you could post somewhere even under a Nym that "I am going to Blow up %location% sometime next week" and i would bet that THIS WEEK you will have a No-Knock Entry at your house.

--
Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge

Re-read that with more comprehension by tlambert · 2012-07-23 07:20 · Score: 3, Interesting

The part the summary left out: If you refuse to use your real name, then you can no longer reply to youtube comments. The option is disabled.

This is false, I've logged in, told it I don't want to use my real name, and am still able to comment.

He's talking about replying to comments, not making initial comments. So for example, if you post a video, and someone makes an asshat comment on it, you can't call them on it by replying, it just sits there being an asshat comment until it bothers you so badly that you relent and give out your real name.

Basically, it's a form of emotional blackmail to get you to reveal your real name, which is what they wanted in the first place. ...now waiting for the conspiracy theorists to will claim Google hires people to make asshat comments on videos posted by people who refuse to use their real name...

Re:Privacy Concerns Aside by TheGratefulNet · 2012-07-23 07:25 · Score: 2

duckduckgo sucks. it sucks badly.

I gave it a chance. I wanted it to work.

its nothing but spam for the first few pages. "did you mean you wanted to BUY this?" no, I wanted tech info on it, or downloads of firmware or user comments or issues or known bugs or.

"YOU WANT TO BUY THIS?? here are places that grabbed the keyboard and mixed it in so it shows up in our hits:"

sheesh. its useless. it assumes the only reason you are online is 'for commerce'. how stupid!! how fucking stupid. and how fucking useless it all is, now.

google search also sucks. similarly, first few pages are either fake bullshit links or stores or something related to a sale. try to find real info and its increasingly impossible.

can we have internet2, now? please? and make it commercial-free, in every single way? maybe call it ORGnet since it would be a 'not dot com' place, in the original idea of what a .org was supposed to be.

I want the .org concept back. I'm sick of the ads, the store links and the faked SEO crap that is all you find on so-called search engines.

--

--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."

Re:PIGS OPEN FIRE ON BABIES by Jeremiah+Cornelius · 2012-07-23 07:35 · Score: 3, Interesting

Because it's on your sidewalk? Because it's a neighborhood, trying to show their dignity, civility and decency - in the face oppression?

--
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."

Re:Privacy Concerns Aside by Mal-2 · 2012-07-23 07:43 · Score: 2

I'll see your xkcd and raise you a ctrl-alt-del

BZZZT! Sorry, that's a string raise. You'll have to take that comic back.

--
How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.

Re:Privacy Concerns Aside by Hentes · 2012-07-23 07:50 · Score: 2

First, Youtube is used by millions of people and there isn't a monolithic Youtube community. If you encounter lot's of morons on Youtube, you might want to try and change the parts of it you frequent. There are many parts with normal or even intelligent comment walls.
Second, the theory that improper behaviour on the internet is caused by anonymity has been disproved by Facebook long ago. Facebook showed us that people can be just as dumb without anonymity.

So why are conversations appear to be less intellectual than IRL ones? One cause I think is that not being face-to-face with the other person desensitises the netizens. It might also be just an appearance: the internet has given everyone a chance to express themselves, and as the average person is a moron, most comments we see are stupid.

Re:I'm going to take a less than popular position. by cheekyjohnson · 2012-07-23 08:22 · Score: 2

Rather, I don't have a problem with Google doing this simply because I firmly believe in the principle of personal resposibility

Despite claiming to not support the "nothing to hide" argument, this reeks of exactly that. "If you're not going to abuse it, what do you have to fear? Step up and be a perfect example of my ideal 'responsible' citizen!"

Anonymity allows people to tell others things that they normally wouldn't say, allows people to avoid stalkers, allows people to speak out against perceived injustices when the enemy is perhaps an angry mob, and allows people to avoid getting fired for saying things 10, 20, or perhaps even 30 years ago that seem completely normal to them and other people. If ridding us of anonymity means getting rid of all those benefits, then I'll just accept the occasional troll (The horror!). Most people don't seem to be abusing the privilege in any significant way (that I see), anyway. I'd also not rather resort to censorship or punishing people for their anonymous speech (After all, what would happen to people who did not conform to the scheme?).

This is assuming you're not just advocating this to be done with Youtube, but your arguments could be applied in general. Since your definition of "responsibility" seems to be "needlessly putting yourself in danger," I'll have to disagree.

There is, however, a distinct difference between privacy and public anonymity.

Apparently not, since you do have the option to speak publicly and always remain anonymous. You always did, but the Internet just made this more simple. Like it or not, they definitely have privacy when they're anonymous.

so I simply don't see the importance of it.

Of course. You can't see the importance of it, so it shouldn't exist? I hope that's not the case.

--
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!

Re:I'm going to take a less than popular position. by cheekyjohnson · 2012-07-23 09:01 · Score: 2

Unless a person does not have a sense of integrity, I'm not sure why that would be.

That's comical. Human beings typically have a desire to have some degree of privacy. You probably don't want other people to see everything you do. Another form of this is someone not wanting people to associate their real name with comments posted on the Internet. They self-censor and do all manner of things if they feel it could be connected to them. The fact that they don't want to say something does not imply that they are doing anything wrong.

The police can help with that too, when it is a problem.

It will quite possibly be too late.

If it's worth speaking out about, then why is it not also worth facing the possible consequences for?

Because you could be killed (by a criminal, organized criminals, or even by a government) or socially isolated. Not everything worth speaking out about is worth that to everyone.

Personally, I feel that if a person want's anonymity, then they should keep to themselves.

Personally, I feel that if a person doesn't want anonymity, they should just make that decision for themselves. Go ahead and give up all of your information if you wish.

But to advocate for censoring or the stifling of free speech (the result of someone not following this little scheme)? I think that's right up there with the TSA, the Patriot Act, and the "nothing to hide, nothing to fear" argument. Collective punishment. All under a vague concept of "responsibility" for reasons unknown.

and if you spend your entire life worrying about or picking apart the small stuff, then all you're going to do is give yourself high blood pressure and probably die a whole lot sooner.

Then stop worrying so much about other people's anonymity.

--
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!

100% the reason I didn't sign up for Google+ by AbRASiON · 2012-07-23 09:03 · Score: 2

Right here folks this is why. I don't mind my google services tied together /to an extent/ and I dont' care if google /internal/ can identify that I'm firstname.lastname@gmail.com and cowtipper69 on youtube. but I sure as shit don't want regular folk to be able to do it.

This applies across the board for googles services and is why I am easing back on using their stuff when possible.

Re:I'm going to take a less than popular position. by DigitAl56K · 2012-07-23 09:12 · Score: 4, Informative

Rather, I don't have a problem with Google doing this simply because I firmly believe in the principle of personal resposibility, and if a person is not prepared to be held personally accountable for the things that they do, then I'm afraid I'm just going to have a hard time recognizing any alleged right that they might have to do it.

That is really naive. Personal responsibility to who? Society? Or the Government? And whatever happens to be the law/populist opinion at the time? What happens further down the road if the law becomes intolerant of your then opinions? What happens if your Government happens to be an oppressive regime? What happens if someone just really doesn't like something you say - even if it's not widely held as offensive, and decides to come track you down over it?

I suppose nothing you write is ever indefensible in the eyes of another?

VEVO Channel Change? by core_dump_0 · 2012-07-23 09:17 · Score: 2

If Google wants to force full names, they should start by changing LadyGagaVEVO to StefaniGermanottoVEVO, KatyPerryVEVO to KatyHudsonVEVO, and SnoopDoggVEVO to CalvinBroadusVEVO before bullying the rest of us.

Re:Privacy Concerns Aside by lgw · 2012-07-23 10:13 · Score: 3, Insightful

Where is it written that "freedom of speech" necessarily includes "freedom from responsibility"? Nowhere that I've ever seen.

The Founders were big on anonymous pamphleteering - the 18th century equivalent of Youtube comments (and every bit as nasty). Anonymous speech was understood as crucial to free speech from the beginning. Without freedom from repercussions, how much freedom can you really have to criticize those in power? Why do you think those in power want the ability to de-anonymize all speech (by forcing ISPs to keep IP logs indefinitely, and logging all Internet traffic data indefinitely)?

--
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.

AdBlock Plus remedies this by FMtRIS · 2012-07-23 10:41 · Score: 2

I opted to not answer ANY questions or surveys and used AdBlock Plus for Firefox to bypass the entire process. Since it seems that with any corporate strategy these days, it is to keep asking and wear the user down, witness SOPA, PIPA and now CISPA. Granted, these are ALOT worse than a simple identity box but also there is alot of cross referencing in data mining between services and I opt out of the entire process where applicable.

Re:Privacy Concerns Aside by Pentium100 · 2012-07-23 14:13 · Score: 2

In that case you can say that North Korea has free speech, as did the USSR under Stalin.

After all, you could call the leaders idiots, but you were also responsible for the consequences of your actions - a bullet or one way ticket to Siberia.

Slashdot Mirror

Google Wants You to Use Your Real Name on YouTube

118 of 602 comments (clear)