Pseudonyms Now Allowed On Google+
An anonymous reader writes When Google+ launched, it received criticism across the internet for requiring that users register with their real names. Now, Google has finally relented and removed all restrictions on what usernames people are allowed to use. The company said, "We know you've been calling for this change for a while. We know that our names policy has been unclear, and this has led to some unnecessarily difficult experiences for some of our users. For this we apologize, and we hope that today's change is a step toward making Google+ the welcoming and inclusive place that we want it to be."
I see the only major impact of this being that people can now leave pseudonymous comments on Youtube again.
"Now that our pseudonym to single user identity resolution algorithm is reasonably accurate, go right ahead and make up a fake name."
Now Google+ is sure to become the popular destination it's always been destined to be! I'm going to go on Facebook and Twitter and Instagram and Reddit and Tumblr and a site with Disqus and tell everyone it's time for Google+! Then I'll pull down my pants and tell all my friends on SnapChat!
Actually, "Anonymous Coward for the WIN!" should be the headline of this story.
having to use real names has made it far less trollish then other places.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
The same happened with my hometown paper but the reverse is true. They went from a moderated (meaning the spam and abusive posts were never posted since posts had to be pre-approved) with lots of insightful comments to almost no comments what-so-ever and the few that were commenting were doing so from fake FB accounts. So the noise ratio went way up on the comments they were getting. In short, they replaced their working moderation system with the FB system thinking the same way you do and got exactly the opposite effect.
This is a sig. This is only a sig. Had this been an actual sig you would have been informed where to tune for more sigs.
Whistleblowing, witness protection, for example. For most other cases anonymity degenerates into a cesspool of behavior that is not accepted in normal society.
People suppress their true nature in "normal society." "normal society" bores me to tears.
Overnoght the forum changed from endless spam and trolling to respectful discourse between actual people.
More like useless, non-controversial discourse. By tying everything to real names, you make it less likely that anyone will do anything controversial, even when it needs to be done. Who knows if a future employer will decide to not hire you because you said something they don't like, even if you thought it was completely innocuous?
I'd rather deal with trolls and spam than have "respectful discourse" between fake people.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Everyone is chatting about it on Twitter and Facebook!
#DeleteChrome
You're failing to distinguish between anonymity and pseudonymity.
You could argue that "seebs" isn't my "real name", although it's the only name I reliably answer to. But I've got ~30 years of history using this name, and nowhere near as much visible history under the name on my government ID, so this is the one I care about.
My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
With "say controversial things" you mean trolling?
Is that seriously the only thing you can think of? Take controversial topics like child porn, pedophilia, etc. Get on the 'wrong' side of an argument and you may find yourself the target of an angry mob - perhaps literally.
Don't you think life would be better for you if you could assume who you are and what you think instead of having to hide and having to be a hypocrite?
Don't you think life would be better if the world was perfect? Well, it isn't. You risk not being hired, being fired, losing many opportunities, and being harassed by the government. You also chase away people who don't want any of the things I just listed to happen to them. Maybe you expect people to just ignore all that, but the fact is, people don't. Some people change and convince themselves that they're being themselves, even when they're not. I don't want to hang out with fake people.
Besides, I like my privacy. I like knowing that it's difficult to tie many things to me.
Do you like it when people lie to you in order to obtain some kind of friendship from you?
No, that's why I like anonymity.
But my guess is you never posted anything which could justify it.
You base this on nothing. And since when is this just about me? I'm more afraid of others ceasing to produce insightful and thought provoking content, all in the name of stopping "trolling," something that only thin-skinned people have trouble dealing with anyway.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Google+ was trying to be a social network, and one of Google's execs (I think Eric?) also described it as an "identity service", which is something advertisers may want but slightly fewer than zero readers and writers actually wanted. No Facebook kill here, even if it does stick around longer than Orkut (which mainly took off because John Perry Barlow gave a bunch of invites to friends in Brazil, and Brazilians thought it was a great service for gossip.)
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks