Slashdot Mirror
EFF Joins Nameless Coalition and Demands Facebook Kills Its Real Names Policy
Mark Wilson writes: Facebook has seen heavy criticism for its real names (or 'authentic identities' as they are known to the social network) policy. Over the last year, all manner of rights groups and advocates have tried to convince Facebook to allow users to drop their real name in favor of a pseudonym if they want. Now the Electronic Frontier Foundation is part of the 74-member strong Nameless Coalition and has written to Facebook demanding a rethink on the ground of safety, privacy, and equality. This is far from being the first time Facebook has been called on to allow the use of 'fake names', and the latest letter is signed by LGBT groups, freedom advocates, privacy supporters, and feminist organizations.
The best argument for Facebook will be if there's a way to make money off fake names.
Thank you, Bradley Manning, Edward Snowden and so many others, for courageously defending humanity, my freedom and more!
If Facebook wants to require real names, fine by me, I don't have to use the service...
I refused so they shutdown my account. My company uses Facebook chat for dev communications, after giving-up on Skype, so I got fired. Requiring a real name isn't nearly as bad as demanding ID and utility bills.
Github wants real name registration, one account per person, and many companies (employers and consulting clients) host their code there, so it's impossible for a programmer to avoid using it. That means Github gets to track your employment history / client list. Some of those clients even have made me sign NDA's saying I wouldn't tell anyone I had worked for them, but of course then the info spills to Github. It's like Facebook for coders and I avoid it to the extent I can, but bleccch. I'd much rather have separate accounts per project but they don't allow that.
There is no magic bullet but didn't the real name policy with G+ and then linking to YouTube actually curb trolling on YouTube? As for real names on Facebook, if you joined Facebook then you have already surrendered your privacy.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
Real names provides a measure of accountability that posting online under pseudonyms does not. Facebook doesn't randomly check to see if people are using real names. This only is an issue when someone reports someone else for having an account but not using a real name. As long as you're not doing other things that violate Facebook's community guidelines, this won't be a problem. The accountability is a good thing because it limits vulgarity, harassment, and other abuses that can take place far more easily behind the cover of pseudonymity. Allowing people to use fake names will actually increase bullying and harassment of people who are subject to discrimination such as LGBT, Muslims, Arabs, and children who aren't accepted by their peers. Those who want to use fake names on Facebook have certainly run afoul of the community guidelines in other ways. There is no valid reason for demanding pseudonymity except you have something to hide and are up to no good.
Facebook is a private service. Stop using and treating it like a public square.
Well played.
The entire point of a social network is to connect to people you know. Every one of your "friends" knows who you are, even if you don't use your real name. And of course Facebook knows who you are, even if you don't use your real name. So what is the point of not using your real name? People give a corporation access to their and other people's entire lives. That's the problem, not that they use their real names while doing that.
Sorry, but the Gestapo doesn't work with pseudonyms, real name required, even if it puts you at a privacy risk...
It's always better done anonymously..
despite it takes considerable backing to do wmd on credit genocides,,, same banks, pr firms & sideshow bob style neogod dictators as we see today... every day... hang on to our hemispheres... truth + mercy = justice .. thanks again moms
Stop pretending that "private" means "not being responsible for one's actions".
Doing public business involves being called out on formally legal but actually questionable behaviour. Sometimes it's the last recourse left in a world in which big money and state collude more every day.
It's not as if someone posts as an anonymous troll and then some named troll scoops up and takes the credit for what the anonymous troll has posted all along.
Why do the policing when people do it for free.
...if you don't like their policies, don't use their service. It doesn't matter how many of these groups gather around a campfire to shake an angry fist - Facebook is not obligated to bend to them. Right now Zuckerberg is probably sitting atop one of his scrooge-mcduckian vaults laughing at the very idea that anything that is making him even richer than he is now is something that needs changing.
BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
Why are these groups constantly pandering to Facebook to change its rulership of willing victims?
Facebook is replaceable, Facebook is unnecessary and Facebook is not really social it is commercial.
This "social network" only helps large groups alienate people on a wider and constant scale. School bullying is only enhanced, stalking empowered and invasive misuse of information that can affect you long term by your employer, the government etc.
Using you real name is not protecting you. Making someone else use his real name does not protect you from them by being "accountable" that's hogwash.
Instead of trying to fix and make MySpace better what did we do? we moved one! -now many more people are realizing what Facebook is and now it's time to move on.
So many people have hundreds of Facebook friends and they do not even know who their neighbour is. Social my ass.
A 'singular oddity' is an event that cannot be explained and only happens when you are alone.
David D. Davidson at your service. If surrendering anonymity is the cost of doing business I will not be doing business. If enough people feel the same way business will become more anonymous.
If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
Real Names are necessary to help support Facebook's customers.
Facebook has an obligation to their customers to supply them with clean data. They pay Facebook money to help them target the exact people that they are looking for.
https://www.facebook.com/busin...
You are not their customer. You are Facebook's Product. You are giving Facebook huge volumes of data, personal data, etc. about you in exchange for Facebook allowing you to communicate with friends and family easily.
While you're mad as a sack of spiders I cannot help but admire how you've managed to work both the masons and regicide into a discussion about facebook privacy.
and huffingtonpost discriminates by requiring facebook to post comments.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
they may be making more money off real names. If you were facebook, you'd be insane not to have intelligence contracts.
Facebook requires real names.
... well ... they don't even have anything close to a monopoly so I guess it is just people are lazy.
If you want a service that doesn't require real names, why are people trying to use Facebook for that purposes?
It isn't like there aren't countless alternative sites and services that allow fake names.
But no, Facebook must change because
I have an idea --- someone should create an alternative to Facebook that allows fake names!! (Hahahaha, there are probably tens of thousands of those!)
"They already have way too much power"
"is the de facto means of mass communication"
"any moves to curb their influence and reach must be supported"
"A real names policy does little to stop trolls either"
Strong statements without evidence much? Facebook is for grandmas.
Nameless Coalition is not the best choice, from a marketing perspective, for a group - especially in a Capitalized Headline.
"Look, they still have to decide on their name. How lame is that to not be able to come up with a name for your lobby group?"
"No, they have already come up with a name. Their name is 'Nameless'."
:
WARNING: the system has encountered a paradox and has run out of stack space
On the topics of names: what's wrong with "John Smith" for a real (* = for certain values of real) identity? I mean, when you choose something like "Pixiedust Warslayer", you actually are broadcasting that you still want a moniker that people can identify you with fairly uniquely - you just think the one your parents came up with is stupid.
Free, as in your money being freed from the confines of your account.
> It doesn't matter how many of these groups gather around a campfire to shake an angry fist - Facebook is not obligated to bend to them.
That's right. But when enough fist-shaking touches their bottom line (and it *can* do: Facebook is basically Just Another Ad Seller, remember?), then they'll bend.
Let's turn the campfire into a headquarters-fire!
(ehh... figuratively, of course)
Just stop using facebook.
I find it interesting how vocal open source contributors are about privacy.... but these same people insist that you use mailing lists for the bulk of communication when contributing to OS projects (many of them insisting that you use your real name if you want to be taken seriously). I have personally hit this multiple times and now just avoid projects that insist on patches through mailing lists in favour of projects that I can contribute to via tools such as github where real names aren't required or enforced.
In all honesty, I can't see the attraction that leads OS projects to mailing lists for the bulk of their communication.
I think Facebook should implement a surreal name policy
You are unwilling to stand behind what you say.
- Robert Kelly Brumbelow
Facebook makes it money selling information about its users to advertisers for a profit. That information is worth less if it's not attached to a real identity and therefore a real person. If you don't like it stop using Facebook
What does that word mean, exactly, here? What is it meant to imply?
Communism. Totalitarianism.
EFF is not really in a position to demand Facebook do anything.
He also used "Henceforth", which is a sure sign of admirable lunacy.
You are welcome on my lawn.
People act differently when they are not accountable for what they say. You know that from reading every online forum ever. My facebook feed to positively civil compared to every anonymous forum.
Ideally you'd be able to use your real-world name, whether it's your legal name or not, but how can facebook tell the difference between a name you made up for facebook and one you use professionally or personally? Just how hard do you expect them to work to accommodate every keyboard warrior?
If you pick a realistic name and act like a real person, facebook will not be able to tell it's not your real name, and they have no interest in disallowing you. But you will have few friends, because you will not have a ready-made real-life network, so you will probably seek the company of other people who are using fake names, gathering around common interests. But some of them will use obviously made-up names, and they will fight because they aren't accountable, and someone will rat you all out.
This isn't facebook's fault, or their problem to solve. They don't want you turning their service into a duplicate of every other keyboard warrior antisocial forum on the internet. It's not in their best interest to be used as a tool for keyboard warriors and social misfits. Keyboard warriors and social misfits ruin the experience for "normal" people, and facebook is earning money serving "normal" people.
The lesson: If you've chosen a realistic name and want to be treated like a real person, then act like it, and watch who you keep company with. Don't piss off keyboard warriors and facebook won't know, doesn't need to know, and doesn't care that it's not your legal name.
Blogger or other well-known pseudonym? Create a facebook page rather than a personal profile. Be a facebook "like" or "follow" rather than a "friend".
Geeks want to discard any system that is not perfect for everyone, including edge cases and trouble makers. It's not realistic. If Facebook's rules don't work for you, then don't use it. They don't exist to provide a forum for you. They exist to make money, and they do so by providing social networking for real-life people, for people who want that.
Disclaimer: my slashdot name is not my real name, and I can't use it on facebook. I'm also a social misfit and generally pretty unsuccessful at social networking. That's not facebook's fault or problem.
I am sure not the only one, never used my real name or information, not so I can troll. Friends on fb no who I am.
Get up!
Facebook is a poor choice for communicating around a common interest, or for getting support from a group. There are no facebook communities that compare to the better web forums, and it has nothing to do with anonymity. The interface itself is just not conducive to group discussions. Everything is short-term, hit-or-miss reach, and even large groups have small participation. Facebook isn't useful for carrying on a meaningful dialog.
74-member strong Nameless Coalition? Out of how many billions of users?? Good luck. And Facebook is not a government provided services, it's a private corporation. They can do whatever they want. Don't like it? Don't use it. Plain and simple.
The LGBT "community" is <1% of the U.S. population. I'm really sick and tired of constantly and continuously hearing about them or their whining opinions.
If you don't like Facebook's real name policy, either don;t use THEIR free service or lie, like everyone else.
But FFS STFU!
Fucking hipster douchebag; I bet you're next going to tell us how you don't watch TV.
you sir, won the internet today, and i say this as an American. +1!
FB has too much going with verified identities, everything from proof they have a real consistent person for advertisers to verified log ins for things like Huffingtonpost.
My guess is at least one of FB's goals is to become the "single login" to the internet.
I know that part will be true of FB's internet connectivity services.
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
But I still think that companies should still have whatever rules they want as long as they don't violate laws (including antitrust) and said rules are explicit and well documented. I'm puzzled by the presence of LGBT and feminist groups. Are LGBT groups trying to protect the relics who still want to keep it on the DL? Are the feminist groups trying to shield women from abusive EXes? Those are my guesses. Both of those are fixable with security settings.
I mean, if you don't use your real name, I'm not going to accept a friend request. I don't know who you are. So I see limited utility in you being on Facebook in the first place. Try one of a million message boards on the internet that don't care if you call yourself Batman.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
Let FB alone, and promote decentralized alternatives under user control, like diaspora*.
pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
Look, here's the thing: Make up a plausible sounding name, create a gmail account with that name and link it to it.
Just how much do you think Facebook can actually check this shit? Does anybody believe there aren't already fake names?
Yes, it's a stupid policy ... so ignore it.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
The first time an LGBTIQBLTBBQ member gets harassed by a pseudonymed user, some advocate will demand a user's real name from Facebook. Then there will be a push to require real names on Facebook in the name of equality.
How about those who oppose Facefuck's policies build their own system?
Baseball games and Football games. And occasionally the wife convinces me to watch an episode of Arrow or Flash. Otherwise haven't watched TV since the 80's....
But when did it become Hipster to avoid FB? I just do it because I like my privacy too much to broadcast every fart to the known world....
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
I can relate...I suck a dick every few years when my wife wants an mmf three way. But I haven't been gay since the 80s
Baseball games and Football games. And occasionally the wife convinces me to watch an episode of Arrow or Flash. Otherwise haven't watched TV since the 80's....
But when did it become Hipster to avoid FB? I just do it because I like my privacy too much to broadcast every fart to the known world....
See definition 13 here.
"But the federal government has agreed to back off monopolization charges in exchange for real names they can track!"
This threat is normally reserved to extract donations to senators and representatives.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
But when did it become Hipster to avoid FB?
I was wondering that too...I don't have a Facebook account and I'm about as far from "hipster" as it gets. I confess I don't watch much TV, there's just not enough time for me to do so and not much on it that I find interesting...but FFS, that hardly makes me a "hipster", does it?
So...according to AC, I have to watch a certain number of hours a week AND use Facebook some given amount, or I'll be labeled a "hipster"? Really? Is that how it works now?
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
> I'm about as far from "hipster" as it gets
Bingo! You ARE a hipster! :)
Pfft! I was a hipster before it was cool.
No TV, Twitter, Facebook, etc... Also, a lot of good bands turn to shit when they get popular. I actually have great respect for Jane's Addiction who broke up simply because they were getting too popular and that wasn't their goal - they just wanted to make good music and have fun, not start a movement.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
I would be perfectly happy to have never created a Facebook account. Unfortunately, there are now several websites that require a Facebook login to use, including Tinder (yes, I am that shallow). How about if we stop making Facebook the de facto user identification mechanism for the web, and require ALL sites to provide a user identification mechanism that allows anonymity? I'd also point out that Facebook doesn't follow it's own rules, it encourages those under 13 to lie about their age, then goes ahead and collects data on them, when any human being viewing their profile picture would conclude they are underage. They also only worry about names not being "real" when some other user flags them.
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
So, use a real name... just don't use YOUR OWN real name! Let some other poor sucker take flack for the manure you post on Facebook! Personally, I think we could use a subset of the internet which requires positive identification, but Facebook isn't it.
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
I DEMAND to remain anonymous on the Internet. NOW!
Definitions fails. OP never says he is better then anyone else. He just doesn't watch much TV and enjoys his privacy.
It is actually kinda sad that you had to look through 13 different definitions to find one that you might be able to color the OP in. So what do you have against people who don't use facebook if that doesn't make them a hipster?
I've been watching TV since before it's been cool. Then I stopped when everyone started doing it.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
So ... they failed on both their goals?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I would say this is coming too late. The cultural damage is already done. People have shifted away from thinking of attaching their internet identity to a handle and now find it normal and acceptable to attach their "real" identity with their "internet" identity to the point where they think it's odd that someone would rather go by a handle of their own choosing. Even if you let people specify their own handles, they would still sign up with their own names. Facebook has made this practice the normal behaviour of internet users.
It's "facebook" people. Facebook. It's not like you need it or life requires it. It's not like you have to put everything in your life into it. You can of course put your whole life out there for anyone who wishes to see it (That's what I do mostly) or if you like you can post 4 pictures of cats and then only share them with a handful of friends and then never go back there again. People who use it aren't "willing victims" and people who won't use it because they don't want to use their real names aren't being somehow abused or picked on. What does identifying LGBT have to do with any of this shit? Just go outside and play for fucks sake and get over it.
Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
I remember meeting Michael Richter, the then Privacy Counsel for Facebook, at a lunch privacy forum back in 2008. Someone in our group asked him about their 'authentic identities' policy and what Facebook planned to do when people wanted to use an alternate identity for privacy reasons. His response was very off-the-cuff, dismissing the concern entirely - "we don't believe in that, people only have one identity". Most of the people in attendance were privacy law scholars and there was an audible gasp. He went on to talk without shame about how Facebook was terminating the accounts of people who were found not using their real names while we sat there mouths agape. There wasn't any attempt at all to discuss the issue with us. All of his statements were very matter-of-fact.
The only topic of discussion on the drive back was how this person, who was the acting Privacy Officer at the time and who should have been championing privacy organizationally, did not seem to value privacy at all. It told me all I needed to know about what Facebook's priorities were then, and still are now.
So not using facebook makes one a hipster?! I thought only hipsters used faceblech!
You can't watch television any more. There's no "tele." Now you can watch packetvision. Not that I'd recommend it. Near as I can tell, if it's in the form of an image recording, it's very, very rarely worth watching.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Yep. And I've always not been a member of Facebook. :)
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Fucking hipster douchebag; I bet you're next going to tell us how you don't watch TV.
On rare occasions, I watch broadcast TV (very rare, the last time was months ago). I have DVB-T hardware, but don't use it; I stopped getting cable more than a decade ago. Other than that, I just watch what's on my media server at home - more than a thousand movies and several thousand TV series episodes.
That's very nice. If you live in California.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
That. Was. Awesome.
But you really should take your meds.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
I have 4 faux name accounts made using made up names off top of head.
They have a fake profile data, with college , job, etc and couple photos faces cropped from random Google images.
I've had them over 5 years and use them for anonymous comments, trolling, spy, etc.
There's no way they can prove the info is fake
As long as you don't blatantly use a nickname as the account name.
Course I also have 6 gmail accounts mainly to get extra storage space on Google drive free, I use Rapidleech on my colocated server to transfer downloaded torrents from rutorrent web front end over o Google drive then share URLs with friends and such.
"rebels, masonic regicidors, anti-establishment conspirators, naval draft dodgers and ordinary run-of-the-mill criminals"
So *that's* how to start up first-rate country!
His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
I have 4 faux name accounts made using made up names off top of head.
They have a fake profile data, with college , job, etc and couple photos faces cropped from random Google images.
I've had them over 5 years and use them for anonymous comments, trolling, spy, etc.
There's no way they can prove the info is fake
And it's obvious that many others do the same so I'm always disgusted when "news" media reports that FB has 1.5 BILLION users (or whatever the number is). No they do not. Strip away the fake and multiple accounts, subtract the accounts that are no longer active, subtract businesses (who are not actually individuals) and I wonder how many people actually use FB.
Yes, I'm sure it's still a big number but it always amazes me when some bubble-headed bimbo on the local news marvels at just how many people are on FB. Perhaps it will become obvious as internet access becomes available to those who may not have it now and we end up with more FB users than there are humans on the planet.
"...to ensure the rights and free speech of all Facebook users..."
You know your company is successful when free and open access to the service you provide is considered a fundamental human right. As a long-term supporter of the EFF and someone that has never used Facebook I have to say that the EFF has seriously let themselves down here with this stance and I have cancelled my support.
Facebook receive my full support in maintaining its real names policy; their site, their rules. One is not truly a "rights" group when you're siding with a state to attack other people.
So not using facebook makes one a hipster?! I thought only hipsters used faceblech!
Only in the early days. Now everyone uses Facebook.
Remember, the hipster is the sort of guy who says "this is popular, so it sucks." That also means that things the hipster might have once liked, he/she can't like anymore.