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.
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.
Facebook is a private service. Stop using and treating it like a public square.
Well played.
The old "if you have nothing to hide" argument gets really stale. If you have nothing to hide, why do you put on clothes? If you have nothing to hide, why not give me your SSN or bank account number? If you have nothing to hide, why don't you want me to put cameras in your house?
I never use my real name online.
I do not harass or abuse people.
(excepting lawyers, trolls, politicians, religious nuts, math failures & the RIAA)
No one needs their life judged by the internet community.
Or their identity stolen.
Been on Facebook about 5 years without a real name.
When they demand one, I will just sign up under another non-real alias.
Or discontinue it entirely
This is my opinion based on what little I know and understand of the rumors and lies Thanks, Randal
...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.
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.
That's okay, I don't consider those as "people" either.
I think Facebook should implement a surreal name policy
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.
I use a name that isn't remotely real.
I just don't have friends who will flag it as fake.
--
BMO
"There is no valid reason for demanding pseudonymity except you have something to hide and are up to no good."
So George Eliot, George Orwell, Anatole France, Anthony Burgess, C S Forester, Daniel Defoe, Ford Madox Ford, George Sand, Boz, John le Carre and Joseph Conrad - and many, many more writers - were 'up to no good'?
And you posted as 'Anonymous Coward'. Need I say more?
Fucking hipster douchebag; I bet you're next going to tell us how you don't watch TV.
They hit me with the authentic name crap. I just asked for the employee ID and license of the person requesting my info.
Haven't used facebook in 5 months.
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.
Damn straight. If there's something you don't like about a service you use, you should just slink off and find a different service.
When someone says, "Any fool can see
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 wonder if posting this crap as AC you appreciate the hypocrisy and irony inherent in that?
Ah, the battle cry of idiots and fascists ... if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
"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...
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."
When they demand one
Under what basis? I don't think even they have the resources to go after their billion users asking each one individually for photo ID.
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.
That's okay, I don't consider those as "people" either.
If you can make Soylent Green from them, they're still "people".
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
According to the following gallup poll, 3.8% of adults self-identify as LGBT. You are correct that the percentage is usually overestimated, but you lose credibility when you don't get your facts straight. http://www.gallup.com/poll/183...
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
The problem is that there are many other websites now that you can only post to if you have a Facebook account, which requires you to create a burner Facebook account. The obvious solution is to stop making a Facebook account mandatory for use of other sites.
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
-1 irrelevant.
Facebook does not require use of your real name, it requires compliance with their Real Names policy which in some cases prohibits users from using their actual real name.
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.
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.
Soylent green wasn't made of people. Read the book: "Make Room, Make Room" by Harry Harrison. I guarantee the original story is better than the Hollywood vomit-fest that ignored every salient point the book made in favor of drooler fodder.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
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
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.