Slashdot Mirror


Facebook Tweaks Its "Real Names" Policy (thestack.com)

An anonymous reader writes: Facebook has announced a US-based trial of minor changes to its controversial process of name verification, apparently in response to last year's controversy over LGBT and transgender users who were penalized for determining their own identity.

The post about the changes reveals that users who report someone else for using a 'fake' name can now provide more background information, and that users who have been asked to confirm their identity by uploading documents, such as a passport or birth certificate, can now also provide additional background information for Facebook to take into account.

This article argues that a frivolous social network should not be allowed to co-opt government-level identity checks simply because it began life in the university arena, and has telescoped the necessary supervision of teenagers transiting to adulthood into a far wider and more diverse network of users.

26 of 114 comments (clear)

  1. A right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    is a disposition towards citizen identity that is usually only allowed to governments

    I don't get this idea that doing this level of check is somehow a restricted right. No one is being forced to use facebook, if they want to require users send them a blood sample, their left tooth, and 5 million dollars to keep their account, I don't see how they shouldn't be "allowed" to demand this. At what points does facebook become something to which fair access to is governed by law (not snark, really curious.. I know there are laws regarding say, restricting access to a restaurant, so possible some of those apply?)

    Personally I strongly dislike this recent trend of pushing the use of your real identity, especially with recent actual occurrences of people being harassed in real life due to online activities. It's one of the many reasons I choose not to use facebook (the other being I find whatever voodoo they do to recommend friends disturbing, I signed up with fake info awhile back and it started recommending people I actually did know from both family and work.. which honestly creeped me the fuck out). I don't feel like my rights are being violated though.

    1. Re:A right? by KGIII · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The Libertarian in me says they're not violating any law and you are not actually required by law to make use of their services. Thus, it is their property. They can require you only type with your left thumb, type without capital letters, use a real name, provide proof, or pay any sum they insist they want you to pay. You are, of course, free to not make use of their services. Until such time as they're forced, by law, to be used then they're free to make any and all stupid choices they want that are still within the law.

      People might not like it. They don't have to. You have choices. That's the great thing about this internet thing. There are plenty of options for those who want to take or make them. You don't have to conform. You don't have to fit in. You don't have to follow. You can be different. You can be odd. You can lead. You can opt-out of participation. Equally important is that you don't have a right to participate. That's okay. There are plenty of people with whom you can associate. The path of least resistance is often the path of least interest.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    2. Re:A right? by Pseudonym · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You have choices.

      Yes, you do, and many of the choices that you have involve attempting to persuade Facebook to change its policies.

      You are free to publicly protest their rules. You are free to state your case about why you think Facebook's requirements are ridiculous. You are free to publicly shame them if you believe they are acting in a way contrary to social moires or the moral sensibilities of their target audience. You have the right to tell the world that Facebook is just a web site and maybe it should get over itself.

      You even have the right to rant in Slashdot comments. Truly, the Internet is a grand place to be.

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    3. Re: A right? by ShaunC · · Score: 2

      Many people I know have no Facebook profile whatsoever.

      Sure they do, they just haven't claimed it yet. Facebook compiles as much information as it can to build dossiers about people who haven't signed up, and that "shadow profile" can be linked to their account if they do make one. The Belgian government recently banned this practice, but the rest of us are stuck with it for now.

      --
      Thanks to the War on Drugs, it's easier to buy meth than it is to buy cold medicine!
    4. Re:A right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      > You can opt-out of participation.

      Considering that facebook builds shadow profiles of people who have chosen not to create accounts I have to call bullshit - a big steaming pile of bullshit - on you.

    5. Re:A right? by mlts · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The problem is that social network sites are becoming required for things, such as having a job, arranging meetings, group conversations, messaging, and other items.

      I know I lost a job interview because I didn't have a Twitter account, and the interview called me a "fossil" because of that. (I really don't need Twitter because I have better things to do with my time) So, social media is important, and is moving to almost a message board for everyone.

      It gets me wondering about someone setting up a social network, registering as a common carrier (so they are not responsible for people's hate speech.) Then, with a reputation system (person "A" is a friend of person "B" who sets person "A"'s opinion weight at 1.0. Person trolls person "A" who blocks person "C"... person "B" then auto-blocks person "C" as the reputation propagates.) Of course, something needs to be done about speech not protected by the 1A or equivalent (threats of bodily harm or damage), but with a reputation system in place, a troll would wind up completely ignored after a while as negative reputations propagate.

    6. Re:A right? by KGIII · · Score: 2

      But of course. I don't believe I implied you didn't have a right to complain.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    7. Re:A right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > That's not you participating. You can opt out.

      That is a meaningless, empty statement. There is no opting out, facebook won't even acknowledge that they have built a shadow profile to track you much less let you "opt out." Don't be one of those ideologues who can't see the real world for what it is.

    8. Re:A right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      > I repeat, that's not you participating.

      Correct. It is not me participating it is them tracking me without my consent, without my participation and without any recourse.

      >. If you don't want to play by their rules, don't use their site.

      Fuck off you dumbshit. I AM NOT USING THEIR SITE. Ca-fucking-piche? Read the goddamn links, I didn't put them there for my benefit.

  2. It makes a lot of sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If their product is the users, you are attacking the heart of their business model by providing an incorrect name.

    1. Re:It makes a lot of sense by Etherwalk · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If their product is the users, you are attacking the heart of their business model by providing an incorrect name.

      This. They are causing massive harm to individuals and society in several ways: careerwise (since social media is now checked by employers), by reducing social mobility (the same way), and in terms of chilling free speech. All so that they can sell your identity to advertisers, intelligence agencies, and data mining firms.

    2. Re:It makes a lot of sense by epyT-R · · Score: 2

      Simple, you would've stayed in touch in the first place.

    3. Re:It makes a lot of sense by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 5, Interesting

      If their product is the users, you are attacking the heart of their business model by providing an incorrect name.

      Yet in the United States it is entirely legal to adopt any name at all, for any reason you want, under certain restrictions (most having to do with how you interact with the government and sometimes banks - frequently because of government). There is absolutely no requirement that I use my birth-name, although there are some inconveniences. As far as my friends know, my bullshit made-up Facebook name is actually how I wish to be referred to.

      Asking me to provide proof of my name is really asking me to produce documentation that corroborates my story: documentation I can easily (and legally) fabricate, or else may itself have been a fabrication that does not support my facebook identity. It seems like in our brave new digital age, the we should have our children change their identity every year to establish some history.

      It is a total waste of time to continue down this road, my name is whatever I say it is. Until it comes time to pay taxes, then it's whatever my parents said it was on the day I was born.

    4. Re:It makes a lot of sense by Obfuscant · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It is a total waste of time to continue down this road, my name is whatever I say it is. Until it comes time to pay taxes, then it's whatever my parents said it was on the day I was born.

      I don't know that the IRS cares either, as long as the TIN (taxpayer identification number) is correct and the numbers add up.

      Facebook has made, and will continue to make, money from selling my demographic information, and companies that want to sell me stuff don't care if my name is Fred Willard or Bjorn Florgen as long as I have money they can separate me from.

  3. Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    At long last, I can use my rightful name on my Facebook account.

    Sincerely,
    Seymore Butts

  4. I miss read... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    When I first saw the title I read it as "Facebook Tweets ..." and I just about fell off my chair!!!

  5. Re:Really? by Anrego · · Score: 3, Interesting

    and there's fuck all anyone can do about it

    Until they mandate everyone validate their identity. Things like requiring a mobile number for account creation is already becoming popular. It's depressing but not using your real name is going to become harder and harder, all so they can show you ads that are still probably going to be irrelevant.

  6. Re:Really? by epyT-R · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Not necessarily. You're forgetting the group of users who are unhappy yet continue to use the service because not having an account destroys their social lives.

    With social media the only winning move is not to play.

  7. Re:Really? by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 5, Interesting

    No it's not, we're just going to get more comfortable with lying and fabricating documentation. Which is OK too.

  8. Re:Really? by epyT-R · · Score: 2

    Not when it finally hits single signon stage. Net access will be like a driver's license. It will be illegal to fabricate.

  9. Re:Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Not necessarily. You're forgetting the group of users who are unhappy yet continue to use the service because not having an account destroys their social lives.

    With social media the only winning move is not to play.

    If you are forced to use FB, it is not FB's fault, but your social circle's. Don't blame FB.

    It's like saying you hate a specific shop, but you go there because that's where all your friends hang-out. How is it the shop's fault?

  10. Re:whut? by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 5, Interesting

    passport? birth certificate?

    IANAL, but it's not clear to me that it is a violation of 18 U.S.C. 1543 to forge a passport for the purposes of fucking with Facebook, it's not clear based on 18 U.S.C. 1546 that it is a crime to provide a false passport for the purposes of fucking with Facebook, and it's not clear under 18 U.S.C. 1541 that Facebook is actually allowed to verify a passport (i.e. they are not a sanctioned body, as far as I know). You can do whatever you want with birth certificates, as far as I know, insofar as Facebook is concerned. All of this falls apart if you are actually trying to break a law and using false information to conceal your activities, but in that case you're already in cost-benefit analysis land and hopefully know what you're doing.

    Maybe someone is going to have to do this and get taken to court over it to "see what happens", but I have no intention of telling the truth on the internet unless I have a good reason to do so.

  11. Wait, what? by QuietLagoon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Facebook would expect me to upload my birth certificate and/or passport to be used in their people catalog?

  12. Re:Really? by epyT-R · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Facebook is in the process of becoming single sign on for a lot of sites. For example, if slashdot went that way, those who don't want to deal with facebook would have to walk away. Eventually such people are cornered. yeah, sure, facebook can do what it wants, but that doesn't mean they aren't user-hostile.

  13. Facebook only cares about the $$$ by l0n3s0m3phr34k · · Score: 2

    Their various spokespeople have been dancing around the truth behind this; but it's all about the advertising money. If your not using your real name, then they can't easily tie you back to whatever profiling system they use that pushes ads based on marketing databases. My theory is that many of the "complaints" that get accounts removed are coming from various companies who pay to advertise with Facebook; to them "fake accounts" are wasting their money. No corp gives a flying f*ck if your a victim of domestic abuse, a trans hiding from a beating, or even if your in the US's witness protection plan. To them, a fake name = wasted ads. The only reason Facebook is even addressing this is because of the social backlash.

  14. Re:Really? by brantondaveperson · · Score: 3, Interesting

    because not having an account destroys their social lives.

    Seriously? How does it do that, exactly? Does your email stop working, does your phone self-destruct? Are you teleported into outer space? It's possible to communicate with people without funnelling everything through a third party service that repays your loyalty by making large amounts of money from your information, and keeping it. Delete your Facebook account (I seriously encourage everyone to actually do this. The world would be enormously improved), and you'll find that your social life continues to function. We all gave Facebook this power, we can take it back.