Fake Names On Social Networks, a Fake Problem 283
disco_tracy writes "The leading social networks demand that members use their real names, and they're not afraid to evict violators. Many Facebook users have quietly complied, despite the problems that rule creates for political dissidents, stalking survivors and others. Much of this discussion has centered around people in physical or financial danger of having their identities revealed. But there are broader reasons for social networks to stop pushing real-name policies."
In other news... (Score:2, Funny)
several hundred people around the world have had their name legally changed to Anonymous Coward
Re: (Score:3)
No, really, I swear! I AM Spartacus!
Re: (Score:2)
You Are The Product (Score:5, Insightful)
The single main reason that âoesocial networksâ push the real names issue is quality of their database for the use of marketers that buy services from the social networks. That, and the Three Letter Agencies make extensive use of social network data mining. But itâ(TM)s mostly the marketers, the more they know about *you* the more they can sell *you*. "Social networks" do this to improve the quality of their product (you).
Re: (Score:3)
The requirement is there to help the corporations, not their users.
The really silly part is that they make such half-hearted attempts to enforce it. A simple 1 cent charge on a Credit Card (or a $10 charge that buys you a $10 credit at your choice of Amazon/Fandango/Barnes & Nobles/other corporate sponsors) would do 99% of the work of verifying identity. But they don't want to actually do this, because they are afraid it might turn off 1% of users.
What they don't understand is that at le
Re: (Score:2)
It's how USPS does it for online change of address forms. It's a $1 charge but google could easily afford a $.1 charge (they already have the google checkout processor). I'd validate and verify everyone on their service. Heck they could even just issue a temporary hold and reverse the charge as long as it went through.
Re:You Are The Product (Score:4, Informative)
Yes, but you as a customer do not have to do your change of address online and pay for it.
I was kinda shocked when I saw this...so I looked a bit harder at the USPS site...and it did provide the option (not as easy to find) to print out the form, and submit it to the postoffice or mail it in like the old ways for free.
Credit cards and name verification = not so easy (Score:5, Insightful)
Hi, I'm the author of the Discovery piece (and yes, I'm posting under my real name). One detail I couldn't get into that post was the credit-card issue--at first, I thought that a Facebook or a Google+ could just query Visa or AmEx or whoever and get a name match. It turns out that it's not so easy. Neither of the two usual card-verification schemes actually confirm a cardholder's name:
* asking for CVV2 numbers [wikipedia.org] just proves that the person has the card in their hand (or has memorized those digits);
* AVS [wikipedia.org], or address verification system, only checks the numbers in the billing address.
There are other services that claim to verify names nearly instantly--but as gurps_npc notes, the real reason neither Facebook nor G+ bothers is because they don't want to discourage people from signing up.
- RP
Re: (Score:2)
You're right this would also solve that problem.
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks to AdBlock and Google's spam filter, I haven't seen a single email from Facebook or one of their 'marketers' since I joined.
I was also unaware that they had any sort of 'use your real name' policy, as many of my friends use "Shotglass Susie" and stuff like that, which is clearly not real.
Re: (Score:2)
... as many of my friends use "Shotglass Susie" and stuff like that...
Screen Name is different than Real Name at FB. And, from the FB ToS:
Facebook requires users to provide their real first and last names [....] Fake names are not permitted.
So, FB may get around to "Shotglass Susie" eventually, and send her and her shotglass packing.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe a real name like this will work: Chnsz Medvypa
I generated a password using Lastpass and just changed the capitalization. After all, maybe it's my family tradition to give their kids first names composed of all consonants.
Re:You Are The Product (Score:4, Funny)
It's nice to know Welsh people finally made it online as well :-)
Re: (Score:2)
From my end, I'm more concerned of being able to find old friends from long long ago. If they're using pseudonyms, how can I find them?
Actually, Google says you can use pseudonyms, as long as other people that you know also know that name.
Just my opinion.
Re:You Are The Product (Score:4, Insightful)
If there are using a pseudonym then obviously they don't want to be found by their real name. I would argue that their right to privacy is greater than your right to find them.
Re:You Are The Product (Score:4, Insightful)
If the company is just selling advertising directed at you (Google, to the best of my knowledge) then what difference does it make if i use a pseudonym or not? They can collect information about me just as easily and sell advertising directed at me either way. Even if i "fool" them by logging in two or three times under different names that just means they can collect information on each of those profiles and sell two or three times as much advertising.
And if i'm afraid to indulge my interest in invisible pink unicorn pornography while logged in under my real name and a social network enforces a real name policy, then either i'm not going to log into that network at all (total loss of revenue) or i'm just going to avoid some of my favorite activities on that network (partial loss of revenue since their advertising won't be as well tailored to my actual interests.)
Re:You Are The Product (Score:4, Informative)
A very large problem with this forcing of real names is when the sites in question have blacklists for certain names. I have a friend who's real, birth certificate name is "Aragorn" (his parents are HUGE LOTR geeks) and facebook does not allow that name, so he goes by Aragor. It's incredibly annoying to me, but he doesn't really care that much. facebook wants him to send a copy of his driver's license as proof so they'll allow him to use the name.
I'm just glad that they let me use Spike. I mean, it may not be on my birth certificate, but it's the only name I use. It's on my bank accounts (BofA doesn't seem to care), credit cards, cell phone, work ID, everything. My parents have called me that since before I was born and it's all anyone calls me.
Does it work? - Genuine query (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm asking these questions with a genuine level of curiosity....
What impact do people think having real names genuinely has on advertising?
Is the advertising industry really that effective?
How much notice do people actually take?
Are people really conditioned to buy stuff or even switch brands just because there's an advert?
If I'm making a purchase beyond the weekly shop, I tend to look at suppliers websites, reviews etc - I wouldn't go out and spend my hard earned cash on something just because there's an
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Interesting...pretty much every real friend I knew from High School, or along lifes path since then...I've kept up with and in constant or almost constant contact with...some for multiple decades. That's one reason I've not seen any reason to join FB. Anyone that I want to be in contact with...I'm in contact with. It isn't like I lose touch with people I care about in lif
Re: (Score:2)
That's the tinfoil hat version - and it ignores that the service has to be paid for somehow...
But in reality, the main way the vast majority people find each other is by their real names, has been since the introduction of phone books.
Oh Look.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Ah; a story on how hiding behind pseudonyms is no bad thing..
..followed by a comment thread in which lots of people hiding behind pseudonyms insult each other in ways they would not do if their names were actually attached and the comments could follow them home.
Re: (Score:2)
Says someone similarly using a pseudonym. That's not evidence, that's just /..
Pseudonymous usage does not == uncivil assholeishness.
If you need evidence of that, have a look at some of the anti-pseudonym sentiments that have cropped up under people's "real" names on Google+ thus far. On the whole the pseudonymous crowd have been considerably more civil, more reasonable, and more able to present research supportive of their arguments.
Re: (Score:2)
Pseudonymous usage does not == uncivil assholeishness.
I disagree; and I cite the Internet's finest authority to back me up in it's most famous cartoon:
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/3/19/ [penny-arcade.com]
Re: (Score:3)
And I present the following countering evidence to the idea that real names do anything to increase civility: http://imgur.com/ub51D [imgur.com]
Re: (Score:2)
It doesn't always lead there. I've been in a few groups that are remarkably civil without requiring real identities (or excessive moderator action). And back in usenet days when I engaged in some of my most uncivil Internet conversation I actually used my real name. But it's a definite contributing factor. Even with my semi-anonymous usernames like this, I often restrain myself from my instincts to be a complete ass.
Re:Oh Look.. (Score:4, Funny)
Oh, f**k you. You fascist.
And by the way.
Real Name: Jonathon Wisnoski
And I live in: Parkhill, Ontario, Canada.
Re: (Score:3)
Pfft! Still fake. There is no such place as Canada!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You forgot your age and SSID..
If you find that someone pointing out (with examples) the problems of pseudoanomity a bit 'Fascistic'.. how do you feel about the sentiment that a private website, run by a private company, can make whatever rules it fancies? And if it's users don't like them they can leave. Or do you want to impose rules on them; cos that sounds just a teency-weency bit fascistic to me..
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Oh Look.. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Do any sites require that?
What's more the real name policy definitely discriminates against folks with unusual names. I remember working with a gentleman whose last name was uncommon enough that he could categorically say that if I ran into anybody with it that they were a relative. My last name isn't really that rare, but there's still only a few dozen folks that I know of that share it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What's more the real name policy definitely discriminates against folks with unusual names.
And people with common names, e.g. John Smith, Bob Jones etc. are almost defacto anonymous anyway. There are probably millions of people with the same name.
Real names is completely unnecessary and unfair. Even if a site requires a real name (and even that should be hard to justify), people should entitled to roll their own aliases.
Re: (Score:3)
Just because some mistake freedom for license doesn't mean freedom should be removed, online or offline. We have laws because some people just can't deal with freedom, but this is different since it's about a business model which depends entirely on selling user details for marketing purposes. As such, unlike the law, it is quite easy to escape, simply by not participating, or taken to the next level, by creating a competing operation which doesn't need such unsavoury practises to thrive. What that might be
Re: (Score:2)
You've never been to a city hall meeting, have you?
Re: (Score:2)
Asshole.
You made yourself an "EasyTarget" for that one. Harharhar.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed; boy I'm so dumb.. never saw that coming huh?
What's funny is how many people seem to take my belief that it is a good thing to have some non-anonymous places on the net as meaning I want to ban anonymity everywhere..
Then I realised; in fact everybody here, except one fat kid in NJ, agrees with me; and all the accounts ranting here are in fact sockpuppets of that one dork.
Re: (Score:3)
Naïve.
First, the story wasn't not about how pseudonyms are not bad, it doesn't even talk about that but goes into other issues. (See the bullet points kindly provided in "Lord Grey's" post below.)
But to truly attack someone, you have to know something about them and be able to access an area they are vulnerable.
Anonymously "attacking" is insignificant.
If some stranger with no identity you can relate to says something about you, whether on the Internet, WWW, email, or written in your local newspaper, i
Re: (Score:2)
It is, however, strange that people who do not wish to expose themselves are present on social networks. Even if they don't disclose their own identity it is generally easy to trace them back through their friends who do as well sa their own traits.
Re: (Score:2)
That is no bad thing. I'd rather not have everybody censor themselves down to meaningless banalities for fear of possibly insulting some extremist whacko. Sure, some people will "abuse" their privacy, but such "abuse" is harmless and easily handle
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You don't want some random internet user coming to your home to make his point without using words.
Well; I rarely say things that might make them want to do that.. Do you find you have such a problem? Maybe it's the way you express yourself?
Re: (Score:2)
so, from your limited experience, you extrapolate to the entire world. Brilliant.
Re: (Score:2)
Says the guy with the username "EasyTarget".
Re: (Score:2)
Obviously, you're not gay and hold no controversial views. Good for you, for the rest of us, there's always the possibility of saying something that would lead somebody living relatively near to us to come over and take things up in person. Sure it's a remote risk, but for some issues it definitely could happen.
Not to mention employers that do background checks.
Re: (Score:2)
Three points (Score:4, Interesting)
For those of you who don't RTFA -- you do exist, right? -- here are the "broader reasons:"
Mind boggling, I know. Even more so when you consider than an entire article was written around those three points.
Re: (Score:3)
Mind boggling... but what is even more so are how many people are out there insisting that we have to get rid of psuedonyms.
It is a good thing that articles are being published debunking some of the myths... and not just by people who come across as ranting or rambling...
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Does it? Who decides what the purpose of Facebook is? Certainly the people who own Facebook can try to direct things, but isn't the purpose of Facebook just as much what the users of Facebook actually use it for?
Personally, i use Facebook for the exact same reasons i use other social networks for, to keep track of what's going on with my friends. Those friends will tell me what their profile is on the their favorite network site, whether they're using a pseudony
I know several that do obfuscate... (Score:5, Interesting)
Why? because of Stupid HR people.
I have a friend that has 3 PHD's in Archaeology and is a Viking Historian that heads up the local SCA Viking group. he had to change his name to a viking name to keep schools from googling him and labelling him as a "wierdo that dresses up" and losing teaching positions.
I have another friend that worked in the medical field and was getting questioned daily by his HR department demanding he "friend them" on Facebook. so he changed his name to a made up one, made a new "real profile" that is empty and friended them through that.
Give us laws that protect us from Assholes in the HR department, I.E. let me sue my boss for $34,986,231,15 for not giving me a raise because I posted a LOLCAT animated gif on my facebook wall.
They cant fire me for living in a blue house with yellow flowers growing outside, but yet the idiots in Washington think it's ok to let them do it because I am friends with people named Dave.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Wow - really?
My boss pestered me to be added as a friend on facebook. I politely avoided the issue. Several other staff did add the boss and trouble ensued. The boss was quickly unfriended followed by requests to see what collegue x was up to via my account - again politely refused.
My personal life has nothing to do with work. My friends on facebook are just that, friends.
That said, my facebook account is largely dormant now as a result of this. Well that and the pointlessness of so many status updates thes
Re:I know several that do obfuscate... (Score:5, Insightful)
When I get asked by bosses/coworkers to be Facebook friends, I politely suggest we connect through LinkedIn.
The right tool for the job, etc.
Re: (Score:3)
I and a lot of my friends do this. Specifically, all of my friends who work as teachers, are all on there with pseudonyms, and other friends who don't want their careers tarnished by their profiles.
I know it's a serious problem for me, and many others. Fuck Facebook's rules, I'll do what I want.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would somebody have three PhDs? (Score:2)
I have a friend that has 3 PHD's in Archaeology...
!!!
Three PhDs? In the same subject?
Why?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Peolpe with blue houses are not a protected class in any way shape of form.
My religion requires me to paint my house in blue. Do you discriminate against me because of this?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why not? It worked for Scientology quite well.
Re: (Score:2)
They can fire you for having a blue house, but while this may happen once or twice, they're not going to be able to go through all the people in the company and pick everyone with blue houses to fire them. It's just not practical to drive around to everyone's address just to see if their house looks weird enough.
As long as the information is not available in a couple of seconds on the Internet, they can't in *practice* fire people for having blue houses.
But it takes a very short time to examine someone's F
Re: (Score:3)
I think firing is not likely to be a big problem, so much as hiring in the first place.
You send out a resume to 100 companies, and you don't get any requests for interviews. Is it because they just don't need you or have much better resumes, or is because you have photos from Comic-Con on your facebook page? You'll never be told.
Or, suppose your boss is told they need to lay off one person. You're the guy who gets let go. Did facebook have anything to do with it? All you'd be told is that your services
Re: (Score:3)
This even happened before social networking was a big thing.
I remember a story about a high school art teacher who was secretly a critically acclaimed pseudonymous artist. Who painted mosaics using his naked buttcheeks as stamps.
When he was found out, he was shamed and forced to resign, even against the wishes of his students. So when you bring up the story about the teacher forced to resign for drinking *something* in a picture on Myspace, remember that story.
Re:I know several that do obfuscate... (Score:4, Informative)
They cant fire me for living in a blue house with yellow flowers growing outside
If you live in an ironically named "at will employment" state, then yes, they absolutely can fire you because they don't like your landscaping.
Re: (Score:2)
Er. They *can* fire you for living in a blue house with yellow flowers.
Re: (Score:2)
Given the number of people I know who are professors, or other high level professionals, or military members with TS clearances and arcane accesses (including both intel and nuclear weapons) who openly play in the SCA... Either he's embell
Re: (Score:2)
Geeze, viking costumes? Imagine what they would do to him if they found a picture of him having a beer or wearing a skirt at a Halloween party.
Re: (Score:2)
HBGary email that ought 2 concern U ALL (Score:3, Interesting)
This really bothered me, don't know about the rest of you:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/02/16/945768/-UPDATED:-The-HB-Gary-Email-That-Should-Concern-Us-All [dailykos.com]
PERTINENT QUOTES/EXCERPTS:
"According to an embedded MS Word document found in one of the HBGary emails, it involves creating an army of sockpuppets, with sophisticated "persona management" software that allows a small team of only a few people to appear to be many, while keeping the personas from accidentally cross-contaminating each other. Then, to top it off, the team can actually automate some functions so one persona can appear to be an entire Brooks Brothers riot online... And all of this is for the purposes of infiltration, data mining, and (here's the one that really worries me) ganging up on bloggers, commenters and otherwise "real" people to smear enemies and distort the truth... "
and
"They are talking about creating the illusion of consensus. And consensus is a powerful persuader... And another thing, this is just one little company of assholes. I can't believe there aren't others doing this already. From oil companies, political campaigns, PR firms, you name it. Public opinion means big bucks. And let's face it, what these guys are talking about is easy."
and
"To the extent that the propaganda technique known as "Bandwagon" is an effective form of persuasion, which it definitely is, the ability for a few people to infiltrate a blog or social media site and appear to be many people, all taking one position in a debate, all agreeing, for example, that so and so is not credible, or a crook, is an incredibly powerful weapon."
---
* I'd suggest reading the whole article in the link I put up above & not only because of the quotes I pulled from it to get your attention here, but also because it largely BACKS THE FACT THAT EVEN PSEUDONYMS DON'T MATTER, because they're easy to create via alternate email accounts, TOR endpoint proxies usage, OR anonymous proxy server usage on the part of those seeking to be "many from 1"!
(Yes, I'd read that folks - because it MAY ADVERSELY AFFECT YOU ONE DAY ALSO & be "levelled against you" (I hope not)... & I KNOW I've had it happen to me, here, & others spots online (I busted clone52431/clone53421 & others doing it in fact, the "trolltalk.com" pack of admitted trolls around here in fact & years ago from arstechnica people @ Windows IT Pro -> http://www.windowsitpro.com/article/internals-and-architecture/the-memory-optimization-hoax#feedbackAnchor [windowsitpro.com] (Jeremy Reimer mainly))).
APK
P.S.=> That's for anyone that tries to say I am "full of it", etc./et al - though I know that most of you KNOW this type of crap really does go on online, & how/when/where/why IF NOT BY WHOM as well as why...
... apk
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Where I think the counter to sockpuppets is in sites like Stack Exchange, where everything is based around your "reputation" (really just a score of how much you've done, and what other experienced users think of your contributions).
From a purely "let's keep the jackasses out" perspective, it works well - it beats the sock puppets by requiring them to invest enough in the system before they have access to do anything too annoying. Creating a second account when you're banned? Sure - but you have to rebuild
A fake problem indeed (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So what follows? (Score:3, Interesting)
I wonder what follows to real names.
Real profile picture photo?
Real town, school, work place?
Why?, does it make any difference to advertisers to have a name attached to a profile?, would they target that specific product differently if my name is A or B?, I would guess they will try to sell to who I am, and that doesn't change with my name...
What constitutes a "real" name? (Score:3)
What constitutes a "real" name? Take a look at Sun Yat-Sen [wikipedia.org], for example. Which one do you think is THE real name? The original name? Baby name? Genealogy name? Courtesy name? School name? Eventually, Sun Yat-Sen was famed in China because of the pseudoname he used in Japan. And Yat-Sen itself is a school name.
I have a false name (Score:4, Insightful)
best argument against real names: (Score:4, Informative)
it's bad for business. the same policy killed friendster:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071101/194615.shtml [techdirt.com]
friendster started deleting fake names. this was the height of friendster's popularity, 2003. so people left in droves for this new funky site called "myspace"
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20030813/2010251.shtml [techdirt.com]
1. if you do not learn from history, you are doomed to repeat it, GOOGLE PLUS I'M TALKING TO YOU
2. the BOTTOM LINE you idiots. this policy hurts your BOTTOM LINE. just ask friendster, circa 2003
Re: (Score:2)
there were a lot more factors in myspace's demise
but take two sites, of equal featureset and user experience, but one allows fake names, and one doesn't: the one that allow fake names wins
They have a bigger problem in fake people (Score:3)
Why do they have to be everything to everyone? (Score:2)
What I don't understand is why there is the constant expectation that every service offered MUST provide for everyone.
If a social network doesn't permit fake names, and you want to use a fake name, then go elsewhere. If there is no elsewhere, then isn't this a great opportunity for some entrepreneur to create an anonymous social network?
Re: (Score:2)
If it's a niche site that's not intended for everybody then it's not an issue. But if it's the number one site, like Facebook is, then it really needs to comply with typical norms. Which includes privacy policies and settings that don't drastically change at a moment's notice and the ability to post in a pseudonymous way.
Re: (Score:2)
I've failed to see anyone express the opinion that Google MUST allow pseudonyms, but i've seen a lot of people express the opinion that Google SHOULD allow pseudonyms. Yes, we can all go elsewhere if Google refuses to go along with the idea and we really think it's that important, but i'm failing to see why it's a bad idea for us
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, wow. You did not just compare having to use your real name on Facebook to Jim Crow segregation. Oh, wait. You did.
Seinfeld (Score:2)
If I walk up and introduce myself as Ted, and
Re: (Score:2)
Did Voltare or The Artist (formerly known as Prince) have any problem hiding under their pseudonyms?
Prince Rogers Nelson is his real name and he had to use a pseudonym, the unpronounceable Love Symbol, because Warner Bros. trademarked his real name which is pretty much his identity. It's no better than stealing someone's soul if you ask me. If we are not allowed to use pseudonyms on social networking sites, how will we be assured that we won't someday be hoodwinked out of the right to use our given names like Prince was? I'd much rather lose a pseudonym that I created than the name that my parents gave
I may see Facebooks point (Score:2)
For a long time I was in agreement that requiring real names was pointless, against privacy, blah blah blah.... More recently however I have begun to think otherwise, these social networking sites are based around YOUR identity, that way people find you, recognize you, and identify with you. I got sick of myspace because many people where changing their names weekly, trying to incorporate as many random characters as possible. Actually finding people I knew became next to impossible, on facebook I have foun
A Workaround (Score:3)
I only recently discovered a workaround. I had previously stayed away from places that demand my real name like Facebook. I used the form of my name in a different language, not a translation but a standard transliteration. Their requirements never say which writing system I have to include my real name, only that I have to include my real name. My real name written in the Arabic or Japanese writing system is still my real name, but it's not much use to those who would otherwise find me.
Eric S. Raymond (Score:2)
Over on G+, ESR has been arguing for the removal of anonymity, pseudonymity, and noms de plume. He claims, repeatedly, that if people are "accountable for what they say" they will behave better online. He calls it the solution to the "Sexygirl69 problem." a "problem" only in his own mind.
Everyone who points out how badly people behave on Facebook under their real names is dismissed with a wave of the hands, as if reality doesn't trump hypotheses. And to add to the insanity, he said that "important people
Re: (Score:3)
Quality Control (Score:2)
Facebook would not be where it is today if people chose names like sexykitteh69 or RedskinsFan420.
Besides making it easier to find people you know, using a real name makes the site look more professional. If you want to hide your identity, use a fake name that sounds real so it gives the appearance that everyone uses their real name. Obviously fake names cheapen the site.
Use a proxy.. (Score:2)
Appear to come from a different country and name yourself "Raoul Sexout", and say that you are a male escort specializing in cougars.
http://www.xroxy.com/ [xroxy.com]
Re: (Score:2)
You bet your ass. At some point the stalker may decide that if they can't have you, nobody can...
the way it's going call it nbc sports network 2 (Score:2)
Move ninja warrior from g4 to it + pick up all hunting and other lesser sports from versus and kill the poor PQ universal sports sub channel and move all the stuff on it to nbc sports network 2.
Re: (Score:2)
SyFy was lying just as much as Facebook and Google are lying. The name "Sci-Fi" is a descriptive term and as such is hard to trademark (though they could still trademark it in a particular font as a logo). They wanted to change it to something easier to trademark.
Re: (Score:2)
My real name is neither especially unique and recognizable, nor is it trademarkable. However if i was the first person to come up with "Nostalgia Critic" or "Angry Video Game Nerd" or "Lady Gaga" then i'd clearly have just as much reason and justification to rebrand myself as one of those names as Sci-Fi did for switching to SyFy. (Noting of course that the _right_ to rebrand yourself
Re: (Score:2)