Are 'Real Names' Policies an Abuse of Power? 318
telekon writes "Microsoft researcher Danah Boyd argues in this article that 'The people who most heavily rely on pseudonyms in online spaces are those who are most marginalized by systems of power.' This comes in the wake of criticism aimed at Facebook and Google for their stance on anonymity and pseudonymity. A related article from the Atlantic discusses how revolutionary the real name requirement really is."
Re:Easy solution (Score:4, Interesting)
Mass market solutions always pander to or exploit idiots. Good marketing tends to win out against good product or even being first to market. So products and solutions that target savvy users tend to be marginalized. Since computing tends to create "compatibility" barriers, this becomes especially problematic.
The sad fact is that most people don't see the danger of broadcasting their lives on the Internet.
So more dangerous solutions proliferate to the detriment of better alternatives.
Re:Easy solution (Score:5, Interesting)
Futaba style image boards are a very versatile method of communication.
In my opinion they have a free and openess of communication, which western style forums seem to stifle.
Re:Easy solution (Score:2, Interesting)
I've been stalked by an ex-girlfriend. She is completely goddamn psychotic.
Unfortunately, she stays just to that grey area of the law where the local police "can't do anything" and lawyers are leery of it. She tried to bug the hell out of my boss at work for a while, then he got the hint to have her ignored and barred from the premises. She started trying to look up my friends list on FB, even to the point of getting hold of a friend's FB password and using his account to spy on me. She bothered every female on my list as to why and how they knew me, even to the point of bugging my maternal grandmother (who doesn't have any pictures on her account).
I said fuck it, backed up what data I needed, wiped Facebook, and started over with a false name. I only add those people I trust back on, and I don't post pics of myself and make it clear I don't want to be tagged in their photos either (how I long for a "make it impossible to tag me" feature on FB).
So far, it's worked. But if Zuckerberg and his buddies want me to go back to my real name, well, they can go fuck themselves, because I'll drop FB and any other social networking site altogether before I take that risk.
I wish they'd deconflate identities (Score:3, Interesting)
What I call someone, what they call themselves, and their real identity are three different things. Why force them to be the same?
A) if Google/Facebook only grant accounts (or verified account status, as others have suggested) to people who disclose their personal identity... that's the company's choice. It certainly makes me more likely to use their service (for the obvious spam/troll prevention reasons).
B) but there's no reason they need to publish that information for anyone else. They could then let my friend Robert Snee sign up for an account, choose his public name to be "Dread Pirate Snee" and then, most importantly, let me override his name and avatar with one of my own choice... probably Bob Snee with a picture of something other than his newborn baby.
C) And if Rob wants to use a total psueodonym but still accept his friend request/add him to a circle... he'll need to tell me in private "who he is" and prove it to me. Possibly by *choosing* to reveal his google/FB-verified real-identity. If he doesn't, I'm not going to let him into my friends/circles... which is the difference between social network-based sites and open communication tools like email/forums which have global acceptance for historical/practical reasons.
G