Google Wants You to Use Your Real Name on YouTube 602
Google has launched a pop-up dialogue box on YouTube that urges you to use your real name when trying to make a comment. From the article: "When you try to comment on a YouTube video, a box will pop up that displays your username as it’s currently seen, along with a side-by-side comparison to what it will look like if you let YouTube pull your name from Google+. You can choose 'I don’t want to use my real name,' but that will lead to another dialogue box that basically guilts you into agreeing. If you still insist on remaining anonymous, you have to tell Google why: 'My channel is for a show or character' or 'My channel name is well-known for other reasons' are two options. 'I want to remain anonymous, is–unsurprisingly–not one."
Just like a slashdot poll (Score:5, Funny)
Somebody always bitches about the lack of options. Maybe Google should have included a "My name is Cowboy Neal" option?
It could be worse... (Score:4, Funny)
For instance, if redtube [redtube.com] required you to use your real name...
Re:It could be worse... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Hey this isn't 4cha.... oh, nevermind.
Re:It could be worse... (Score:5, Interesting)
YouTube, on the other hand, is full of generally "normal" people with little to no internet savvy who spew bile from the heart. They're generally not trolling for shock value, they have hearts full of hate.
I'm starting to see why various powers rose up throughout history under the banner of controlling the populace. It never works, but I can see why...
Re:PIGS OPEN FIRE ON BABIES (Score:4, Funny)
Re:PIGS OPEN FIRE ON BABIES (Score:4, Interesting)
Because it's on your sidewalk? Because it's a neighborhood, trying to show their dignity, civility and decency - in the face oppression?
Re:Just like a slashdot poll (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Just like a slashdot poll (Score:5, Insightful)
Trolololo- no.
Lack of options in a multiple choice question is almost always a way to manufacture a false N-chotomy for the reader. Referendum-type votes do it all the time to manipulate the results. If the question is "Why would you not like to reveal personally identifiable data online" then one of the fields should be either free-form, or "because I'm not a complete muppet."
If they did add that, they would need to also include (and make default) the option that is almost certainly the correct one: "I want to troll with no repercussion."
Re:Just like a slashdot poll (Score:5, Insightful)
There would never be any repercussions to begin with.
But there are valid reasons to remain anonymous, including avoiding getting fired/not hired by insane employers or staying out of sight of insane people. No need to stifle people's speech, either. The Internet is great because there is so much anonymity. Otherwise, more people would be afraid to speak their mind. Much less interesting.
Re: (Score:3)
But there are valid reasons to remain anonymous, including avoiding getting fired/not hired by insane employers or staying out of sight of insane people.
Which of these reasons (or any other for that matter) for remaining anonymous are not fundamentally driven by concern regarding repercussions?
Re:Just like a slashdot poll (Score:5, Insightful)
Not all "repercussions" are the fault of the person who seeks to be careful and not expose himself.
Re:Just like a slashdot poll (Score:5, Insightful)
>>>Which of these reasons (or any other for that matter) for remaining anonymous are not fundamentally driven by concern regarding repercussions?
There's repercussions, and then there's misinterpretations. I've had people unfriend me simply because I said I was libertarian. More scary: A government might choose to put me on a Do-Not-Travel list, because I said on a youtube post (of a girl with her jaw blown-off) that it should not be bombing Libya. With anonymity I am free to post; with realname I have to be afraid.
Re:Just like a slashdot poll (Score:4, Insightful)
That's fucking stupid. Even Nelson Mandela operated under false names at times, and for good reason - he could have been murdered simply for believing in freedom and equal rights. And what about all the Jews in WWII Germany, you think the ones trying to sneak out of the country should have openly shouted their real identities on the streets rather?
Re:Just like a slashdot poll (Score:5, Insightful)
I have no idea where you get avoiding repercussions is a bad thing.
That is simply a stupid argument.
OF COURSE I want to be anonymous to avoid repercussions.
I find it obvious that one needs to avoid repercussions when discussing controversial and/or political topics with a worldwide audience.
I find it obvious that both governments, corporations, groups, and individuals might decide to act in a way I would find objectionable, based on comments I have/will make.
Please let me know what you find wrong with that.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Just like a slashdot poll (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Just like a slashdot poll (Score:5, Insightful)
So between our two viewpoints, it comes down essentially to what your motivation is in posting. Any way you look at it, the only reason to wish to post anonymously is to avoid some form of repercussion (whether identity theft, stalking/harassment, or simply being outed as a douchetard.)
Whatever happened to the concept of "it's just not your business?" It's the idea of "if I wanted you to know or thought you were entitled to this information, I would provide it willingly without being prompted for it." Is that disappearing along with the idea of focusing on what is being said rather than making everything into a petty personal matter focused on who is saying it?
I mean sure, Google can do what they like with their properties. That doesn't make it a worthy or noble idea, though.
Re: (Score:3)
Whatever happened to the concept of "it's just not your business?"
It was slaughtered by the corrupt politicians when they realized that fear makes for much easier ruling than visions.
Now it's "if you've got nothing to hide..."
Re:Just like a slashdot poll (Score:5, Insightful)
I have plenty to hide, and it's stuff I simply do not wish to share.
I do not trust strangers to not abuse my private information.
Staying out of jail is not one of my motivations.
Re:Just like a slashdot poll (Score:5, Insightful)
I have plenty to hide
Of course you do. One of my more common answers to "if you've got nothing to hide..." is: "So you're ok with me installing a camera in your bedroom?"
Re:Just like a slashdot poll (Score:5, Interesting)
It is a common reaction, but it's wrong -- it validates the assumption in the question, that there is something to hide.
This. is. false.
The question is not whether or not I have something to hide. The question is with whom I choose to share what.
Hence, my reaction usually is along the lines of "If I have something I desire to share with you, I'll let you know."
PS: delicious to post this as AC...
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Have you considered that Google doesn't care if you use your real name or not? But chances are, if you use your real name you're not going to troll with racist, inane, idiotic, offensive, inflammatory, poorly spelled, quasi-literate trash which describes 99.9% of youtube posts.
You can still do it, but you have to be determined. If you care, and you want to remain anonymous and post, you can still do it. Chances are you are not one of those filling the place up with bullshit.
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Just like a slashdot poll (Score:5, Insightful)
Also, the internet never forgets. So a teenager who makes some stupid comments may regret this for the rest of his life.
Me now != me in five or ten years.
Re:Just like a slashdot poll (Score:5, Insightful)
That they can doesn't mean they should. It also doesn't mean they can't be criticized for it.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
That's not what the writers of the Federalist Papers thought.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Just like a slashdot poll (Score:5, Insightful)
I think the problem here is that everyone is a dissident in some circles. So while I hold opinion A and like to promote it, my (family/boss/co-worker/government) don't know that opinion and will keep treating me normal. If I start publicly promoting opinion A then I would be disowned/fired/disasociated/killed.
So we are all dissidents in that respect when we want to remain anonymous. Early supporters of rights for minorities and females would fall into this category. If you try and define what is legitimate to disagree with anonymously and what isn't, then you have already ruled out dissidents from opposing you without being subject to your prejudice/judgement/punishment.
Re:Just like a slashdot poll (Score:5, Insightful)
Why should it all not be protected speech that is capable of being disseminated anonymously?
Who is to be the judge of what speech can be protected anon or had to be 'stood by in public'....
To truly allow free speech....you must take the good with what you perceive to be the 'bad' and possibly distasteful, otherwise....someone has to be the judge over what is and isn't permitted.
And, one great way to allow true freedom of speech...is to allow it anonymously.
People are allowed in this country to whistle blow....be pro or anti-gay, and yes....you can think racist thoughts and should be able to freely speak them (and no, it isn't just white people not liking blacks). Do you find it distasteful....ok. But it has to be allowed....otherwise something *you* find to be important, might be later become distasteful to someone with more power than you, and if you could not express your views anon...they you're viewpoint might be squashed.
Remember, it wasn't that long ago that many things could be freely discussed, that just are not politically correct in the past 5-10 years. What if in 5 years...popular culture and thinking swings, and it becomes politically incorrect for you to speak what you find to be an important topic for discussion or call to action?
Re: (Score:3)
When you speak in public, your name IS our business. You can stand behind your words or you can keep quiet. Choose.
Excellent. Could I have a list of all the stupid things or potentially offensive you said as a teenager or 'in public' to share with your your employer and others?
Let's get over this notion that things that are recorded and archived are equivalent to transient things said in context in a public place, ok?
Re: (Score:3)
IMHO, what historically made the intern
Re:Just like a slashdot poll (Score:5, Insightful)
Any way you look at it, the only reason to wish to post anonymously is to avoid some form of repercussion...
Or perhaps you just believe anonymity improves the quality of the discussion—since you don't know who anyone is, there is less basis for personal attacks and more pressure to debate the substance of an argument, rather than the person who made it. The fact that you can participate in discussions without revealing your ethnicity or gender has always been one of the online community's strengths; forcing people to reveal their real names undermines that implied equality.
A "real name" policy also tends to favor those with popular names (John Smith), who remain effectively anonymous, at the expense of those whose names are relatively unique.
Re:Just like a slashdot poll (Score:5, Insightful)
>>>Any way you look at it, the only reason to wish to post anonymously is to avoid some form of repercussion (whether identity theft, stalking/harassment, or simply being outed as a douchetard.)
No. Shit. Sherlock.
Your comment shows you don't think long term, or wide. I want to avoid the repercussion of employers, governments, et cetera using my comments from 10, 20, 30 years ago against me. (Example: Finding a reason not to hire me. Or finding a reason to put me on a Do Not Travel list.)
Re:Just like a slashdot poll (Score:5, Insightful)
> "I want to troll with no repercussion."
Bullshit. I like things that are irreverently funny. I like things that are sexy. I don't believe in a magic old man with a white beard watching over us and getting pissed if I wack off. The majority of my extended family would have a problem with all of these.
Re:Just like a slashdot poll (Score:5, Funny)
Meep Meep Meep Meep Meep Meep Meep
Translation: Just because I'm a muppet, doesn't mean I want people knowing my real name.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Just like a slashdot poll (Score:4, Interesting)
Hell....my YT account is with a non-gmail, throw away account...set up with another throw away acct...etc.
Re: (Score:3)
But I do have gmail....and to keep things separate, when I'm on one of my computers that is using the web interface for gmail...I open a different browser with my YT account...so that they don't inter-mingle.
Not that much of a problem....
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Just like a slashdot poll (Score:4, Interesting)
Try running firefox with these options:
-ProfileManager -no-remote
That will let you have separate profiles within firefox. You'll have separate configurations for each profile which means things like different extensions, different bookmarks and different skins (I use different skins to make it easy to tell what "task" instance of firefox is the current one).
One flaw with both your multiple-browsers and my multiple-profile approach is flash cookies - if you use flash in any browser, they all use the same cookie storage. I work around the problem by using the BetterPrivacy plugin to delete flash cookies after 5 minutes.
Re:Just like a slashdot poll (Score:5, Interesting)
Surely if this becomes a significant problem, an extension could be written to allow a browser to have a unique set of cookies per page-domain? Such that a page loaded from www.youtube.com would look like a different user from the one who loads www.google.com.. of course, there would be tricks to get around that, such as tracking referrerals and such, but a privacy extension could handle that too.. I guess even 'Private Browsing' mode could be extended along these lines.. I don't think this war will ever end, and there will be many gains and losses along the way.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Privacy Concerns Aside (Score:5, Interesting)
I know I should be annoyed at the elimination of anonymous options, and in most any other setting I would be, but youtube? yeah I think I'd like to see this play out. just don't make a universal case out of it google.
Re:Privacy Concerns Aside (Score:5, Insightful)
The part the summary left out: If you refuse to use your real name, then you can no longer reply to youtube comments. The option is disabled. AND the reason I don't want my realname is because I know how google & the internet operates. I can still find posts under my real name from 1988! The last thing I want is my youtube comments hanging around for 60 years for anybody (especially a future employer) to find and develop a profile about me. Or dig-up potentially embarrassing comments that I later regret saying (when I'm older/wiser).
I haven't used my realname online since 2002, because I don't want to have an online history that employers, governments, et cetera can use to develop a personality profile.
Re: (Score:3)
simply, THIS.
if you force us to expose ourselves, many of us just won't. we'll go away from that site. I have stopped posting to anything google based, personally. I never reg'd on FB or T and never will.
its a shame that the internet is going down the Tubes (sorry..) but since it is, those parts of it that aren't worth it, just don't get my attention anymore.
the fact that employers and governments are so invasive and so insistent on 'checking you out' - that's enough of a chilling reason to avoid posting
Re:Privacy Concerns Aside (Score:4, Insightful)
I haven't used my realname online since 2002, because I don't want to have an online history that employers, governments, et cetera can use to develop a personality profile.
That's exactly why Google wants you to use your real name. The more personal profiles Google has, the more valuable its ads are. The solution is, don't use Google products.
Re:Privacy Concerns Aside (Score:4, Interesting)
My real name is probably more anonymous than my Google gmail address. I use the gmail username in a number of places, but it's relatively unique -- I don't think I've ever seen anyone else use it.
My real name, however is incredibly common -- no one would *ever* be able to tell it was *me* from the name. Which is one of the reasons I came up with the name I use for for gmail -- there's no way I could ever find a name relating to my real name to use on any service that has more than a few people on it. It's always taken. I got away with it on Slashdot, but that was on a much smaller Internet.
Re: (Score:3)
I can still find posts under my real name from 1988!
While I get your point, I'm still gonna call bullshit on the 1988 date.
Well, I can find stuff I posted to usenet from May of 1983, so I guess your bullshit call is, well, bullshit.
Re-read that with more comprehension (Score:4, Interesting)
The part the summary left out: If you refuse to use your real name, then you can no longer reply to youtube comments. The option is disabled.
This is false, I've logged in, told it I don't want to use my real name, and am still able to comment.
He's talking about replying to comments, not making initial comments. So for example, if you post a video, and someone makes an asshat comment on it, you can't call them on it by replying, it just sits there being an asshat comment until it bothers you so badly that you relent and give out your real name.
Basically, it's a form of emotional blackmail to get you to reveal your real name, which is what they wanted in the first place. ...now waiting for the conspiracy theorists to will claim Google hires people to make asshat comments on videos posted by people who refuse to use their real name...
Re:Privacy Concerns Aside (Score:5, Funny)
First they came for my LOLCats, but I did not LOL...
Re: (Score:3)
right, thus the "don't make it a universal case".
The problem with the slippery slope arguement is that people think it applies to everything. there are outlieing cases.
it's entirely possible to say "hey, you know what, maybe we don't let members of the public own thermonuclear weapons" without that meaning that everything else in the catagory of "weapon" from fully automatic assault rifles and flamethrowers down to potato guns and super soakers needs to be banned too.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Oh, I thought you were going to link to this http://xkcd.com/386/ [xkcd.com] .
But actually I was going to post: "What: real people actually post comments to YouTube?"
Re:Privacy Concerns Aside (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
Obligatory:
http://xkcd.com/481/ [xkcd.com]
The comments on YouTube videos are a plague of idiocy, racism, hate-mongering, astro-turfing...
Something has to be done, no?
Yeah, link them to your Google+ which requires a "real name"*
* my real name is Bob 4. Apples.
Re: (Score:3)
Something has to be done, no?
Nothing has to be done. Just down vote the comments and you will no longer see them.
Re:Privacy Concerns Aside (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Privacy Concerns Aside (Score:4, Funny)
I'll see your xkcd and raise you a ctrl-alt-del [cad-comic.com]
You said "raise you"... as if to say you were providing something more ... but... you linked to Ctrl-Alt-Del... error... error... ERROR... DOES NOT COMPUTE... DOES NOT COMPUTE... DOES NOT COMPUTE...
Re:Privacy Concerns Aside (Score:5, Insightful)
Obligatory:
http://xkcd.com/481/ [xkcd.com]
The comments on YouTube videos are a plague of idiocy, racism, hate-mongering, astro-turfing...
Something has to be done, no?
What should be done is so easy, so simple, that its value is often overlooked.
What do do? Expect adult people to be able to handle speech they dislike. That means overlooking it, ignoring it, countering it with speech they consider better, or simply not viewing whatever it is they have a problem with.
I'm telling you, emphasizing that would make for a better world.
that attitude doesn't work (Score:4, Interesting)
because, as a look at youtube posts, or slashdot browsing at -1 proves, it destroys the forum
a communication channel will be abandoned by serious people if there is no signal and just a lot of useless noise. tragedy of the commons. so you need to police the commons
perhaps youtube could embrace moderation instead, but either way, you WANT to squelch, aka, censor, useless anonymous speech
i would be posting anonymously if i were in syria
but in the usa, if i post anonymously, my intentions are not in the interest of a good forum, but just abusing the forum for some antisocial problem of mine
there's always 4chan. for everything else serious, you need moderation or integrity of word and speaker with real life ids
Re: (Score:3)
Spoken like a dictator. The benefits of anonymus speech far outweigh the fact that you might get inconveienced by some racist posts on Youtube. You have no freedom to not be offended.
Re:Privacy Concerns Aside (Score:4, Insightful)
Where is it written that "freedom of speech" necessarily includes "freedom from responsibility"? Nowhere that I've ever seen.
The Founders were big on anonymous pamphleteering - the 18th century equivalent of Youtube comments (and every bit as nasty). Anonymous speech was understood as crucial to free speech from the beginning. Without freedom from repercussions, how much freedom can you really have to criticize those in power? Why do you think those in power want the ability to de-anonymize all speech (by forcing ISPs to keep IP logs indefinitely, and logging all Internet traffic data indefinitely)?
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Privacy Concerns Aside (Score:4, Insightful)
so the "fire in a crowded" theater guy should retain his anonymity?
If they had, they wouldn't have ended up in court in a blatant violation of the First Amendment.
You do realise that the 'fire in a crowded theater' argument was an attempt to justify government censorship of political speech by anti-draft activists in WWI?
No, didn't think so.
Re: (Score:3)
The fact that a few people may abuse their anonymity is not, to me, a justification to take it away from everyone. I don't care for TSA or Patriot Act mentalities where everyone is punished.
While I hope "bad guys" get caught (depending on what we're talking about), don't catch them at the expense of innocents.
The names Coward... (Score:5, Funny)
Anonymous Coward
You HAVE to tell them why? Uh..... (Score:3)
Good move on Google's part... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Take one of the biggest, most popular sites in the world and start driving people away from it
...and Google+ people along with them
Re: (Score:3)
Take one of the biggest, most popular sites in the world and start driving people away from it.
These are the people who don't mind clicking to dismiss an advert for every single video. If those adverts didn't make them go away, nothing will.
(PS: Get NoScript if you want rid of them...)
Re:Good move on Google's part... (Score:4, Funny)
An AC saying other people don't need anonymity when posting. Either excellent trolling or someone's irony meter exploded.
Re:Good move on Google's part... (Score:5, Insightful)
ACs do from time to time post insightful comments. /. would be poorer for the lack of them.
Re: (Score:3)
In reply on how to "subscribe" to channels by RSS, this link is an RSS feed:
http://gdata.youtube.com/feeds/api/users/CHANNELNAME/uploads [youtube.com]
Replace CHANNELNAME with channel name obviously.
Benefits to not having a Google+ account growing (Score:5, Interesting)
So if you don't have a Google+ account, would it bring up any warning?
At first I didn't join Google+ because Google literally would not let me - I had a paid Google Apps account and giving them money meant you were dirt as far as they were concerned, they wouldn't let you join Google+ for months (I guess they figured they were already collecting the personal information they wanted from you through your account so strip mining your Google+ data was irrelevant).
After paid accounts could join, I thought - why should I if they didn't want me at the start?
Turns out to have been a great choice, getting better by the day.
Really makes you think twice about having a Google account for anything, although there's really no great replacement for some of the services they offer...
Re:Benefits to not having a Google+ account growin (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Benefits to not having a Google+ account growin (Score:4, Interesting)
I had a paid Google Apps account and giving them money meant you were dirt as far as they were concerned, they wouldn't let you join Google+ for months (I guess they figured they were already collecting the personal information they wanted from you through your account so strip mining your Google+ data was irrelevant)
Actually, there were technical challenges with enabling Apps accounts. I don't know what they were exactly, but I think they had to do with ensuring that nothing broke for big enterprise users of Apps.
When Google+ came out there was huge internal demand for Apps-enabling it -- I'm sure it wouldn't surprise you to know that many Google employees have their personal domains hosted on Apps -- and if it could have been done any faster, it would have. For those intervening months the question was raised in virtually every TGIF (weekly company-wide meetings during which, among other things, employees have the opportunity to question management in front of the whole company) and the Google+ team was getting really apologetic by the time it finally rolled out.
Re:Benefits to not having a Google+ account growin (Score:5, Interesting)
As of today I found if you have a google+ account and opt to not use your real name in lieu of a username, you can't post replies to comments, even to your own videos. They didn't warn this would happen when you denied to use your real name, and it was immensely frustrating to not have a working reply button, and more so to not know why. Well, there it is.
While I have no habit of spewing vitriol, and write every comment as though I am accountable, I also have no want or desire to make it easy for any number of stalkers to come straight to my own front door; and without compromising their anonymity! Even if I were comfortable with putting my real name out there and associating it with my YouTube content, there's such a small handful of people in the world with my name that it's effectively unique. Talk about opening yourself up to ambush.
What did I do, you might ask? I deleted my G+ identity, and nothing of value was lost. I can now keep in touch with my subscribers. If they keep this up, I will have to abandon their services, and I won't feel the least bit of remorse.
Oh no. Please. Not Google+. (Score:4, Interesting)
Is Google seriously trying to use the power of Google+ to twist people's arms on a real name policy? Google, you can't do that until the service is actually popular! My Google+ profile is just some bullshit I made to check out the service. I can delete it or fill it with fake info any time I want. It means nothing to me. If you insist on linking it to services I don't want it linked to, I'll just stop using the service I like less. Which is gonna be Google+!
Re:Oh no. Please. Not Google+. (Score:4, Insightful)
My Google+ profile is just some bullshit I made to check out the service. I can delete it or fill it with fake info any time I want.
You sure? I think you mean you can ask them and hope they delete it, or you can fill it with fake info which is irrelevant because the contents of your gmail archive contains far more than enough to uniquely identify you. /tinfoil >.>
Re: (Score:3)
..but they have to or they'll miss their google+ usage targets and don't get so big bonuses..
on the other hand, there's a shitload of accounts like this: http://www.youtube.com/user/emi [youtube.com]
and shitloads of takedown notices generated that don't have a real responsible person named for them.
Why Google Why (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I have historically been a believer in google, and thought they where one of the few companies who put principles like free information etc ahead of profit (my naivety).
But moves like this are further cementing my belief that something is rotten at google, and it started to get real bad once Page became CEO. The one good thing about this is that it opens up the doors for competitors to take business from google imho, creating competition.
I want the freedom to have access to the information about who is saying what, and this is a step in the right direction. Eventually, my slashdot pseudonym will disappear into my one identity for all to see, and that's ok too. If we're all going to have control over our political voice, we have to behave like politicians and be public figures... they go hand in hand. Anonymity is the tool of the disenfranchised... it's better NOT to be disenfranchised, and that requires the end of privacy.
Re: (Score:3)
You cannot force people to use their real name... Especially on a free service that has no requirements to sign up for.
-Yours Truly,
Abe Froman
I tried this this morning... (Score:4, Informative)
I tried this this morning...and still registered fine with a fake/temporary account to make comments on videos. I think all this means is that your posting aliases are more likely to be interrupted by a space than before.
On the other hand, when Google does mine, they'd probably wonder why I watch so much Dora the Explorer on my business account. (It's tied to my business cell phone, which I use most often to keep my daughter entertained.)
Re:I tried this this morning... (Score:5, Funny)
> On the other hand, when Google does mine, they'd probably wonder why I watch
> so much Dora the Explorer on my business account. (It's tied to my business cell
> phone, which I use most often to keep my daughter entertained.)
Yes, we were kind of wondering about it. Thanks for clearing that up. It's been added to your file.
The Google, Inc. Team
Re: (Score:3)
"Why are you signing out first?"
"Some shames you just cannot live with."
Amusingly though, even if you're not signed in youtube still knows what that computer has seen from which to draw recommendations.
Internet, free marketplace of ideas anymore? (Score:3)
So much for the Internet staying this amazing free marketplace of discourse. Since we all have jobs and need to make a living we need the anonymity afforded by these sites to say what we truly want to say. I used to get into great discussions and debates with people on various news websites, until they all started requiring you to post under your Facebook account. Conveniently my full name, photo, job title and employer get tagged in with those posts. So basically now all of my posts have to be something my employer would approve of; they are a conservative Midwestern insurance company and probably wouldn't approve of many of my ideas. You will all tell me to remove my employment information from my Facebook page but why should I have to?
YouTube comments are like sugar (Score:3, Insightful)
But, like sugar, you can't have too much of it. It quickly becomes nauseating. Best is to get a small taste and then take no more. Just like too much sugar will eventually destroy your pancreas, too many YouTube comments will eventually destroy your faith in humanity.
Google Wants You to Stop Commenting on YouTube (Score:3)
Google Wants You to Stop Commenting on YouTube
There, fixed the summary headline.
And with no G+? (Score:3)
Threre's something to be said about anon posts... (Score:3)
“Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.”
-Oscar Wilde
I'm going to take a less than popular position.... (Score:5, Interesting)
This is *NOT* because I believe the premise that if you've done nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide, because, in fact, that premise is wholly specious (anyone who claims to genuinely believe that statement is true must be either a liar or else a public nudist).
Rather, I don't have a problem with Google doing this simply because I firmly believe in the principle of personal resposibility, and if a person is not prepared to be held personally accountable for the things that they do, then I'm afraid I'm just going to have a hard time recognizing any alleged right that they might have to do it. That's not to say that I don't think that people are entitled to privacy... giving people privacy shows them respect, and I resolutely believe that every human being is entitled to that level of respect. There is, however, a distinct difference between privacy and public anonymity. I don't see how not giving people anonymity in public disrespects them as individuals, so I simply don't see the importance of it.
Re:I'm going to take a less than popular position. (Score:5, Informative)
Rather, I don't have a problem with Google doing this simply because I firmly believe in the principle of personal resposibility, and if a person is not prepared to be held personally accountable for the things that they do, then I'm afraid I'm just going to have a hard time recognizing any alleged right that they might have to do it.
That is really naive. Personal responsibility to who? Society? Or the Government? And whatever happens to be the law/populist opinion at the time? What happens further down the road if the law becomes intolerant of your then opinions? What happens if your Government happens to be an oppressive regime? What happens if someone just really doesn't like something you say - even if it's not widely held as offensive, and decides to come track you down over it?
I suppose nothing you write is ever indefensible in the eyes of another?
Hmm kindof funny on that (Score:3)
You do know that Google really does not NEED for you to display your real name since THEY ALREADY KNOW YOUR REAL NAME (assuming your G+ account is correct). Im thinking this is more about enabling folks to google %John Doe% and see everything you have posted (assuming that there are small number of John Does online).
KIDS DO NOT TRY THIS AT HOME
you could post somewhere even under a Nym that "I am going to Blow up %location% sometime next week" and i would bet that THIS WEEK you will have a No-Knock Entry at your house.
Re:Big Content Requirement? (Score:5, Insightful)
No, it's more likely a reaction to the pathetically low quality of Youtube comments.
Similar to how Rotten Tomatoes disabled commenting on Dark Knight Rises reviews entirely when the trolling shit to everything else ratio got so skewed that they couldn't ignore it anymore.
Too many people online think that "anonymous" = "license to be a complete fuckwad".
Re: (Score:3)
Your whining is annoying to others.
I note you don't use your (full) real name to comment here.
Re: (Score:3)
I tried to start Moogle, where all search items and images were redone in the style of the Final Fantasy series, but people attacked me and chased me into the hinterlands. I was not at all happy with that response.
Because you need your real name for some things (Score:3)