Facebook Wants You To Snitch On Friends Not Using Their Real Name 304
Qedward writes "Freedom to go under a pseudonym is, miraculously, one freedom to survive the security lock-down of the previous decade. Now Facebook wants to change this. James Firth shows Facebook is clamping down on pseudonyms, with an interesting screenshot of being asked whether a friend is using their real name."
Everyone should post as Anonymous (Score:5, Insightful)
If you have comments you should post them as Anonymous... because we can.
Re: (Score:3)
I do that now, with all of my email. Of course, it comes across as garbled garbage to my friends. Not that they would notice the difference as the garbage I write in emails is only slightly less crappier than what I post on Slashdot.
Re:Everyone should post as Anonymous (Score:5, Interesting)
I want to keep both, and at least in terms of productive discussion of topics upon which all parties don't already agree, the 'net will be dead to me the day these are lost.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Anonymous is good, no doubt, but I'd say that pseudonyms are often better because a pseudonym, even if they are personally unknown, helps set context. Comments on issues which are complex often can't realistically be partitioned to be exhaustive in themselves. For some people here, at least, I'm familiar with their basic worldview from their other posts, and their comment or argument can placed in that wider context for deeper consideration, at least implicitly.
I'm way to memory challenged to keep track of my own world view, let alone that of the people who's posts I read or reply to.
I suggest it's sort of intellectually dishonest if you evaluate a posting in a certain way based on who posted it rather than what was posted.
Ideas should be evaluated based on their content rather than their source.
After all, isn't checking who posted something sort of running afoul of the Fallacy of Ad hominem [nizkor.org]?
That said, I tend to discount AC postings unless the subject matter is on
Re:Everyone should post as Anonymous (Score:5, Interesting)
I suggest it's sort of intellectually dishonest if you evaluate a posting in a certain way based on who posted it rather than what was posted. Ideas should be evaluated based on their content rather than their source.
Learning to evaluate ideas directly, without being influenced by one's preconceptions about their source, is a skill that we should all learn and value.
However, it is also valuable to evaluate sources and their presentation of ideas over time, because some sources are more accurate/insightful/relevant to particular knowledge domains than others. And that's important because we evaluate (or should be evaluating) many, many ideas continuously. Authority is not the ultimate source of truth, but it can be a shortcut to it.
A source also has a reputation to defend, and this encourages (some of them) to be more careful about what they say. I suggest that this why you discount AC postings... no reputation is at stake.
Unfortunately, some people are shockingly poor at source evaluation. They'll forward anonymously written emails that are thinly disguised political agit-prop, then turn sour when you send them a link to snopes ("that's not a reliable source").
Re: (Score:3)
Evaluating the source is most useful when you don't have a good basis to determine the validity of the information yourself. This isn't as crucial as it was pre-internet, since it's not hard for most (?) people to do a little googling to find out more, but there are time where I don't care enough or don't have the bandwidth to find the background. In those cases, if I know the background of the source, I can sometimes easily decide if it's worth remembering or discounting out of hand.
I totally agree with
Re:Everyone should post as Anonymous (Score:5, Insightful)
I suggest it's sort of intellectually dishonest if you evaluate a posting in a certain way based on who posted it rather than what was posted.
Ideas should be evaluated based on their content rather than their source.
Depends. If someone on fox news claim that that they aren't in bed with the Romney campaign, or that Obama is in fact a kenyan muslim I know they're likely to be full of their usual shit. There's far more information in the world than I can reasonable parse through, so you have to pick your sources you trust and sources you don't, or you'll spend your life doing research and never actually getting things done. That doesn't mean I completely discount everything fox news said, but I'll leave it to someone else to actual check their facts - after all, it was the national enquirer that broke the Monika Lewinsky scandal correctly in detail (despite the vast majority of their material at the time being completely made up nonsense).
Also, posting everything purely anonymously makes it hard to verify you're continuing a conversation with the right person, which does happen in the comments here occasionally.
Re:Everyone should post as Anonymous (Score:4, Insightful)
I do not bother with ACs either but icebike hardly gives away your identity as Facebook is asking for. I would not give my real name on Facebook and I think that anyone that does is an idiot. I would not want some fanatic to be able to track me down after I comment about some crazy's over reaction to that anti-Mohammed film. I do not tend to write flame bait but I often speak my mind and there are people out there that will kill you for speaking your mind if it is not the same as their warped perception of the world. Do you really think that they cannot find you if you put all your real data on Facebook as Facebook wants?
This is not about AC vs. pseudonym, they want you to put genuine data on your account that will allow people to find the real you in person.
Re: (Score:3)
"medium to get in touch with and keep track of long (and not necessarily so long) lost friends."
People who had their locker beside yours in high-school are not 'long lost friends', they don't need to see photos of your cars and kids nor need they to know where you live.
Re: (Score:3)
the 'long lost friends' are forgotton and meant to STAY THAT WAY.
for a reason.
Re: (Score:3)
People who had their locker beside yours in high-school are not 'long lost friends'
You're right, they're probably not. But most people do have real friends that they've lost touch with over the years. Back in the days before widespread internet, where phone and the postal service were the only ways to keep in touch with friends that no longer lived locally, it was hard to keep in touch with more than a handful of friends. I'm back in touch with, and now regularly see several friends that I'd lost touch with for years before Friends Reunited and then Facebook came along.
Possibly for those
Re: (Score:3)
The story was written by Qedward and posted by Soulkill.
How much more Anonymous do you need to be?
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Simple: (Score:4, Insightful)
That, ultimately, is what lies behind this kind of thing: Facebook wants to make money. If it knows exactly who you are, it thinks it can make more money from you.
This should be obvious enough, but sometimes the obvious needs pointing out:
Facebook can't make any money out of you if you don't use it.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
I'm afraid if I'm ever asked about internet identities during a job interview and I answer Anonymous Coward I'll have a lot to answer for.
Someone please tell Facebook that (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Someone please tell Facebook that (Score:5, Informative)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Someone please tell Facebook that (Score:5, Insightful)
If, as they have said, their "entire platform is based on people using their real identities", then their entire platform is fundamentally flawed. No one should be forced to use their real identity for any purposes online, and the harder companies like Facebook try to force people to do so (and the more sites that use Facebook for authentication), the more backlash there will be against Facebook, and the more traction alternative services will get.
Re:Someone please tell Facebook that (Score:5, Insightful)
Incidentally, none of Facebook's accounts are fake. They all represent an online identity. Whether those identities maps 1:1 to physical users or not is irrelevant. There are still actual humans using the accounts, viewing ads, contributing to the usefulness of the platform, etc. There is no legitimate reason for Facebook to be concerned about these accounts that do not center around fundamental invasions of personal privacy, such as correlating user behavior outside of Facebook with what they do and say inside of Facebook.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Unfortunately Facebook is a private company and they own the servers, so they get to dictate what data is and is not allowed.
They don't NEED a reason, legitimate or otherwise, to concern themselves with whatever they see fit.
Our facetime, however, is ours, and we may in turn see fit not to patronize them if we don't like what they're doing.
Since they sprung the trap after luring us in, and refuse to delete our data even if we tell them to, we're really not in much of a position to negotiate since they alrea
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
in this context, it doesn't mean much. Public and private in the context of the parent is differentiating between government and private sector as apposed to privately owned or publicly traded.
Re: (Score:2)
Nobody said otherwise. What I said was any justification is almost guaranteed to be something that most people would find unacceptable. Sure, users' only real recourse is to switch services, but that can happen; just ask Myspace.
Re: (Score:2)
I do believe they have a legitimate reason to enforce a 'real names' policy.
Imagine if you picked up the local phone directory, and instead of what it has now, it listed names such as FantasyFairy337, OMGCATS88 and cutiecupcakes264. They are still real accounts, and calling the number will connect you with a living breathing person but what would your opinion of the utility of the phone directory be?
One of the strongest motivating factors for people to get on facebook is to connect with/stalk others. For ex
Re: (Score:3)
About the same as it is now. My employer's phone directory has my number, so if anybody from work needs to reach me, they can. If anybody else needs my number, they can bloody well a
Re:Someone please tell Facebook that (Score:5, Interesting)
You raise an interesting point about having a 'fake' name to show the world, and what is your real name.
I'm Chinese, so on my bank accounts and official documents, I have the romanised version of my name in mandarin.
In day to day life however, everyone calls me Nicholas. My co workers, clients, friends, etc. and that is also the name I use on facebook. About the only people who know my name in mandarin are my immediate family, and entities I need to enter into contracts with.
To be sure, Nicholas is by no means fake or a pseudonym. My parents named me as such, and I have answered to that name all my life. Google me and you will turn up a lot of stuff i have put online over the years, pictures of parties, videos, random nonsense on forums etc. But searching official records for that name is going to turn up a lot of people who arn't me.
So back to the topic at hand, maybe what facebook is concerned with are name that are pure fiction/fantasy, after all, my name would pass the 'fake' test in the article as i have built an identity around it, but it's not my official name.
Re:Someone please tell Facebook that (Score:5, Insightful)
I think that Facebook is caught between a rock and a hard place here. If the fake accounts continue to exist (and if Facebook is admitting to 80 mil you can be sure the real number is much higher than that) then advertisers will continue to abandon the platform. But if Facebook continues to come out with policies like this then USERS will abandon the platform.
This is why I don't use Facebook. You start out posting a few innocent quotes and photos. Then maybe you add a questionable comment or two. Maybe a drunk college photo. Next thing you know it goes mainstream and HR drones start trolling profiles of prospective hires. Now you're got some explaining to do to someone you don't even know that probably has no business trolling your profile in the first place. But you've sold your soul to Facebook and now you can't get the toothpaste back in the tube. Those photos and comments live in infamy. All in the name of advertising dollars. Who reads those stupid ads anyway?
Re: (Score:3)
This is why I don't use Facebook. You start out posting a few innocent quotes and photos. Then maybe you add a questionable comment or two. Maybe a drunk college photo. Next thing you know [...]
FB privacy has moved on a bit. You can add "friends" then categorise your real friends as "close friends", then default all postings as being visible only to close friends. It does take a bit of care but you can leave your FB page sterile and devoid of anything remotely interesting. You can even add people as "restricted" so even if you mess up at some point they still never see anything.
Much to my surprise, this is actually my biggest problem with FB.
See historically it was quite comfortable to be acquaint
Re: (Score:2)
except when participating in commerce and using credit cards and the such.
That and other obvious exceptions (like filing taxes) aside, Facebook is simply a joke.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I just staked out the claim on may name, and pretty much just said "Yes, this me. I don't use facebook."
Lately I have been barraged with incessant emails from Facebook "welcoming me back" or reminding me how many "friend requests I have" (more than zero). All of which I ignore. (Although I do log in every few months, just to keep my ac
Re:Someone please tell Facebook that (Score:4, Informative)
I got a real account.
and a fake account.
how else am I supposed to test facebook api's? by pestering my friends? fuck no.
supply chain (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Ask Apple.
Re: (Score:3)
And Wal-Mart.
Facebooks product, customers, and suppliers (Score:5, Interesting)
While its true that Facebook's customers are those purchasing ads, the rest is not quite right.
Facebook users are suppliers, not products. Their attention is the raw material for the product, which demographically targetted advertising.
The utility (in the economic system) provided by Facebook's system to the users is the payment from the product vendor to its suppliers.
Re: (Score:3)
Nope, sorry, that doesn't make a conveniently dehumanizing enough sound bite to repeat ad nauseum whenever the poster needs a quick jolt of smug self-importance for not using Facebook/Google/etc. You'll have to do better than that.
This. "You are not the customer, you are the product" may have been a really insightful observation once upon a time. Now it's become just another sound bite.
Its not repeated often enough (Score:3)
...given the number of automatic SPAM appeals to join Facebook that service generates.
PS: I'm glad this story made you uncomfortable enough about your insidious 'investment' in FB to lash back. FB must really be pouring on the charm these days for its critics to be labeled 'dehumanizing'. LOL!
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Everyone seems to forget that we aren't the customers, we're the product. This is all about increasing the quality of their data for their real customers.
Er, "Everyone"?
From the average 12-year old to the 85-year old Great-Grandmother, I have yet to run across someone using Facebook as a "customer" or a "product". They use it because it's free. They use it because it's cool. 90% of people on there don't even know their data is being sold, and therefore are absofuckinglutely clueless as to quality of data, or real customers.
People who sell shit for a living don't have a clue.
There is forgetting, and there is blind ignorance. Don't confuse the two.
Re: (Score:2)
Everyone seems to forget that we aren't the customers, we're the product.
Nobody ever won a war with their product.
Re:Someone please tell Facebook that (Score:4, Insightful)
In every transaction, there's a seller, a buyer, and a product.
If you're not getting any money and you're not losing any money, guess what you are...
Re: (Score:3)
A hippie?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
The beauty of facebook is that it has absolutely no value. I use it because it is there. If they boot me off, then it's no great loss.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Well the citizens of Monticello already told that to TDS, and they were wrong.
You can easily win a war with your customers if you're a monopoly.
Re:Someone please tell Facebook that (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
you're both wrong. MS has been waging war since WFW 3.11
Re:Someone please tell Facebook that (Score:4, Insightful)
No, "Hide extensions of known file types (Recommended)" was the first shot in Microsoft's war against its customers.
What if God were Anonymous? (Score:2)
Yes, anonymity is valuable! Especially for spammers.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, I was too lazy to dream up a proper title, so I riffed on the theme from Joan of Arcadia.
Facebook snitches (Score:3, Funny)
Get stitches.
Snitches end up in ditches (Score:5, Funny)
In my case some of these people are expert army sharpshooters and/or former paratroopers
So no, I'm not snitching
Re:Snitches end up in ditches (Score:5, Funny)
I'm not snitching
Are you kidding? I understand you get 10,000 "likes" for every friend you snitch on. Now that's real value...
id wonder if .... (Score:3)
Confession time (Score:5, Funny)
Anonymous is my real given name though. Life has not been kind to me ever since 4chan took off.
Re:Anonymous is my real given name though. (Score:4, Interesting)
That would actually be an epic thing to see. It would make for a beautiful legal decision "you can't change your name to one that causes social confusion". The Artist Formerly Known As Prince could submit an amicus brief on it too.
Re: (Score:2)
Please help us (Score:5, Insightful)
Please help us understand how people are using Facebook:
Is this your friend's real name?
Do you really like this friend?
Has this friend ever sent you any revealing pictures?
How much do you think this friend spends on entertainment? clothes? shoes? online services?
Please estimate the odds that this so-called friend might be a terrorist?
If you had to describe this friend to Facebook and the DHS, which of the following descriptions would you use: creative? avant-garde? obedient? disruptive?
Facebook appreciates your answers and respects your privacy. Thank you.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Please help us (Score:5, Funny)
It's a win win!
Re: (Score:2)
No
No
Eww. No.
Don't know. Ask him/her yourself.
About the same as the general population, give or take.
Re: (Score:2)
(Bitter Satire)
Hi user mtrachtenberg.
Are you the actress Michelle Trachtenberg? http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0005502/ [imdb.com]
With an ID that low and the "wrong" gender I am guessing not.
Re:Please help us (Score:5, Insightful)
What kind of idiots are on Facebook anyway?
Well just remember those of us that are 'sane' and don't have an account, are apparently psychopaths [mashable.com] now. So fuck'em. I'd rather be a psychopath, then I can get free room and board, along with happy-trip meds.
Why stop at fake names? (Score:2)
Fake date of birth, fake profile picture, fake location details, ...
This could be a good little snitching exercise, but then Fakebook would lose so many under-13s* that their userbase would practically halve. And that's just tackling DOBs, let alone the other details.
(*I'm not condoning under-13s being on the website, only stating the fact that there are a lot of children who signed up with fake DOBs.)
Re:Why stop at fake names? (Score:5, Insightful)
Rule #1 for my kids: never ever use real information. There's a time and place for it, but not on Facebook or other 'social' and gaming website.
Facebook encourages snitch culture in general (Score:5, Interesting)
Just look at how it's designed. It's designed to encourage snitch culture.
Let me make it clear, telling the truth isn't the same as snitching. Witnessing isn't the same as snitching. And helping the police isn't the same as snitching. Snitching is telling on your own side.
The problem with Facebook itself is it doesn't care about ethics or the risks associated with making everyone stalkable. Facebook is a stalker friendly application while at the same time snitch friendly. That combination isn't a good mix. For example if you have a friend who has a stalker maybe you shouldn't reveal their last name on Facebook even if you know it, and maybe you shouldn't tell Facebook whether or not they are using a pseudonym.
On the other hand maybe they shouldn't be on Facebook.
Re: (Score:2)
And helping the police isn't the same as snitching. Snitching is telling on your own side.
The problem is, there are so many sides.
Re: (Score:2)
And helping the police isn't the same as snitching. Snitching is telling on your own side.
The problem is, there are so many sides.
But if you're a traitor to your side then the next side you join will automatically expect you'll be a traitor to theirs as well and your usefulness will be limited.
Re: (Score:2)
I only count two:
I was addressing the quoted text in my comment, which is how these things work. HTH, HAND.
99%... okay 90% u$ers polled don't care. (Score:2)
Facebook users don't care, and get angry when you try to eduucate them. They think I'm crazy,, but mostly I post inane rubbish just to keep the data miners off kilter.. Spam away!
Re:99%... okay 90% u$ers polled don't care. (Score:4)
Facebook users don't care, and get angry when you try to eduucate them. They think I'm crazy,, but mostly I post inane rubbish just to keep the data miners off kilter.. Spam away!
Just don't post anti-big-government opinions and Canadian rap song lyrics if you're a military veteran, or you could get the "Soviet dissident" treatment, and get thrown into a mental ward without warrant or due process.
http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/citizen-warrior/2012/aug/22/can-government-detain-you-over-facebook-posts/ [washingtontimes.com]
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/aug/29/former-marine-facebook-sue-fbi [guardian.co.uk]
Thankfully for Raub, someone caught his detainment on video and it went viral. What if nobody had taken video? Would he still be doing the "Thorazine shuffle" and drooling on himself in a tranq'ed-out stupor in some mental ward doing a real-world remake of Jack Nicholson's role in "One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest"?
Scary times we live in.
Strat
How many accounts do you have on Facebook? (Score:5, Funny)
And of those, how many bear no resemblance to you?
I have six accounts in all. Only two are even remotely real. One has all the usual crap, the second is scrubbed for use with potential employers. The other four were used for varying purposes where I did not want to contaminate the real thing. I am about to create a seventh, just to see how outrageous I can be.
God, I hate Facebook.
Re: (Score:2)
Everyone should create a dozen fake Facebook accounts. When the number of accounts exceeds 15 billion maybe advertisers will catch on that they're paying for fuckall. But a Fakebook account isn't really much good without a bot to keep it uploading crap and clicking on random links.
a bot to exercise Google links would be a nice addition.
Stop (Score:2)
"Freedom to go under a pseudonym is, miraculously, one freedom to survive the security lock-down of the previous decade.
Just stop.
When you're talking about the the restrictions that a company places on its non-essential services, you don't get to talk about how complying with their terms of service has an effect on your "freedom" - you're free to use a pseudonym in all kinds of places. Quit complaining and stop using it.
I got a similar request. (Score:5, Interesting)
I got a similar request asking if one of my female Facebook friends was really female. It's a strange question too, because she's not the kind of person you'd expect this question for. She's always posting pictures of cupcakes from Pinterest and pictures of her nephew and things like that. I wish I'd taken a screenshot of it, it was a lot like this question. I responded in the affirmative because I didn't see what kind of harm it could do. I've never heard of someone getting kicked out of Facebook for listing inaccurate personal information or anything like that.
I can understand why they'd want to get rid of "fake" users. I don't think their interest is in eliminating pseudonymity, but rather in eliminating spammers. I think they're thinking if they show you something like this for something they suspect is a fake account, it will you cause you to question whether or not you really know the person and to report them as a spammer if you don't know them. I'm thinking of those friend requests I get with pictures of attractive looking women I've never met. If you accidentally accepted one you may be unwittingly letting spammers abuse Facebook's system, so I can defiantly see why they'd want to get rid of those accounts.
Re: (Score:3)
Because they devalue the Facebook brand. They call into question the authenticity of Facebook add clicks, and they pollute a users news feed with irrelevant information.
I don't know what you mean by that. There is plenty of content on Facebook. It has pictures of friends, notes, links to web articles, events, company information and lots of other content, much of it is original content as well.
It lets my friends sha
Re: (Score:2)
If someone hasn't written a "generate a thought-free anti-Facebook screed from randomly strung-together cliches" page, they should. It would save so much time!
Re: (Score:2)
It is as big brother as it can possibly be
It's not Big Brother anymore, it's little snitch. - Robin Williams
Obligatory Facebook-CIA-Onion (Score:4)
I think the epiphany comes when one watches it and doesn't laugh.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh! Eff me!
Thank you so much for that. Sorry, I tried not to laugh, but I couldn't stop.
"400 billion tweets and not one useful bit of data was ever transmitted."
Spot on.
And Zuckerberg was the CIA Director of the Facebook project. Enough to make you crap state secrets.
Although maybe...
Anybody else remember the SNL commercial spoof of the Trac II. They showed a razor with three blades. I can't stop snickering when I pass the five blade shaving systems in the store. I was truly frightened when I saw that
Misleading blurb (Score:5, Funny)
Facebook is not "clamping down on pseudonyms" and /. should be ashamed for posting a story that suggests it is. The questions Facebook sends to users are used for statistical purposes and are not used to punish those using pseudonyms. Pure FUD.
Re: (Score:2)
And lastly.. (Score:2)
I don't give a fuck who pinned what to pinterest or what game someone played. In fact Facebook is useless except for spreading rumors and self promotion. The nosey types love it. It still smells bad though. Real bad.
Nein! You must show us your papers... (Score:3)
Nein! You must show us your papers...
Nobody said Facebook was a democracy.
Rare instance... (Score:2)
... When you can go straight to Godwin's Law comparisons.
Also, the impish side of my wants to try to game the system by asking my friends to vouch for 'Große Gobblecoq' being *totally* legit.
Always answer "yes". Or something. (Score:2)
TFA shows a screenshot of the question screen. You're given several possible answers to "is this your friend's real name". I can see data mining possibilities with the answers, especially correlated with other people's friends list, and answers.
I think we should all agree now to provide the same answer. When I started writing this article, I thought the answer should be "yes". As I'm writing it, I've changed my mind. I think we should always answer "I don't know this person". I think this provides the
Always feels good to stay away from FB (Score:3)
Another good reason to stay away from Facebook.
I have an account that I idiotically once made to join a group to get notifications.
That group is gone but then an idiot from my school 30 years ago put connected me to people from then.
I almost never log in, and I tell people I don't like Facebook when they ask me if I'm on it.
For some reason even intelligent people seem mindless on FB.
I recently saw a publicly available discussion thread on the well, an interview with charles stross and cory doctorow iirc and others.
It was a really refreshing and considered dialogue over a week, it was great and after reading that it makes me almost physically ill to think of FB and the way it analyzes you and your friends and then hooks this spying apparatus into a targeted advertising engine. A typical asshole idea by another psychopath billionaire.
I have sometimes found it useful to get more insight into the activities of a person or company but I do not contribute to FB.
My False-Tag Fake ID Group Is Deleted (Score:3)
The issue with this is (Score:2)
Heh (Score:2)
Dear Facebook... (Score:2)
This friend of mine, Mark Zuckerberg.. That' snot his real name.... Can you ban him please?
Irony if your name matches a celebrity name (Score:2)
My dad and my nephew are both named James Dean. Facebook won't let them use their real name, which contradicts their goal of having real names.
Don't do it to me! (Score:2)
nah ah, lol (Score:2)
Time to get Pinocchio off the bench (Score:2)
From TFA: The choices offered are "Yes", "No", "I don't know this person" and "I don't want to answer". I don't understand how they forgot to include an option saying "Go fuck yourself, Zuckerberg, you fascist prick".
In fairness, the easiest thing to do is just lie. My Facebook profile is so full of lies it almost makes Romney look honest. My friends all know the truth, and everybody else who cares that much about whether I'm 25, 35 or 45 can join Zuckerberg in the line to Honk On Bobo.
Legal implications? (Score:2)
In some countries it is legal to use any alias you wish, provided you are not doing so with the intention of committing fraud or impersonation (in which case the actual crime is the fraud/impersonation not the fact you used an alias). A name is after all, a totally arbitrary label and the government is only really concerned in tying an individual to a birth record.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I used to read many a stories in which a young girl will get free drug from a neighbor. After she is hooked, he will only give if she takes off the shirt and then if she takes off her all clothes and so on. By this time, the girl is so much hooked to it, she will do anything. Facebook is just like it. You get it for free. Next you are asked to remove your shirt, next all your clothes and next.... I am happy, I don't have facebook account.
Sorry, that doesn't work with Facebook. When I gave the cute girl across the hall my Wifi password so she could check her Facebook, she refused to take off her shirt (or any other item of clothing) for me.
Re: (Score:2)
Why post AC? Afraid the FB Boogeyman will come and get you?
Damn, this story has been more fun than all of the Apple stories combined.