Foursquare Will Display Users' Full Names By Default 101
Location services can be useful and fun, but, depending on how paranoid ("cautious") you are, you might already dislike the idea of a social-network dashboard keeping track of where you are at a given moment. After all, bad guys can use computers, too.
Now, Foursquare may up your level of caution just a bit: CNET reports that "Beginning January 28, 2013, users' 'full names' will be displayed across the check-in service and venue owners will have increased access to users' check-in data, the company announced in an e-mail sent to users late last night." Users, though, "will still have control of the name displayed by altering their 'full name' in their settings," and can opt out of the increased flow of data to business owners. For users' sake, I hope Foursquare doesn't go in for the "real names" fetish to the extent that both Google and Facebook have.
Re:"Full Names" seem to be the in thing (Score:2, Interesting)
I bet the government is giving them tax breaks for implementing it.
I bet they're not.
You're right. they are just giving them National Security Letters.
Why give money away or bother with warrants when you can just claim "National Security" and completely bypass that pesky "Bill of Rights" thing.
Re:"Full Names" seem to be the in thing (Score:5, Interesting)
Dunno why this was modded down. The *ONLY* ISP or hosting service operator in US history to challenge a national security letter was Nick Merrill. Ever.
A single national security letter can dragnet in thousands of user accounts. Simply receiving one means that you are already bound to secrecy by the letter itself with the very real threat of 10 years in jail. Nick had to fight in a secret court hearing just to have the right to have an attorney represent him, and then again to publicly state that he received a letter. He still cannot discuss any of what was requested, or he goes to prison for a very long time.
They are not limited to one letter per user per item- they are not required to be specific at all. That means every major service out there has been handing out your info to the feds. Usually, this is just usernames and other log data. If your full name is included, it makes it that much easier to keep tabs on you. And, yes, people are being investigated and rounded up based on this kind of data.
Look up the Calyx Institute or Nick Merrill on YouTube. Fascinating stuff. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkvGK60MSOk [youtube.com]
Re:"Full Names" seem to be the in thing (Score:4, Interesting)
I suspect the social media backlash is going to begin pretty damn soon.
It wont. People are fucking stupid. They have absolutely no idea what's happening to them. The only thing that will push the public as a whole to care is if holywood makes a movie about it and makes it glaringly obvious what's going on. But this isn't something that makes for good theater, and advertisers are going to squash any attempt to make such a movie just like they killed that Mythbusters episode about RFID.
On the bright side however, those same stupid people that are using these services are also Fickle. I have a niece that's your typical tall blond bombshell, most popular girl in a very large school, won state sports championships, etc... Has something like 3000 facebook friends. According to her, facebooks on its way out. They are mostly annoyed by it and all the drama on it now. One girls opinion but she holds sway over quite a few clueless youth so who knows. I suspect that she's one of those "keystone" members that social networking sites fear losing.
Re:Introvert! (Score:4, Interesting)
speaking as an introvert, this is a false dichotomy. there's some truth to what you're saying, but overall it's just something introverts comfort themselves with, to feel like they have some kind of integrity, and to put off overcoming their limitations. of course, before i go on, i must say that extraverts have limitations as well.
i've known several extremely successful people who define their self worth in terms of what they can do, but challenge themselves by living and exhibiting it with their peers. they actively mentor those who are (at the moment) less accomplished, and they seek mentorship from those who are moreso. their extraversion leads to more utility and challenge of their own abilities.
this is not to say that extraversion is a superior strategy; there are those who, as you say, begin to define themselves through the shallow. also, extraverts can be annoyingly grating and pompous to their introverted peers who nonetheless ``walk softly and carry a big stick." every person they snub with their antics will be more inclined to vote against them when evaluations come around.
so, the challenge of the extravert is to not be a grating prick, while the challenge of the introvert is to benefit from other people. stereotypes like you present are only good in seeing the challenge; they are not the right way to live.
Re:They are mentally ill. (Score:1, Interesting)
[quote]YOU give private data to companies and "agree" to their "privacy" policy[/quote]
Bullshit. When I posted to Usenet, I wasn't initially aware I was posting worldwide distributed and instead thought I was participating in a central worldwide discussion area. Later when I realized I was posting worldwide distributed I didn't realize someone would make a commercial archive of it. Well, DejaNews (later Deja.com) made a commercial archive of Usenet, fully searchable, but not as good of a search as Google. Later, as Deja.com was going out of business, Google not only bought Deja but incorporated the Usenet archive into their search engine (as Google Groups). Not only that, they went out and got private archive sources and backfilled that archive.
MANY users of Usenet at workplaces and universities had their real name in their post--if not as part of their username, then as part of their signature.
As another user posted, I also don't use Foursquare but do think of the repercussions if Google were to ever buy Foursquare and incorporate an archive into their search engine. To reiterate part of what could happen: Google Groups tends to favor posts that flame or ridicule the poster (in the subject line or in the body of the post) by their username (which could be their real name) at the top of the search results. That bias alone means that other more meaningful posts are hidden away to later pages of search results so Google can cast a negative light on that poster.