Google Realizing That Its Real Names Policy Is Excessive
from the about-time dept
We've been discussing for a while some of the ridiculousness behind both Facebook and Google requiring "real names" and shutting down the accounts of those who used pseudonyms. Frankly, it didn't make any sense to be so strict about it, and Google especially seemed to be at a complete loss to give any coherent reason why the real names policy made sense. And while the company defended the position for a while, it's nice to see that it appears to be planning to relax that policy with a new system that likely will allow the use of pseudonyms. While it's not yet entirely clear how this system will work, this seems like a move in the right direction, and will likely make Google+ a lot more usable by many people.Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: real names, social networks
Companies: google
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/11/10/18/1429223/facebook-is-building-shadow-profiles-of-non- users
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Alternative Solution
- Require a random portion (roughly 20% should work) to check a box when adding you as a friend that says "I know who the person behind this account is." If at any point in time the percentage of friends who check this box drops below the required amount, the account will be unable to post more than 1 public posting per day, or to address any private posting to more than a single recipient.
Problem solved. Now can we please, PLEASE get Google Apps support added?! I mean, that's SOOOOOO much more important than this is!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Alternative Solution
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/12/google-ceo-eric-schmidt-dismisses-privacy
There is also the concern that Google just wanted to build better metrics for advertising.
There was concern that a fake Lady GaGa would tell you she had been mugged in Madrid and needed you to wire her money.
And your idea doesn't work so good for me, I don't have enough contacts as this online identity to meet your metric. I keep this identity separate from others I maintain. One would think that Google could just use their algorithm they use to filter spam email on messages.
I think that Google+ might have shot itself in the foot with the on again off again oh wait on again you can be what other people call you policy.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I don't mind using my real name...
Real name or not, until these services give me confidence they'll not "mess up", I'll keep my opinions to Scooter, ala myself.
Here, anyway.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Alternative Solution
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Considering Google's record for leaking profile info in other services, this means anyone wanting to use a handle for casual personal/professional identity management should be very cautious. Anyone concerned about a strong correlation should avoid Google entirely.
Until the full mechanism and policy is clarified, celebration is premature. Don't take the heat off yet - there's no real policy here. The devil is in the details - we don't know if qualifies as "don't be evil" until we see more.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Alternative Solution
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Alternative Solution
It has nothing whatsoever to do with spam.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: I don't mind using my real name...
Having a pseudonym gives me room to breathe, and the ability to speak freely. It also lets me avoid being tracked quite so easily by the various entities that like to assemble dossiers on everyone.
In the case of google, this is less of an issue as most of my pseudonyms sound like they could be real names, so google would be none the wiser. Nonetheless, google has told me,loud and clear, that they aren't interested in the likes of me, and so I am returning that favor. I don't care if they change their policy now, I will never be joining them.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Alternative Solution
Google becomes a be all end all for this is for sure the person your dealing with and the transaction is secure.
They have these grand plans for what G+ will be in 5 years, but it is pretty much the -
1. Announce a Platform
2. ????????
3. Dominate the social market.
They are slowly folding all other Google offerings into G+ trying to force people to join. Did the concept of "Well everyone will want Buzz" being a total failure fall on deaf ears?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
what they need - Real names
vs
what they want - to not appear evil
They wanted to be the hipper Facebook and cash in on that market, can't blame them there. The problem is you have 10 people saying 10 different things, and several really stupid things said by the people in charge of the project that make them look arrogant and uninformed about social things.
If you want a social platform, good for you. But to randomly decide on a whim what works and what won't work from day to day hour to hour you annoy the audience.
Remember these are the smart guys who after slamming their foot down about no nyms EVER, then created accounts for rappers stage names. Kinda stupid, well that can have it because they are special - we need entertainers to make the network more popular. Except many people don't give a fig if the network has rappers, because those accounts will be run by handlers and rarely by the "star".
They had potential, they could have just created a nym badge to "warn" others it was a nym being used. Instead they demand your real name, got quoted saying they don't care about rape victims and others, and shot themselves in the foot again.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
An identity service which you so far have no choice to opt out of when using the G+ social network, its cleverly-disguised user interface.
That Anonymous Coward said: "They had potential, they could have just created a nym badge to "warn" others it was a nym being used."
Yeah this, or the equivalent if you're verified. It ain't rocket science, Google.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]