Global coalition to Facebook: “Authentic names” are dangerous for your users • Hacker News Board

Re: Global coalition to Facebook: “Authentic names” are dangerous for your users

#51

Post by toomuchtodo » Mon, Oct 05, 2015, 9:49 PM UTC

morgante wrote: post #42

toomuchtodo wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No downvote even if I disagree. Once your platform begins to become ubiquitous (Facebook Messenger), it starts to have certain responsibilities, similiar to a utility but not quite that far. Now I'm prepared for the downvotes, but I don't think its wrong to expect certain behavior from tech companies in certain segments once they reach a particular size. A compromise would be to allow Facebook users to get verified (…

> Once your platform begins to become ubiquitous (Facebook Messenger), it starts to have certain responsibilities, similiar to a utility but not quite that far. I think this is a decent argument. Facebook is pretty close to being a digital utility at this point. But, a logical corollary of that argument is that if Facebook is a utility it's also expected for everyone to have it. Hence, it's fully okay for services to…

> I'm not sure I fully understand your proposal, but it actually sounds a lot like my opinion. It's not that I think Facebook profiles should be required to use their official legal name, just that they should use the name they use offline. Is that what you meant by verification?

Yes.

Re: Global coalition to Facebook: “Authentic names” are dangerous for your users

#52

Post by TeMPOraL » Mon, Oct 05, 2015, 9:50 PM UTC

toomuchtodo wrote: post #37

morgante wrote: post #21

I wish the EFF and others who are against using real names would at least acknowledge the drawbacks of pseudonyms and the proliferation of fake accounts and fake names which comes with them. The real name policy has huge benefits. I'm not constantly bombarded by fake friend requests like I am on Twitter, Skype, or any other platform which allows random usernames. Even more importantly, I can easily find the people in…

No downvote even if I disagree. Once your platform begins to become ubiquitous (Facebook Messenger), it starts to have certain responsibilities, similiar to a utility but not quite that far. Now I'm prepared for the downvotes, but I don't think its wrong to expect certain behavior from tech companies in certain segments once they reach a particular size. A compromise would be to allow Facebook users to get verified (…

I think both of you deserve upvotes for presenting arguments from two sides in a civil manner.

Personally, I'm ambivalent towards the issue - on the one hand I really like the idea behind Facebook reflecting your real-life social graph, and I do fancy the ability to find someone by their real name. On the other hand, I had a fake account created for my IRC bot with personality that I meant to use both for fun and to optimize communication for a community, and I got really sad when that account got killed over Real Name Policy.

Re: Global coalition to Facebook: “Authentic names” are dangerous for your users

#53

Post by JoshTriplett » Mon, Oct 05, 2015, 9:51 PM UTC

unclebucknasty wrote: post #47

toomuchtodo wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No downvote even if I disagree. Once your platform begins to become ubiquitous (Facebook Messenger), it starts to have certain responsibilities, similiar to a utility but not quite that far. Now I'm prepared for the downvotes, but I don't think its wrong to expect certain behavior from tech companies in certain segments once they reach a particular size. A compromise would be to allow Facebook users to get verified (…

What I don't get is why Facebook's users don't just disengage. Instead, Facebook is treated as some basic human right. Here, with some vague "responsibilities akin to a utility, but not quite that far". I mean, that really sounds kind of, well, made up. Who's defining these responsibilities? In fact, Facebook is not a public utility, but a private company. And, unlike with a public utility, the public to which they a…

> What I don't get is why Facebook's customers don't just disengage.

Convincing all your friends and family to switch sites is not easy. Social networks provide quite a lot of lock-in. And while alternatives exist, they don't have the momentum, the audience, or the lack of friction.

Replacing Facebook is not primarily a technical challenge.

Re: Global coalition to Facebook: “Authentic names” are dangerous for your users

#54

Post by JoshTriplett » Mon, Oct 05, 2015, 9:53 PM UTC

toomuchtodo wrote: post #50

unclebucknasty wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I don't get is why Facebook's users don't just disengage. Instead, Facebook is treated as some basic human right. Here, with some vague "responsibilities akin to a utility, but not quite that far". I mean, that really sounds kind of, well, made up. Who's defining these responsibilities? In fact, Facebook is not a public utility, but a private company. And, unlike with a public utility, the public to which they a…

You misunderstand me. My apologies for not explaining properly. I'm not saying people are entitled to Facebook; I'm saying if users use Facebook, regulations should be in place to dictate to Facebook how those users should be treated. Corporations will take as much as they can, which is why regulations exist.

> I'm saying if users use Facebook, regulations should be in place to dictate to Facebook how those users should be treated.

As much as I hate what Facebook is doing, I don't think this is anywhere near the right answer. Besides, do you really think governments want to see less information collected, when having that information makes it so convenient for them to obtain?

Re: Global coalition to Facebook: “Authentic names” are dangerous for your users

#55

Post by JoshTriplett » Mon, Oct 05, 2015, 9:54 PM UTC

morgante wrote: post #48

greggman wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know several people online by pseudonyms only. If I wanted to add them on facebook I'd add their pseudonym. I also know people who don't go by their real name in real life. I know John's that go by Sean. I know Richard's that go by Dick. I know another Richard that goes by Greg. I suspect that 95% of his friends don't know his "real" name is Richard. I also know 2 Cyrils that go by Rocky and I suspect only their ve…

> I know several people online by pseudonyms only. Facebook is explicitly designed to primarily be a platform for "real world" relationships, not digital connections with strangers. There are plenty of other places on the web to talk to strangers. > I know another Richard that goes by Greg. Then that's the name he can and should use on Facebook. Facebook's policy is not that you have to use your legal name. It's that…

> Then that's the name he can and should use on Facebook. Facebook's policy is not that you have to use your legal name. It's that you should use the name you go by in everyday life, not a pseudonym you invented for online publishing.

Your statement contradicts Facebook's actual policies in practice, which in many cases attempt to mandate the use of a name backed by government-issued ID.

Re: Global coalition to Facebook: “Authentic names” are dangerous for your users

#56

Post by morgante » Mon, Oct 05, 2015, 9:54 PM UTC

gknoy wrote: post #46

morgante wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I certainly wouldn't argue that the web should be real-name only 100% agreed. The vast majority of the web is based around pseudonymous interaction (even this comment thread). I love that about the web, but I also appreciate Facebook creating one place to foster those real world connections.

I would prefer to be able to explicitly set a pseudoynmous profile (name, profile picture, etc) in groups that we join (e.g., gaming groups, where FB is Super Awesome for out-of-game collaboration, but where not everyone needs to be able to see my profile picture or name). On the one hand, one might say that this is using FB counter to its intentions ... but on the other, it seems clear that the ubiquity of FB chat,…

That's an interesting idea. You have a good point: Facebook has developed a really powerful and sticky social platform. While they explicitly want the primary experience on that platform to be around real world communications, there's no fundamental reason that the technology couldn't simultaneously be used for digital communities.

I feel strongly that the communities shouldn't overlap (I do not want to see pseudonyms in my comment threads), but the idea of a parallel Facebook where alternative profiles can interact with alternative profiles is interesting.

Re: Global coalition to Facebook: “Authentic names” are dangerous for your users

#57

Post by detaro » Mon, Oct 05, 2015, 9:55 PM UTC

morgante wrote: post #48

greggman wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know several people online by pseudonyms only. If I wanted to add them on facebook I'd add their pseudonym. I also know people who don't go by their real name in real life. I know John's that go by Sean. I know Richard's that go by Dick. I know another Richard that goes by Greg. I suspect that 95% of his friends don't know his "real" name is Richard. I also know 2 Cyrils that go by Rocky and I suspect only their ve…

> I know several people online by pseudonyms only. Facebook is explicitly designed to primarily be a platform for "real world" relationships, not digital connections with strangers. There are plenty of other places on the web to talk to strangers. > I know another Richard that goes by Greg. Then that's the name he can and should use on Facebook. Facebook's policy is not that you have to use your legal name. It's that…

What's the measure for a "real world" relationship? Many people seem to use "I've met this person" as a criteria for adding someone one Facebook. But meeting someone doesn't necessarily mean you know their full name (neither does it mean that they want you to know it)

Also, how do you prove to Facebook that this is "the name you go by" if they challenge it?

Re: Global coalition to Facebook: “Authentic names” are dangerous for your users

#58

Post by morgante » Mon, Oct 05, 2015, 9:55 PM UTC

JoshTriplett wrote: post #55

morgante wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I know several people online by pseudonyms only. Facebook is explicitly designed to primarily be a platform for "real world" relationships, not digital connections with strangers. There are plenty of other places on the web to talk to strangers. > I know another Richard that goes by Greg. Then that's the name he can and should use on Facebook. Facebook's policy is not that you have to use your legal name. It's that…

> Then that's the name he can and should use on Facebook. Facebook's policy is not that you have to use your legal name. It's that you should use the name you go by in everyday life, not a pseudonym you invented for online publishing. Your statement contradicts Facebook's actual policies in practice, which in many cases attempt to mandate the use of a name backed by government-issued ID.

If you read some of the linked documents, they admit that their process isn't currently perfect and are working on finding better ways of verifying identity without depending on government IDs.

Re: Global coalition to Facebook: “Authentic names” are dangerous for your users

#59

Post by toomuchtodo » Mon, Oct 05, 2015, 9:55 PM UTC

JoshTriplett wrote: post #54

toomuchtodo wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You misunderstand me. My apologies for not explaining properly. I'm not saying people are entitled to Facebook; I'm saying if users use Facebook, regulations should be in place to dictate to Facebook how those users should be treated. Corporations will take as much as they can, which is why regulations exist.

> I'm saying if users use Facebook, regulations should be in place to dictate to Facebook how those users should be treated. As much as I hate what Facebook is doing, I don't think this is anywhere near the right answer. Besides, do you really think governments want to see less information collected, when having that information makes it so convenient for them to obtain?

> As much as I hate what Facebook is doing, I don't think this is anywhere near the right answer.

That's how regulations work. You dictate to a private business its responsibilities to its customers or users. I don't understand why that isn't the right answer (although Europe seems to do far better about this than the US).

> Besides, do you really think governments want to see less information collected, when having that information makes it so convenient for them to obtain?

This is a tired argument. The government is huge. Not every department is the NSA, nor is every department the FTC or FCC.

Re: Global coalition to Facebook: “Authentic names” are dangerous for your users

#60

Post by morgante » Mon, Oct 05, 2015, 9:58 PM UTC

detaro wrote: post #57

morgante wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I know several people online by pseudonyms only. Facebook is explicitly designed to primarily be a platform for "real world" relationships, not digital connections with strangers. There are plenty of other places on the web to talk to strangers. > I know another Richard that goes by Greg. Then that's the name he can and should use on Facebook. Facebook's policy is not that you have to use your legal name. It's that…

What's the measure for a "real world" relationship? Many people seem to use "I've met this person" as a criteria for adding someone one Facebook. But meeting someone doesn't necessarily mean you know their full name (neither does it mean that they want you to know it) Also, how do you prove to Facebook that this is "the name you go by" if they challenge it?

> Many people seem to use "I've met this person" as a criteria for adding someone one Facebook.

That seems like a pretty solid filter for me.

> But meeting someone doesn't necessarily mean you know their full name

Which is why Facebook's policies and technology is so great: I can easily find and add a new friend who I just met even if I don't have their last name yet.

> neither does it mean that they want you to know it

I can't plausibly imagine any real world scenario where I would willingly share my first name but not my last, but maybe that's just because my name is pretty identifiable.

> Also, how do you prove to Facebook that this is "the name you go by" if they challenge it?

That's the difficult part, and what Facebook is trying to find a good answer to.