Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Jwz: Google's pseudonym support "obvious bullshit"

jwz.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 175 posts

Re: Jwz: Google's pseudonym support "obvious bullshit"

#21

Post by TomOfTTB »

mikeryan wrote: post #19
TomOfTTB wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Google knows your name but allows you to post under a pseudonym then how can someone scratch the surface and find out your real name (unless they work for Google)? That's like saying you can't post an anonymous blog because the web provider knows your real name.

then how can someone scratch the surface and find out your real name A subpoena will do it.

Again I think that's a privacy issue more than an issue of being pseudonymous. Someone using a pseudonym wants to be identified they just want to do it on their own terms.

What you're talking about is complete anonymity which is a different concept.

Re: Jwz: Google's pseudonym support "obvious bullshit"

#22

Post by bigiain »

TomOfTTB wrote: post #18
mikeryan wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think he understands the distinction perfectly. He's saying you can't have true Psuedonimity (as you, and Google define it) without complete privacy. If someone can scratch the surface of your psuedonym and find your real name then there's no real point.

If Google knows your name but allows you to post under a pseudonym then how can someone scratch the surface and find out your real name (unless they work for Google)? That's like saying you can't post an anonymous blog because the web provider knows your real name.

By getting a warrant.

By not getting a warrant but saying it's a matter of national security.

By fraudulently misusing your government id and claiming you have some right to the information.

Re: Jwz: Google's pseudonym support "obvious bullshit"

#23

Post by gojomo »

TomOfTTB wrote: post #18
mikeryan wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think he understands the distinction perfectly. He's saying you can't have true Psuedonimity (as you, and Google define it) without complete privacy. If someone can scratch the surface of your psuedonym and find your real name then there's no real point.

If Google knows your name but allows you to post under a pseudonym then how can someone scratch the surface and find out your real name (unless they work for Google)? That's like saying you can't post an anonymous blog because the web provider knows your real name.

A better name for a system where Google insists on knowing your true identity, but helps you hide it from others might be 'qualified masking' – since it's not true pseudonymity.

Rather than being something which provides all the protections of pseudonymity, such a 'masking' system would give further asymmetric informational advantage (and user lock-in) to Google.

Re: Jwz: Google's pseudonym support "obvious bullshit"

#24

Post by thwest »

nirvana wrote: post #8

I've been using Google pretty regularly for the past 11 years, and have had a gmail account since soon after it was announced. However with the release of Plus and the revelation of their policies on "real names", I've come to realize that I no longer trust google. Gmail accounts can be effectively anonymous. Yet plus accounts cannot be? Google does not need anyone's real name in order to track and advertise to them.…

What are the best alternatives for email?

Re: Jwz: Google's pseudonym support "obvious bullshit"

#25

Post by kb101 »

Wow, what a blast of fresh air, reading this. I miss the old Internet, when Aunt Sally still couldn't figure it out and certainly would be horrified to find her birthday party photos posted on it, much less would she even conceive of going and posting them herself under her real name.

Why does online marketing have to be built around maintenance of a database of people's Real Identities® ? If it's a page full of comments about guitars, stick a Stratocaster ad on it and be done. The Internet was supposed to be about freedom and personal expression. I used to scoff at things like Second Life and people on BBSes with ridiculously fake avatars, but now we have the horrors of everyday life invading and taking over the "virtual" space, which is less and less virtual every day. Even the visual and auditory carnage of MySpace was preferable to the cookie-cutter sameness of Facebook, helpfully tracking your every single move before you even think to make it, and broadcasting the mundane minutiae of everyday existence to all your "friends".

I used to love Google when it first came out, it beat the pants off Alta Vista and it was a fantastic way to extract cool links from the vastness of the 'net. Now people log on to +1 each other on all the right topics and say all the right things and fit themselves into all the right pigeonholes. What if you want to go online not to maintain your identity as it is now, but to explore new ones? What if you need more than one identity? What if the whole notion of "identity" is something you find burdensome and ultimately repugnant? Well then, there must be something wrong with you and you must have something ghastly and awful to hide.

So yeah, fuck those guys.

Re: Jwz: Google's pseudonym support "obvious bullshit"

#26

Post by angelbob »

TomOfTTB wrote: post #20
mindstab wrote: post #7

Everyone is also missing the bigger point that Google's idea of a valid real name is incredibly north american and anglo centric. There are plenty of cases of people using their real names, be in European, or African or what ever and google still kicking them off. Google's policies do not work, and are verging on racist. I know some people who would be better off using a fake anglo name than their real name to keep u…

I don't know. I think it's two different issues. One is an issue of policy the other is an issue of incompetence in implementing a policy.

Unfortunately, clumsiness in implementing security theater has privacy implications.

Re: Jwz: Google's pseudonym support "obvious bullshit"

#27

Post by barrkel »

TomOfTTB wrote: post #21
mikeryan wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

then how can someone scratch the surface and find out your real name A subpoena will do it.

Again I think that's a privacy issue more than an issue of being pseudonymous. Someone using a pseudonym wants to be identified they just want to do it on their own terms. What you're talking about is complete anonymity which is a different concept.

No; the difference between pseudonymity and anonymity is consistent identity over time. When you have two actions by anonymous actors, you can't correlate them as being initiated by the same actor. With a pseudonym, you can. Correlation with an underlying "real" name is independent.

(Misrepresentation and misattribution aside.)

Re: Jwz: Google's pseudonym support "obvious bullshit"

#29

Post by kb101 »

thwest wrote: post #24
nirvana wrote: post #8

I've been using Google pretty regularly for the past 11 years, and have had a gmail account since soon after it was announced. However with the release of Plus and the revelation of their policies on "real names", I've come to realize that I no longer trust google. Gmail accounts can be effectively anonymous. Yet plus accounts cannot be? Google does not need anyone's real name in order to track and advertise to them.…

What are the best alternatives for email?

Don't know about best, but www.fastmail.fm/help/overview_features.html is pretty cool. It is what it says, fast. No graphics, clean web interface, runs quick on anything, including crappy old hardware or phones. Opera recently bought them so if you run Opera on your phone it is especially nice. Very reliable, hardly ever down and on the rare occasions it goes down it's usually back up within minutes. You can hook up pretty much any client you like, of course. And they don't read your mail to serve you ads.

Re: Jwz: Google's pseudonym support "obvious bullshit"

#30

Post by padenot »

thwest wrote: post #24
nirvana wrote: post #8

I've been using Google pretty regularly for the past 11 years, and have had a gmail account since soon after it was announced. However with the release of Plus and the revelation of their policies on "real names", I've come to realize that I no longer trust google. Gmail accounts can be effectively anonymous. Yet plus accounts cannot be? Google does not need anyone's real name in order to track and advertise to them.…

What are the best alternatives for email?

I personnaly use Fastmail and I'm very happy with it. As any other serious competitor, it's not free, though, around $50 a year for the best plan (10gB, custom domain and file storage, among other goodies).
Post reply on HN