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

Facebook Wants You To Snitch On Friends Not Using Their Real Name

paulbernal.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 164 posts

Re: Facebook Wants You To Snitch On Friends Not Using Their Real Name

#151

Post by wisenhymr »

jordanthoms wrote: post #85
psbp wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now imagine a whole generation socializing under these artificial restrictions. Can you imagine how stifling being raised under an umbrella of constant surveillance by your peer group, family, future employers and advertisers would be to your personality and relationships? We're developing a society of sociopatic egotists.

... and the only cure is 4chan!

Would that it were. The owner/admin's made some bad decisions that opened it up to being restricted/gamed and as a result the site is suffering as a platform for free and independent speech.

Sic transit gloria mundi, I guess. Some people cite backroom lobbying by people from places with authoritarian factions, e.g. Reddit and SA, but I don't have the resources to verify the rumors.

Re: Facebook Wants You To Snitch On Friends Not Using Their Real Name

#152

Post by starpilot »

v0cab wrote: post #114
FellowTraveler wrote: post #109

In Mexico, bloggers are disemboweled and strung up from bridges as a warning to others, by cartels. In Syria, government snipers murdered bloggers to silence them. In China, bloggers are imprisoned at hard labor. In the United States, the Federalist Papers were released anonymously in order to protect the lives of their authors. It is only the spoiled, rich and free countries who make such naive and irresponsible sta…

Great post. I am in South Korea. I could be imprisoned for the the things I have written here about Samsung and their owning family.

…but you haven't.

Re: Facebook Wants You To Snitch On Friends Not Using Their Real Name

#153

Post by ANTSANTS »

wisenhymr wrote: post #151
jordanthoms wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... and the only cure is 4chan!

Would that it were. The owner/admin's made some bad decisions that opened it up to being restricted/gamed and as a result the site is suffering as a platform for free and independent speech. Sic transit gloria mundi, I guess. Some people cite backroom lobbying by people from places with authoritarian factions, e.g. Reddit and SA, but I don't have the resources to verify the rumors.

As someone who practically grew up on 4chan, I have to ask: What on earth are you talking about?

Re: Facebook Wants You To Snitch On Friends Not Using Their Real Name

#154

Post by genwin »

steve8918 wrote: post #56
mkjones wrote: post #41

Hey folks - I work on the Site Integrity team at Facebook. We work to keep people safe from scams, spam, fake accounts, and having their account taken over. We're always looking for ways to better understand how people represent themselves online and improve the design of our service. We look at the results of this kind of experiment in aggregate - the responses doesn't have any impact on the user account or that of…

The best way people, especially kids, have to protect their future selves from things they write or post today, is by assuming a fake identity. Kids are quickly learning that everything on the Internet is forever. Take the option of hiding their identity away from them, and I think they will move to a service that will allow this.

My kids are sick of me harping on this. But now they use different pseudonyms for every site, including Facebook, and I'm proud of them for it.

They rarely use Facebook anymore; it seems it's becoming boring.

Re: Facebook Wants You To Snitch On Friends Not Using Their Real Name

#155

Post by genwin »

mkjones wrote: post #41

Hey folks - I work on the Site Integrity team at Facebook. We work to keep people safe from scams, spam, fake accounts, and having their account taken over. We're always looking for ways to better understand how people represent themselves online and improve the design of our service. We look at the results of this kind of experiment in aggregate - the responses doesn't have any impact on the user account or that of…

> We work to keep people safe...

Real name is unsafe, outside of Facebook's control. The unsafe aspects include bullying and robbery, e.g.

Re: Facebook Wants You To Snitch On Friends Not Using Their Real Name

#156

Post by ryanmolden »

mynameishere wrote: post #143
tokenadult wrote: post #100

I have been on online networks of one kind or another since 1992. I am 100 percent behind the idea that people using their real names (the rule of some networks I have been on) promotes better online community and people taking more responsibility for their personal behavior in the community. That said, I do have some friends who have long established pseudonyms that have most of the good effects of real names, becau…

taking more responsibility for their personal behavior in the community Non-anonymous commentary is generally skippable. Attach your name to something, and you have to be careful to the point of sterility.

Alternatively, anonymous commentary quite often yields shallow/knee-jerk comments and trolling. As tokenadult pointed out though, there is a difference between real name and an online handle with a reputation associated with it. People not uding real names have to build / maintain their reputation just the same, but throwing a handle away and "starting over" is obviously easier than doing the same with a real identity. Not sure if that is good or bad, likely a mix of both. Though Facebook has clear ulterior motives other than "civil discourse enforced through 'real world' reputation tarnishment".

Re: Facebook Wants You To Snitch On Friends Not Using Their Real Name

#157

Post by petitmiam »

Karunamon wrote: post #115
prodigal_erik wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What Facebook and Google+ gain in politesse, they lose in depth and honesty. I can't assume I'll be held "accountable" in a just way by every prospective employer, apartment manager, or lover I'll ever meet, so these venues get empty pleasantries from me, certainly nothing controversial in any way.

>so these venues get empty pleasantries from me, certainly nothing controversial in any way. Is nobody familiar with the privacy settings? Facebook has lists, G+ has circles. One for family, one for acquaintances, one for close friends, one for business. Guess who gets to see the pictures from the house party and who doesn't?

Facebook had lists. I was happily using them. Then Facebook added more lists with default names, with no way to delete them. Now I'm never 100% confident I've got everyone in the correct list. Who knows what will happen the next time they update?

Re: Facebook Wants You To Snitch On Friends Not Using Their Real Name

#158

Post by petitmiam »

chris_wot wrote: post #77
latimer wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it turns out it isn't anonymous and they are shutting down accounts over it, can there be any repercussions for them lying like that or is it just "unethical"?

Funny - it says they won't take any action over it. Do I trust that?

makes you wonder why they are asking then.

Re: Facebook Wants You To Snitch On Friends Not Using Their Real Name

#159

Post by homodragon »

tokenadult wrote: post #100

I have been on online networks of one kind or another since 1992. I am 100 percent behind the idea that people using their real names (the rule of some networks I have been on) promotes better online community and people taking more responsibility for their personal behavior in the community. That said, I do have some friends who have long established pseudonyms that have most of the good effects of real names, becau…

reputation with whom

the world is not just. there is no such thing as a "good" reputation, only popularity.

you are saying that if you are popular you won't need to defend yourself with anonymity, which is kind of like the point

Re: Facebook Wants You To Snitch On Friends Not Using Their Real Name

#160

Post by drbawb »

quesera wrote: post #108
tokenadult wrote: post #100

I have been on online networks of one kind or another since 1992. I am 100 percent behind the idea that people using their real names (the rule of some networks I have been on) promotes better online community and people taking more responsibility for their personal behavior in the community. That said, I do have some friends who have long established pseudonyms that have most of the good effects of real names, becau…

> Facebook is LESS of a "monolith," because it is made up of hundreds of millions of users, than any small town anywhere. You inadvertently bring up a strong counter argument. Suppose, in your small town, you are outed (rightly or wrongly) as , and ostracized. Normally, after much introspection and reflection, you or your family could decide to move away, if the social effects were severe enough and unfixable. With a…

I think this also speaks volumes about the "dangers" of using large general-purpose social networks.

Think about it for a second: if I'm ostracized (using my name or a pseudonym, it doesn't matter) from a `Club 3.14: Raspberry Pi Hackers` message board; I can find other message boards with a surplus of R-Pi hackers.

If I say something stupid on Facebook... where am I supposed to go in order to replace Facebook?

The issue with Google+ is (So the issue here isn't so much the ability to have pseudonyms, IMHO.

The issue is that Facebook is quickly becoming a "monolith", and that fact _combined_ with an inability to escape your ostracism via "moving" your online presence to a new identity is where the problem lies.

I feel the real problem is that Facebook is all-encompassing. They want to be _the_ platform for online community.

Therein lies the problem, if you're only allowed _one true identity_ on their platform, your baggage follows you to every sub-community _on that platform._

Post reply on HN