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

The Real Name Fallacy

blog.coralproject.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 323 posts

Re: The Real Name Fallacy

#11

Post by wfunction »

blauditore wrote: post #10
wfunction wrote: post #4

Thing is, if I had to guess, I would say Facebook doesn't attempt to make you use your real name to make the community better in the first place. That's almost certainly just its pretext for everyone who's willing to fall for it. Most likely, it does that to make sure it can identify you globally and uniquely for commercial/advertising purposes. Think about how much more valuable your online identity is if you go sol…

I doubt this, since Facebook doesn't seem to care much about fantasy names. They get most interest data about you from within FB (what pages and posts you like etc.) and from pages across the internet you visit through like buttons embedded there (even without clicking them). So there's a lot of relevant meta data directly linked to your account and no need for them to know your real name.

Does use of this [1] information not include attempting to match up the user's real-life name with his/her Facebook name?

[1] https://www.facebook.com/help/494750870625830

Re: The Real Name Fallacy

#13

Post by matt4077 »

wfunction wrote: post #4

Thing is, if I had to guess, I would say Facebook doesn't attempt to make you use your real name to make the community better in the first place. That's almost certainly just its pretext for everyone who's willing to fall for it. Most likely, it does that to make sure it can identify you globally and uniquely for commercial/advertising purposes. Think about how much more valuable your online identity is if you go sol…

Real names are the difference between Facebook and MySpace. I'm not friends on FB with anybody I haven't met in real life.

Re: The Real Name Fallacy

#14

Post by grzm »

mjolk wrote: post #9

While I agree that expecting users to use real names is a bad thing, this knocked the air out of me: > In societies including the US where violence and mistreatment of women, people of color, and marginalized people is common, we can expect similar problems in people’s digital interactions [1] > [1] Sarah Banet-Weiser and Kate M. Miltner. #MasculinitySoFragile: culture, structure, and networked misogyny. Feminist Med…

A post by ESR was even flagged off HN because its message was that he expected evidence to back claims of harassment

There's at least one other reason users may have flagged it, and in line with the site guidelines: it doesn't sufficiently satisfy intellectual curiosity, and at the same time has a high likelihood of producing little to no constructive discussion while also being very susceptible to flamewars. That doesn't mean that the topic shouldn't be discussed, just that it's unlikely to be constructively and civilly discussed on HN.

Re: The Real Name Fallacy

#15

Post by danmoz »

wfunction wrote: post #8
danmoz wrote: post #6

Real names is one thing, but I'd really like to see a "real age" system on the internet. That would make ignoring trolls -- who I suspect are frequently not old enough to drive -- a much easier task. It would be more akin to real life, if a 14 y/o tried to bully us in the street we'd laugh them off, but when they're anonymous on the internet it doesn't seem to occur to us that we may be dealing with a child.

In theory at least, you're supposed to look at what is being said rather than who is saying it... Not at all claiming I always do that myself, but some food for thought.

That's true, but I'm thinking of situations where there is no context other than pure abuse. I wonder if Charlotte Dawson would have taken her own life if she found out that the majority of trolls telling her to kill herself were kids living in their parents basement.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlotte_Dawson

Re: The Real Name Fallacy

#16

Post by barking »

danmoz wrote: post #6

Real names is one thing, but I'd really like to see a "real age" system on the internet. That would make ignoring trolls -- who I suspect are frequently not old enough to drive -- a much easier task. It would be more akin to real life, if a 14 y/o tried to bully us in the street we'd laugh them off, but when they're anonymous on the internet it doesn't seem to occur to us that we may be dealing with a child.

You sound quite young and naive. How old are you? :)

Re: The Real Name Fallacy

#17

Post by lmm »

wfunction wrote: post #4

Thing is, if I had to guess, I would say Facebook doesn't attempt to make you use your real name to make the community better in the first place. That's almost certainly just its pretext for everyone who's willing to fall for it. Most likely, it does that to make sure it can identify you globally and uniquely for commercial/advertising purposes. Think about how much more valuable your online identity is if you go sol…

> Think about how much more valuable your online identity is if you go solely by Jon Doe rather than by foolover123, bar456fudger, and nighthowler789?

Not very. Assuming the demographic infomation is still accurate, that's the part they can sell.

Re: The Real Name Fallacy

#18

Post by ChrisNorstrom »

I really don't want to say this but, the real names policy does help in terms of trolling behavior for certain communities. When TechCrunch switched over from Disqus to Facebook comments, the amount of trash and trolling was immediately reduced and stayed at a minimum permanently. A lot of the media outlets (Motherboard, Vice, NPR) who've disabled commenting altogether were using Disqus. I've noticed media outlets that use Facebook comments seem to still have commenting turned on.

I know anonymity in comment systems is as touchy a subject for internet freedom lovers as gun rights are for people in high crime neighborhoods. Those that hate them have already made up their mind and won't look at contradicting evidence, those that love them have already made up their mind and won't look at contradicting evidence. The truth seems to lies somewhere in the middle.

So "Real Names Policy" definitely has it's place. Maybe not everywhere, but definitely in some communities.

Re: The Real Name Fallacy

#19

Post by aw3c2 »

danmoz wrote: post #15
wfunction wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In theory at least, you're supposed to look at what is being said rather than who is saying it... Not at all claiming I always do that myself, but some food for thought.

That's true, but I'm thinking of situations where there is no context other than pure abuse. I wonder if Charlotte Dawson would have taken her own life if she found out that the majority of trolls telling her to kill herself were kids living in their parents basement. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlotte_Dawson

What makes you think that they were kids? I highly doubt that.

Re: The Real Name Fallacy

#20

Post by mattnewton »

blauditore wrote: post #10
wfunction wrote: post #4

Thing is, if I had to guess, I would say Facebook doesn't attempt to make you use your real name to make the community better in the first place. That's almost certainly just its pretext for everyone who's willing to fall for it. Most likely, it does that to make sure it can identify you globally and uniquely for commercial/advertising purposes. Think about how much more valuable your online identity is if you go sol…

I doubt this, since Facebook doesn't seem to care much about fantasy names. They get most interest data about you from within FB (what pages and posts you like etc.) and from pages across the internet you visit through like buttons embedded there (even without clicking them). So there's a lot of relevant meta data directly linked to your account and no need for them to know your real name.

There was a good article on pro publica [0] (who I trust very much) about facebook's use of offline data source, and that presumably needs to be linked by real name

[0] https://www.propublica.org/article/facebook-doesnt-tell-user...

Post reply on HN