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

Why I’m sitting at home crying on a Saturday afternoon

violetblue.tumblr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 99 posts

Re: Why I’m sitting at home crying on a Saturday afternoon

#51

Post by scrollaway »

MichaelGG wrote: post #34
jonesb6 wrote: post #25

"This is reality. This is not theory. This is not assertions on Hacker News about how you must have something to hide if you want to keep something private. This is not about a man in a position of power and influence, who has industry privilege and respect for his wealth and status, at Google or Facebook saying that anonymity, or multiple online identities, demotes a 'lack of credibility’. We don’t care of you belie…

That link is strange. Person is using Facebook. They then voluntarily send Facebook their birth certificate and are bewildered and upset that Facebook used that info and corrected (read: edited) their profile? I really dislike Facebook but come on, you signed up for this. If you don't like Facebook's policies (and you shouldn't), then don't use it. What gives anyone the right to use someone else's service, then dicta…

Ok, prefacing this: I don't use facebook, I dislike the website, I dislike the social implications of the website and I dislike the internal policies of the company in shit like asking people for ID.

BUT, quick reality check for a moment: for some people, "using facebook" is not a choice. I mean, it is ultimately a choice, just like wearing clean clothes is a choice or paying your rent is a choice. For some people, Facebook is the only channel of communication with some people they don't want to be separated from. For some, it's how they manage their social life, or there is some form of social pressure to use it and they're not in a position to say no easily.

And I'm sure if I don't add this little disclaimer, some pompous jerk will come correct me, tell me everything about how they were pressured to use Facebook but chose not to: Yes, you can do it, everybody can do it, but you're not in a position to tell other people how to live their lives when you are the person who knows the least about their lives. And funny that, THIS is the exact same problem GP quoted.

Facebook has a lot of power and that power is not being used responsibly. Defending that is appalling.

PS: This is not directed specifically to your post as I'm seeing this attitude in the entire thread. There's bubbles to pop here: Not everybody can just stop using facebook.

Re: Why I’m sitting at home crying on a Saturday afternoon

#52

Post by Camillo »

Why doesn't Facebook use the social graph to verify identity? Have the user contact their Facebook friends and let those friends vouch for them. Weighing friends by length of friendship, frequency of interaction, etc. so that you cannot verify your account using sockpuppets.

Re: Why I’m sitting at home crying on a Saturday afternoon

#53

Post by hugh4 »

wanorris wrote: post #49
MichaelGG wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That link is strange. Person is using Facebook. They then voluntarily send Facebook their birth certificate and are bewildered and upset that Facebook used that info and corrected (read: edited) their profile? I really dislike Facebook but come on, you signed up for this. If you don't like Facebook's policies (and you shouldn't), then don't use it. What gives anyone the right to use someone else's service, then dicta…

The birth certificate was not the only form of ID that person sent. Facebook outed the past name of a transgender person -- that's never ok, and it's a problem taken very seriously in the transgender community. And yes, if you want, you could say that, well, trans people just shouldn't use Facebook, but given the position Facebook occupies in our society in practice, that's quite a statement. Just as important, in ca…

> Facebook outed the past name of a transgender person -- that's never ok, and it's a problem taken very seriously in the transgender community.

Why is that not okay?

I mean, if people want to change their names for whatever reason then that's fine, but that doesn't mean that everybody is obliged to pretend that your old name never existed.

If I were Hitler, living under an assumed name in Argentina, and somebody outed me as actually being Hitler, would that be okay? (Pick a non-Hitler but still criminal example if you prefer.)

Re: Why I’m sitting at home crying on a Saturday afternoon

#54

Post by parennoob »

asuffield wrote: post #46
baby wrote: post #40

> Facebook’s account security is apparently based on its users knowing what every one of of its friends looks like (do you?) … Well yeah. You're supposed to be able to recognise your friends in that test if it's really your account. I don't see what is the problem? I've passed these tests several time, you are presented with 6 different pictures for each friend (so it's hard to fail) and you can re-pass the test seve…

It works well for the way a lot of people use facebook, and very poorly for the way some people use facebook. There's a baked in assumption that you only "friend" people who you can identify from their photos. (This one isn't a fake account, it's a "professional" account, so she's "friends" with a lot of people that she only emails for work purposes and has never met) For a hilarious example of how this can fail, a g…

> This one isn't a fake account, it's a "professional" account, so she's "friends" with a lot of people that she only emails for work purposes and has never met

In fairness, I don't think this is a model that Facebook can easily cater to, given that the express purpose of their site is to map relationships between groups of people what know each other in real life, and to use that information to show them ads. Not saying that I approve of that, but it'll be pretty hard for them to differentiate between a fake account trying to scam people, and this person who can't identify her Facebook friends.

LinkedIn, or better still, actual email would be far more appropriate for such work related purposes and also not fall into the "real name" crap policy.

Re: Why I’m sitting at home crying on a Saturday afternoon

#55

Post by scrollaway »

ikeboy wrote: post #21

She's hardly the model of anti censorship: In July 2008, Blue sought restraining orders against online critics David Burch (aka Ben Burch) and Nina Alter to prohibit them from e-mailing her, editing her Wikipedia page, or writing unkindly about her online. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violet_Blue

That's pretty shitty but how does it relate?

Re: Why I’m sitting at home crying on a Saturday afternoon

#56

Post by jonesb6 »

Camillo wrote: post #52

Why doesn't Facebook use the social graph to verify identity? Have the user contact their Facebook friends and let those friends vouch for them. Weighing friends by length of friendship, frequency of interaction, etc. so that you cannot verify your account using sockpuppets.

What would be the implications of such a system when accounts are compromised (as they so frequently are)?

Re: Why I’m sitting at home crying on a Saturday afternoon

#57

Post by jordanthoms »

panic wrote: post #5
powera wrote: post #3

I'm sorry she had a bad experience (and if the situation was triggered by something she posted that's horrible), but from a security point of view, if the automatic security questions can't be answered and you can't provide an "official government ID", the only way that you should be able to get access back to your account is "from a favor from someone on the inside that knows that you are you". If there's any way th…

She's not saying that Facebook shouldn't have security procedures. She's saying that Facebook's security procedures aren't designed properly and that they don't work for her. Plenty of identity providers (she cites Apple's policies in particular) have more reasonable ways of recovering your account.

Apple's had major problems with account hijacks, including accounts of celebrities. There's no easy answers here.

Re: Why I’m sitting at home crying on a Saturday afternoon

#58

Post by wanorris »

marincounty wrote: post #31

Well, in this case, Facebook indirectly gave Violet Blue a lot of new media exposure? I had no clue to her existence until now. I don't like Facebook, but in this case, I'm glad FB didn't cave in and give Violet Blue her account back--just because 'She has a friend at FB'. I don't like inside special favors.

1. Violet Blue has been a reasonably widely published journalist for many years now. Her bylines include CNet and the SF Chronicle, and she's written or edited a couple of dozen books. She writes both about sexuality and technology, and sometimes about the ways in which they overlap.

2. Your reading comprehension has failed you. Several different people at Facebook offered to do her inside special favors and she chose to decline that because she doesn't like that kind of thing either.

Re: Why I’m sitting at home crying on a Saturday afternoon

#59

Post by Camillo »

jonesb6 wrote: post #56
Camillo wrote: post #52

Why doesn't Facebook use the social graph to verify identity? Have the user contact their Facebook friends and let those friends vouch for them. Weighing friends by length of friendship, frequency of interaction, etc. so that you cannot verify your account using sockpuppets.

What would be the implications of such a system when accounts are compromised (as they so frequently are)?

You mean all of your friends' accounts and yours being compromised at the same time?

Re: Why I’m sitting at home crying on a Saturday afternoon

#60

Post by asuffield »

baby wrote: post #44
danellis wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> FB is a private company Facebook is a public company. I'm surprised anyone reading HN would have missed their rather high profile IPO.

public means government owned

Sorry, this is incorrect. There are several very similar sounding terms here, which do not mean the same thing.

A "public company" or "publicly traded company" is a company traded on the stock exchange.

A "state company", or "publicly owned company", or "public sector company" is a company owned by a government and not traded at all.

The terms here are a regrettable accident of history, which often confuses people.

Post reply on HN