• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Facebook: "Internet Anonymity has to go away"

Status
Not open for further replies.
If they want to want to run Facebook that way, then great. But there will always be a demand for pseudonymous and anonymous posting.
 
lightless_shado said:
They'd stay on facebook? having your real name out there doesn't stop you from being an asshole. Even if people aren't anonymous anymore, what are the chances that you'll run into someone you actually know in a place like GAF? if your friends are morons they'll also "like" offensive shit that you put on your wall.
Click to expand...
One of the posts on my roommate's facebook news feed on election night:

Goddamn that fucking ******
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm sure you can guess what goes in the blank :/

People will be bigots with their real name for sure
 
Salazar said:
Clearly a meeting of the greatest minds of our age.
Click to expand...
Shhh! When they focus their combined brainpower they can probably hear what you're thinking at this very moment.
 
Monocle said:
Shhh! When they focus their combined brainpower they can probably hear what you're thinking at this very moment.
Click to expand...

I dunno. I might have made room at the table for a moral philosopher.
 
Salazar said:
I dunno. I might have made room at the table for a moral philosopher.
Click to expand...
You and your pragmatism have no place in the modern world. Those people have their fingers on the pulse of our culture, duder.
 
ToxicAdam said:
randi-zuckerberg-1.jpg






http://www.zdnet.com/blog/facebook/facebook-8220anonymity-on-the-internet-has-to-go-away-8221/2270

Would the internet be a better place if we all had to use our real identities? Would it cut down on 'bullying'?
Click to expand...

lol that looks like that Zuckerberg guy, with a wig.
 
She's only looking at it from one perspective and of course she would be. The so called "hiding" is protection from further (maybe harsher) bullying for some. If people were not anonymous in some places, they wouldn't be sincere. Sure, there's always bad apples, but that happens on facebook too, names and all. And how can you bully an anonymous person?
 
Eteric Rice said:
Leave the internet the fuck alone.
Click to expand...

.....it hasn’t been fun for years for a reason because all you money-grabbing corporations want is MORE! MORE-MORE, MORE: MORE!.

LEAVE IT ALONE! You are lucky it makes some money for you BASTARDS!
LEAVE THE INTERNET ALONE!…..
 
It's nice having an outlet where people can't judge you based on how you look. I'd like to keep anonymity on the web, and also add it to real life.
 
I use my real name on the internet all of the time and I'm without a doubt a bigger asshole online than I am in real life.

Also, taking away anonymity is fucking stupid and I wholeheartedly disagree. Go away, Facebook.
 
Funny, this showed up the other day:

http://my.nameis.me/

The "real names" argument is entirely flawed and basically a nice sounding security placebo.

First off, anyone can create a "real looking" name like John Smith and harass, stalk, and troll away.

Second, Facebook itself is a cesspool of wank and fratboy follies with guys proudly posting their drunk ass pictures under real names, as they say the most horrible things imaginable.

The Zuckerbergs are really on this sales pitch; it's just marketing for their product. I suppose so that advertisers and other monetizers of Facebook can feel their older models of being sure every user is a 1:1 "real life" person still add up on paper.

The irony is that in the argument that's happening over this on Google+, the people who want to preserve privacy and what name/identity you expose online have been discussing all sorts of systems, ideas, and compromises. But the people who just want to get rid of "fake people" have posted some nasty, condescending stuff, under their real names with photos attached... Some of them have been especially Facebook-ish and misogynist towards women posting in favor of protecting their identities.

Besides the fact that anonymous is not pseudononymous or nom de plume. Plenty of people have all sorts of paper trail, consistency, and social capital invested in names they use on and offline that don't match a birth certificate.
 
Kaijima said:
Funny, this showed up the other day:

http://my.nameis.me/

The "real names" argument is entirely flawed and basically a nice sounding security placebo.

First off, anyone can create a "real looking" name like John Smith and harass, stalk, and troll away.

Second, Facebook itself is a cesspool of wank and fratboy follies with guys proudly posting their drunk ass pictures under real names, as they say the most horrible things imaginable.

The Zuckerbergs are really on this sales pitch; it's just marketing for their product. I suppose so that advertisers and other monetizers of Facebook can feel their older models of being sure every user is a 1:1 "real life" person still add up on paper.

The irony is that in the argument that's happening over this on Google+, the people who want to preserve privacy and what name/identity you expose online have been discussing all sorts of systems, ideas, and compromises. But the people who just want to get rid of "fake people" have posted some nasty, condescending stuff, under their real names with photos attached... Some of them have been especially Facebook-ish and misogynist towards women posting in favor of protecting their identities.

Besides the fact that anonymous is not pseudononymous or nom de plume. Plenty of people have all sorts of paper trail, consistency, and social capital invested in names they use on and offline that don't match a birth certificate.
Click to expand...


Damn, that is spot on.
 
Yo, Kaijima set that shit up nice. Really Zuckerburg, really!?

Leave me the fuck out of your shit man. I left Facebook alone, you're the CEO of a social netherworld for the depraved and dysfunctional, you're a fucking mill/billionaire, what the fuck do you want?

Seriously, you gonna run for president? Ask me not to wear silk boxers anymore because that holds down the conformity of wool? Fuck that. Yeah, as if I want him or his like-face sister telling me what to do.
 
Kaijima said:
Funny, this showed up the other day:

http://my.nameis.me/

The "real names" argument is entirely flawed and basically a nice sounding security placebo.

First off, anyone can create a "real looking" name like John Smith and harass, stalk, and troll away.

Second, Facebook itself is a cesspool of wank and fratboy follies with guys proudly posting their drunk ass pictures under real names, as they say the most horrible things imaginable.

The Zuckerbergs are really on this sales pitch; it's just marketing for their product. I suppose so that advertisers and other monetizers of Facebook can feel their older models of being sure every user is a 1:1 "real life" person still add up on paper.

The irony is that in the argument that's happening over this on Google+, the people who want to preserve privacy and what name/identity you expose online have been discussing all sorts of systems, ideas, and compromises. But the people who just want to get rid of "fake people" have posted some nasty, condescending stuff, under their real names with photos attached... Some of them have been especially Facebook-ish and misogynist towards women posting in favor of protecting their identities.

Besides the fact that anonymous is not pseudononymous or nom de plume. Plenty of people have all sorts of paper trail, consistency, and social capital invested in names they use on and offline that don't match a birth certificate.
Click to expand...
Bingo.
 
It's shit like this that makes me fear Facebook's continued and monopolizing growth. These guys are smart, hiring a lot of talent, and building great products, but the man at the top has these fucked up values about the internet. It really freaks me out.
 
perfectnight said:
wow

It's times like these that I am thankful for this bubble that is my life. God damn humanity is disgusting.
Click to expand...
You do realize that "humanity" encompasses every human, not just the nutjobs.
 
Copernicus said:
I've never seen collective GAF miss the point much.
Click to expand...
Her point is total shill bullshit. Most kids are cyberbullied by people they already know in real life. anonymity changes nothing, oh, except it doesn't help spread Facebook connect. Huge coincidence that is, I'm sure.
 
ElectricBlue187 said:
Her point is total shill bullshit. Most kids are cyberbullied by people they already know in real life. anonymity changes nothing, oh, except it doesn't help spread Facebook connect. Huge coincidence that is, I'm sure.
Click to expand...
Indeed. A lack of anonymity would make it much harder for kids to escape being bullied.
 
spiderman123 said:
Not belittling your opinion, but what is the point?!
Click to expand...

What is more likely to lead to juvenile or defamatory communication, anonymity or non-anonymity? I think most people would say anonymity. If that's true, her point seems quite clear.

Her greater point probably has more to do with regulation, or the internet's lack thereof.
 
piddledy said:
What is more likely to lead to juvenile or defamatory communication, anonymity or non-anonymity? I think most people would say anonymity. If that's true, her point seems quite clear.
Click to expand...
I disagree entirely. If we're talking about the type of abuse that goes way beyond your typical WoW forum wankery and actually ruins peoples' lives. It requires the bullied to be known and not anonymous, and many people might just shrug and not believe it unless the person posting it isn't anonymous either.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Grady Demond Wilson Has Passed Away
3
290
ReBurn replied
Greece to ban anonymity on social media, likely starting in 2027
News  2
55
343
Bojji replied
Catherine O’Hara has passed away at 71 years of age
2
96
1K
TerribleAtThisGame replied
Giorgio Armani has passed away
26
924
ChorizoPicozo replied
Diane Keaton has passed away at 79
19
628
Dr Bass replied
Top Bottom