9 ms·
Facebook has kinda chosen a path that sets them apart from, and often in active opposition to, the Internet RU Sirius envisioned. Facebook is antithetical to wh
by SwellJoe 11y ago
Facebook has kinda chosen a path that sets them apart from, and often in active opposition to, the Internet RU Sirius envisioned. Facebook is antithetical to what a lot of folks wanted to see the Internet become, so it shouldn't be surprising that the early visionaries of the Internet find themselves being excluded from participation in facebook on their own terms. Participation in facebook is on facebook's terms, always, and it's not surprising when they're dicks who wield that power arbitrarily.
I've had several transgender friends excluded from participation in facebook based on this name policy, and I've known a wide variety of other people who use odd names for a wide variety of reasons (some silly, some deadly serious like trying to hide from an abusive ex) who've also been excluded from participation. Facebook makes pleasant noises about the policy and its implementation, but the reality is they're not doing this for us, for the good of the world, or for the good of the open Internet.
I'm not trying to go all RMS about facebook; I have a facebook account, and I use it daily. But, facebook isn't the Internet I envisioned, either. It is just another petty little walled garden where we're all peasants.
- oldmanjay 11y agoFacebook isn't the Internet anyone envisioned, mainly because it isn't the Internet. It's possible to block them completely and still participate meaningfully.
- SwellJoe 11y agoI agree with you, generally speaking. That said, facebook wields a tremendous amount of power, and they often wield that power in ways I am uncomfortable with. I think it's valid to express that discomfort, especially in places where the people who may be building the "next facebook" (whatever that looks like) happen to be hanging out. It's a complicated topic, but when you break it down there are billions/trillions of dollars on one side of the equation, and the values of human dignity and privacy and the open web on the other, with very little profit to be made from respecting those values. I think it's OK to call it out when a company that employs a lot of good people is doing something that is at odds with good values. Maybe they'll think about it, and take the conversation up the chain. Or, maybe they'll laugh at the grumpy old UNIX beard on the Internet for not "getting it". I dunno.
- rodgerd 11y ago> It's possible to block them completely and still participate meaningfully. It's not that long ago that conventional wisdom on HN was you should delegate auth to Facebook and the hell with anyone who didn't want to use it to sign up to your startup.
- nikatwork 11y agoI've noticed a number of yung'uns ditching FB completely for Instagram. Delegating auth to FB alone is an insanely self-defeating move.
- onewaystreet 11y agoFB owns Instagram.
- eecks 11y agoAccounts are not linked though.
- ambicapter 11y agoYeah, sure.
- DataWorker 11y agoIt didn't defeat Tinder or any number of other major apps.
- coldtea 11y agoAnd yet your friends can still be there, talk about you, tag you in photographs etc -- not to some niche site, but to a potential audience of 1 billion people.
- voltagex_ 11y agoThe wider internet? Yes. My social group? I'd be a pariah. I use Facebook as an event calendar these days. I'm hopeful for upcoming.org.
- habith 11y agoExcuse the poor pun but.. are you serious? Facebook excluded several of your friends based on their terrible name policy. They run their walled garden however they want to. Your participation in it makes you (in your own words) a "peasant". Yet, you're not trying to go all RMS about it and you continue to use it daily to give them more money/power? Do you see anything wrong with this picture? Say what you want about RMS, but at least he's principled and does/says what he thinks instead of conforming to social norms.
- SwellJoe 11y agoI am human, and my flaws are many.
- scrollaway 11y agoIt's not reasonable to expect people to "just not use facebook". Not that it's not possible - it is (and I don't use it), but it doesn't mean facebook can just do whatever. Reposting an old comment of mine: For a lot of people, Facebook is "The Web". That's all or almost all they use. The less tech-literate ones don't even know "the web", they connect to Facebook. They get their news from Facebook. They communicate on Facebook. Everything they do online, they do on Facebook. Like someone mentioned above, when you get big enough you start to have responsibilities. When your actions affect and your voice is heard by billions of people, you're no longer "some random privately-owned website"... you're a supergiant with the ability to affect the entire world.
- 11y ago
- rodgerd 11y ago> and I've known a wide variety of other people who use odd names for a wide variety of reasons Or people who use perfectly normal Native American names...
- yuhong 11y agoI dislike real name policies, but my vision is that I do want people to be able to use their real names as often as possible.
- lucaspiller 11y ago> excluded from participation in facebook based on this name policy A large bunch of my friends (30+ maybe) don't have their real names on Facebook. Some sound like they could be real, but most are pretty obvious they aren't. None of them are US based, so maybe they are only focussing on the real name policy there?