3 ms·

Having gotten my start on the internet mid 90's it always amazes me the number of people that attached their offline identities to their online identies This w

by syshum 6y ago

Having gotten my start on the internet mid 90's it always amazes me the number of people that attached their offline identities to their online identies This was just something that was unheard of back then. It was an extension of "Stranger Danger" that you did not reveal who you were to the wide internet, sure some of your close friends may have known your online name but it was not openly broadcasted Fast forward to face book and their failed attempt to "Real names" under the assumption that it would make discourse less extreme we now know that was 100% wrong, and had the polar opposite effect I dont know if everyone needs to go to the extreme of protecting their ID from State Actors, though maybe we do. Everyone however should at minimum end the concept of "Real names" policy

Fiveplus 6y ago
The issue with emerging and easily accessible technology is that in 2020, especially for the younger folks venturing into their first jobs - at least some kind of social media presence is a pre-requisite. Our school's career center gave a presentation where this issue was raised. What if a student wants to not associate his/her political thoughts lest they create a hindrance for a future employer digging through the candidate's social media history. The solution offered was simple - never post anything remotely political on your 'real' profiles. But, we were asked to create them regardless and were told to be mildly active. A ghost profile seems a red flag, as such a non-existent one. Which to many people raises concerns about an individual. We were simply asked to bifurcate our online personas into two - one that was professional and one that was like you mentioned - anonymous.
- syshum 6y ago
  >>A ghost profile seems a red flag, as such a non-existent one I guess my future is going to be limited then, because I have never, and will never have a "real" social media presence. Ever. That is a hard, never going to happen, even if I have live under a bridge
  - NineStarPoint 6y ago
    I think the context was of soon to be college graduates trying to get their first job. Which somewhat makes sense given how little information employers have to go off for those hires to begin with. Once you have your first job I can’t imagine most employers caring too much unless you work in a field like marketing where public perception is part of the job. (And connections to others in the industry are generally a better way to get good jobs anyway if you can swing it)
  - Nasrudith 6y ago
    It seems to be something field dependent. Having a social media presence is an "occupational hazard" for marketing related fields compared to others where it is a don't care.
mkl 6y ago
> Having gotten my start on the internet mid 90's it always amazes me the number of people that attached their offline identities to their online identies > This was just something that was unheard of back then. This is not entirely true. I remember many people using their real names on Usenet, or on mailing lists.
- syshum 6y ago
  Were they real name, or did they just look real. Like I could post under the name JosephDotson, that could be a real name but it is not my real name
  - dredmorbius 6y ago
    Often first name (linus), initials (rms, esr, jwz), first + last initial (marca, billg, dang), initial(s) + last (dmarti, cdibona), first @ last (bruce@perens.org), etc.
dredmorbius 6y ago
Somewhat similar timespan. Real names, or a version of them, weren't unheard of, but were usually at least somewhat indirected. Of current HN users, I can think of two somewhat notable accounts using the same names now as in the 1990s. One is a nickname, the other first initial + last name. Neither is impenetrable. I became distinctly uncomfortable with Real Name use by the late noughts, and have used a set of pseudonyms (some more than others) since.

by syshum 6y ago

Fiveplus 6y ago

The issue with emerging and easily accessible technology is that in 2020, especially for the younger folks venturing into their first jobs - at least some kind of social media presence is a pre-requisite. Our school's career center gave a presentation where this issue was raised. What if a student wants to not associate his/her political thoughts lest they create a hindrance for a future employer digging through the candidate's social media history. The solution offered was simple - never post anything remotely political on your 'real' profiles. But, we were asked to create them regardless and were told to be mildly active. A ghost profile seems a red flag, as such a non-existent one. Which to many people raises concerns about an individual. We were simply asked to bifurcate our online personas into two - one that was professional and one that was like you mentioned - anonymous.

syshum 6y ago
>>A ghost profile seems a red flag, as such a non-existent one I guess my future is going to be limited then, because I have never, and will never have a "real" social media presence. Ever. That is a hard, never going to happen, even if I have live under a bridge
- NineStarPoint 6y ago
  I think the context was of soon to be college graduates trying to get their first job. Which somewhat makes sense given how little information employers have to go off for those hires to begin with. Once you have your first job I can’t imagine most employers caring too much unless you work in a field like marketing where public perception is part of the job. (And connections to others in the industry are generally a better way to get good jobs anyway if you can swing it)
- Nasrudith 6y ago
  It seems to be something field dependent. Having a social media presence is an "occupational hazard" for marketing related fields compared to others where it is a don't care.

mkl 6y ago

> Having gotten my start on the internet mid 90's it always amazes me the number of people that attached their offline identities to their online identies > This was just something that was unheard of back then. This is not entirely true. I remember many people using their real names on Usenet, or on mailing lists.

syshum 6y ago
Were they real name, or did they just look real. Like I could post under the name JosephDotson, that could be a real name but it is not my real name
- dredmorbius 6y ago
  Often first name (linus), initials (rms, esr, jwz), first + last initial (marca, billg, dang), initial(s) + last (dmarti, cdibona), first @ last (bruce@perens.org), etc.

dredmorbius 6y ago

Somewhat similar timespan. Real names, or a version of them, weren't unheard of, but were usually at least somewhat indirected. Of current HN users, I can think of two somewhat notable accounts using the same names now as in the 1990s. One is a nickname, the other first initial + last name. Neither is impenetrable. I became distinctly uncomfortable with Real Name use by the late noughts, and have used a set of pseudonyms (some more than others) since.