9 ms·

What is the rationale of such demand ? This reminds me Schneir's objection to biometric identification. What do we do if it's compromized ? There is no way we

by chmike 14y ago

What is the rationale of such demand ? This reminds me Schneir's objection to biometric identification. What do we do if it's compromized ? There is no way we could change it. One should obviously be able to publish a video that we made without disclosing our identity. Supose I film my cat in my living room showing also the nice HiFi installation behind it. If it is published under my name, it would be like publishing my address on the HiFi. If as a teenager I film and publish a party where I wouldn't be at my advantage, I don't want that my name is associate to it forever. I must be able to reset my Internet image and reputation. Especially for young people. Google is already very reluctant to remove references on demand. At least this now gives something competitors can differentiate with. We need a place where we can create a virtual identity we can throw away. An identity that we can use as signature for publishing comments, articles and videos.

jmillikin 14y ago
(disclaimer: I work for Google, and dislike the Google+ names policy) In this case, it's not a demand; the user has already entered a Google+ name, and Google is offering to show that name on the user's YouTube account. > Supose I film my cat in my living room showing also the nice > HiFi installation behind it. If it is published under my > name, it would be like publishing my address on the HiFi. That's ridiculous. Unless you're also posting your address in the video description, it's practically impossible for a viewer to match a name (even your legal name) to your physical location. The concern here is about privacy, not physical security. Thinking up unrealistic danger scenarios is not productive. > If as a teenager I film and publish a party where I wouldn't > be at my advantage, I don't want that my name is associate > to it forever. > > I must be able to reset my Internet image and reputation. > Especially for young people. Google is already very > reluctant to remove references on demand. Currently, the idea of interacting with the web through multiple disposable identities is constrained to nerds. I believe that as time goes on, and the privacy implications of a single identity become widely apparent, the majority of users (especially younger users) will learn to use multiple identities. You ask for the ability to "reset" an identity, but this is impossible. You can't un-break an egg. Everything posted to the internet is public and potentially eternal. In twenty years, the idea of posting something risqué under one's legal name will be considered as foolish as stapling bank statements and tax returns to a telephone pole. > We need a place where we can create a virtual identity we > can throw away. An identity that we can use as signature > for publishing comments, articles and videos. You mean, like a Google account? There's no restriction on the number of accounts a single person can create, and the censors won't blink twice as long as the name sounds caucasian (citation: http://infotrope.net/2011/08/04/google-plus-names-policy-explained/#govtid http://infotrope.net/2011/08/04/google-plus-names-policy-exp... ). Accounts at any major internet site, including Google, are inherently ephemeral and disposable.
- eliasmacpherson 14y ago
  The real name policy would tie in fabulously with google's now well established image search, who British Airways intend to use to spot celebrities boarding their flights. I'm sure over time that would progress to normal people. Not many people appreciate the permanent nature of internet publication, I wouldn't agree that it's ephemeral and disposable, as it's out of the user's hands.
- biot 14y ago
  > it's practically impossible for a viewer to match a name > (even your legal name) to your physical location. You could count on one hand the number of people in the world who share my first and last name. Of those active online, there is myself and one other. Historically, my address has been available online and until I move that will not change. Even if I move, I have no doubt my new address is only a few dollars away for anyone who wants to find it. Your premise is fine for single videos from someone named Mike Jones, but surely you're familiar with the concept of "bits of information" needed to uniquely identify someone online?
  - dkersten 14y ago
    Agreed. The book "how to be invisible" makes a good case for how easy it is to match a persons name to their address and why this is a bad thing.
  - dinkumthinkum 14y ago
    Even if your name was James Dickerson or something like that, given any other context, it becomes much easier to find someone. I mean, this is Internet 101. I can't believe this is coming from anyone that works at Google. Really??
- gue5t 14y ago
  Making multiple google accounts would be much more reasonable if they didn't demand a phone number (on every gmail login now), real name, etc. with every one.
- Swizec 14y ago
sneak 14y ago
> At least this now gives something competitors can differentiate with. I never thought of it this way. This makes me a lot less annoyed, now.
spot 14y ago
this is for commenting, not for posting.

by chmike 14y ago

jmillikin 14y ago

(disclaimer: I work for Google, and dislike the Google+ names policy) In this case, it's not a demand; the user has already entered a Google+ name, and Google is offering to show that name on the user's YouTube account. > Supose I film my cat in my living room showing also the nice > HiFi installation behind it. If it is published under my > name, it would be like publishing my address on the HiFi. That's ridiculous. Unless you're also posting your address in the video description, it's practically impossible for a viewer to match a name (even your legal name) to your physical location. The concern here is about privacy, not physical security. Thinking up unrealistic danger scenarios is not productive. > If as a teenager I film and publish a party where I wouldn't > be at my advantage, I don't want that my name is associate > to it forever. > > I must be able to reset my Internet image and reputation. > Especially for young people. Google is already very > reluctant to remove references on demand. Currently, the idea of interacting with the web through multiple disposable identities is constrained to nerds. I believe that as time goes on, and the privacy implications of a single identity become widely apparent, the majority of users (especially younger users) will learn to use multiple identities. You ask for the ability to "reset" an identity, but this is impossible. You can't un-break an egg. Everything posted to the internet is public and potentially eternal. In twenty years, the idea of posting something risqué under one's legal name will be considered as foolish as stapling bank statements and tax returns to a telephone pole. > We need a place where we can create a virtual identity we > can throw away. An identity that we can use as signature > for publishing comments, articles and videos. You mean, like a Google account? There's no restriction on the number of accounts a single person can create, and the censors won't blink twice as long as the name sounds caucasian (citation: http://infotrope.net/2011/08/04/google-plus-names-policy-explained/#govtid http://infotrope.net/2011/08/04/google-plus-names-policy-exp... ). Accounts at any major internet site, including Google, are inherently ephemeral and disposable.

eliasmacpherson 14y ago
The real name policy would tie in fabulously with google's now well established image search, who British Airways intend to use to spot celebrities boarding their flights. I'm sure over time that would progress to normal people. Not many people appreciate the permanent nature of internet publication, I wouldn't agree that it's ephemeral and disposable, as it's out of the user's hands.
biot 14y ago
> it's practically impossible for a viewer to match a name > (even your legal name) to your physical location. You could count on one hand the number of people in the world who share my first and last name. Of those active online, there is myself and one other. Historically, my address has been available online and until I move that will not change. Even if I move, I have no doubt my new address is only a few dollars away for anyone who wants to find it. Your premise is fine for single videos from someone named Mike Jones, but surely you're familiar with the concept of "bits of information" needed to uniquely identify someone online?
- dkersten 14y ago
  Agreed. The book "how to be invisible" makes a good case for how easy it is to match a persons name to their address and why this is a bad thing.
- dinkumthinkum 14y ago
  Even if your name was James Dickerson or something like that, given any other context, it becomes much easier to find someone. I mean, this is Internet 101. I can't believe this is coming from anyone that works at Google. Really??
gue5t 14y ago
Making multiple google accounts would be much more reasonable if they didn't demand a phone number (on every gmail login now), real name, etc. with every one.
Swizec 14y ago

sneak 14y ago

> At least this now gives something competitors can differentiate with. I never thought of it this way. This makes me a lot less annoyed, now.

spot 14y ago

this is for commenting, not for posting.