5 ms·
Easy to say if you're not in a vulnerable position where losing anonymity matters, a lot.
by michh 13y ago
Easy to say if you're not in a vulnerable position where losing anonymity matters, a lot.
- jfoster 13y agoIf you are in that position, why not just have your entire Google account under a fake name?
- vdaniuk 13y agoOr make a G+ page that allows pseudonymous comments for YT videos. Simple as that.
- graeme 13y agoI'm a Hacker News user with 2236 karma, and I can't figure out the Google+ Pages system. Where does that leave the average user? It seems very easy to make a permanent change you don't intend when you're using Google+.
- vdaniuk 13y agoHow much time did you spend figuring Google+ pages? It is straightforward and is nearly the same experience as creating a page on facebook. You literally need less than 10 minutes to create a Google+ page http://www.google.com/+/business/brands/get-started.html http://www.google.com/+/business/brands/get-started.html
- tripa 13y agoIt used to take an order of magnitude less time than that to create a pseudonymous YouTube account.
- vdaniuk 13y agoThat is a good thing when creation of an anonymous account takes some time and/or proof-of-work. That limits spam while providing an opportunity for legit uses of anonymous accounts.
- graeme 13y agoI did successfully create a page. The problem was that it's still not clear to me how to keep identities separate. I previously worked for a startup, and had a google apps account. It was impossible to convince Google that the account shouldn't have a Google+ profile, or that it should be the same profile as my personal profile. And to date I'm still not sure if my page is a youtube account page, a page on my personal account page, or both. I'm sure there are answers to these questions. I'd say most of my research time was spent making sure that the page wouldn't do something I didn't want it to do, because Google+ burned me repeatedly by unintended behavior. Google also tends to make things permanent, such as the capitalization of my Youtube account channel. So it's not as simple as "follow the instructions on the page". If you care about identity, you have to follow the instructions on the page AND make sure the instructions won't lead to something permanently wrong.
- yabatopia 13y agoI could be wrong, but I think Greame is talking about the concept of Pages to create an pseudonym for individuals, not for (small) companies. Apparently you can create a pseudonym on Google+ with Pages, but Pages are mainly marketed towards brands and companies [1], not individuals. It's confusing even for Google employees [2], let alone users. A support page on YouTube tries to explain the difference between Google+ Profiles, Google+ Pages and Google Accounts [3]. But the fact that a Page can be managed by up to 50 different people suggests, at least to me, that the use of Pages to create and manage your pseudonym is more incidental than intentional. [1] https://support.google.com/plus/answer/1710600 https://support.google.com/plus/answer/1710600 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6747875 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6747875 [3] https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2848323?hl=en https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2848323?hl=en
- dredmorbius 13y agoI already had two separate identities. I repeatedly told Google I wanted them kept separate. Google merged them. There's no clear way for me to undo the damage. Screenshots I've posted for my YouTube configuration preferences don't show what other's equivalent shots do. I'm, frankly, not interested in jumping through hoops to get what Google might offer by way of account segregation now, and change its mind on in another 3, or 6, or 24, or 72 months. Clearly I cannot trust it to respect my specifically indicated wishes, and clearly, the company doesn't respect its users (in many ways, I've detailed these elsewhere including on HN). Oh, and both identities are pseudonymous. And I studiously avoided circling anyone I knew IRL to avoid outing myself. Never posted photos I'd actually taken, carefully edited screenshots to avoid showing revealing information (though I likely left in a few clues that would help narrow down my identity). Don't mention where I live, where I work, or how I spend my time. Simply because my preference is to be able to speak freely and discuss things, though really, the "why" shouldn't matter. I simply prefer it this way. https://plus.google.com/u/0/104092656004159577193/posts/VZSLjkdqksG https://plus.google.com/u/0/104092656004159577193/posts/VZSL...
- kevingadd 13y agoFake names get your account suspended. (Real names get accounts suspended too, if they look fake enough)
- vdaniuk 13y agoJust create an account with "John or Jane Smith" or any other believable combination of common names.
- varjag 13y agoThat doesn't work long term. Sooner or later, your social and activity graphs overlap enough to warrant flagging.
- vdaniuk 13y agoCare to elaborate? Preferably with proofs that if activity and social graphs of two accounts ovelap at some threshold level user accounts are flagged.
- varjag 13y agoI don't work at Google, so you won't see any proofs out of me (nor of course you'd see any if I did work at Google). But sooner or later, the browsing habits out of the two active accounts are bound to converge pretty well. Remember you've been tracked not just when you post comments, but on every page out there that has a "+1" button. Then, there will be some close friends who'd be connected on both accounts. In addition both your real and fake account are very likely to be accessed from the same set of IPs or subnets, locations and time slices. This may sound complicated, but this sort of mining is just an extension of spam filtering techniques (to which at this point Google invested many millions), and requires zero human intervention. And since it can be done and there is an incentive for Google to do it, it will be done.
- vdaniuk 13y ago
- jessedhillon 13y agoYou think such people are sitting around posting their vital, dissenting, dangerous opinions on Youtube?
- anon1385 13y agoDo I think gay people post or comment on videos about the experience of being gay in a society that is often homophobic? Yes. Do I think feminists post or comment on videos about feminism or rape? Yes. Do I think transgender people post or comment on videos about being transgender? Yes. Is there a subset of the above people that wouldn't want their YouTube activity known to their family or employer? Yes.
- michh 13y agoNo, but I might have previously liked or commented on a vlog by another gay or transgender person which is suddenly publicly tied to my regular Google account. Or I might have expressed a political opinion which isn't going to get me persecuted but might alienate a manager at work or a relative. And yeah, there's ways of preventing this but they're pretty difficult to figure out (the Google+ page route) and it's fairly easy to make a mistake. Especially if they keep changing things.
- devonbarrett 13y agoIf anonymity matters you should not have been using Google as a way to remain anonymous prior to this.
- michh 13y agoThere's a lot of stuff I don't mind Google knowing about me, but I do mind being publicly connected to my real name.
- graeme 13y agoThis amounts to saying "You should not participate in society". Yes, everyone is free to avoid using Google/Facebook/Popular Service X/. Now, which group are you advising to avoid using Google accounts? Members of marginalized groups are often those who must keep their identities private. Your recommendation further marginalizes them.
- rustynails 13y agoI don't understand that argument. If I use Facebook, it's easy to see when I log on/off to profile my usage (and possibly employment / holiday trends). If many of the people I speak to are young or gay or work in finance, doesn't that imply something about me? I am not a fan of this Google policy (it leaves me very uncomfortable) and I support the protests. But, as far as I can see, I can opt out without being marginalized. That's the bit of your argument I cAnt understand. Your argument, to me, appears to be that Google shouldn't be allowed to link you and your opinions to your real name. I'd argue "why not?" I don't use Facebook, etc for this very reason - I don't want to be profiled with the depth that Facebook allows. Am I marginalized? Not that I'm aware.
- graeme 13y agoI didn't say everyone who opts out is marginalized. I said that people who are marginalized are more likely to want to be anonymous. Google and Facebook are infrastructure. We seem to be moving towards some version of "You can't be gay on google without telling THE WHOLE WORLD you're gay". Then your options are: 1. Tell the whole world you're gay 2. Don't be gay on google, pretend you're straight 3. Don't use Google services The way to not marginalize minority groups is to leave in the fourth option: 4. Be gay on google, but without being forced to reveal it to the whole world. Some people, for example, want to post on youtube in ways that reveal their sexual preferences without linking it to their real name. For instance, maybe they are commenting on videos related to gay rights, but their parents are homophobes and they haven't revealed their sexuality to them. A person in that situation has to choose one of options 1-3 above. Whereas I, as a white, straight, male, can post publicly about most things without fear of anyone knowing. That's how this policy effectively marginalizes already certain already marginal groups. Edit: To make things perfectly clear, I'm suggesting that access to Google services is about as important in our society as, say, banks.