5 ms·

I kind of wish Google would have let you pick which display name to use on a per-circle basis. Then I could use a pseudonym with strangers, a nickname with frie

by eco 12y ago

I kind of wish Google would have let you pick which display name to use on a per-circle basis. Then I could use a pseudonym with strangers, a nickname with friends, and my real name with family.

rhizome 12y ago
They would have to hire the best of the best in order to implement something like that.
dm2 12y ago
It's generally best to leave features out, then only add them when it's determined to be necessary. If they had that from the start and later decided to remove it, people would go insane.
AnthonyMouse 12y ago
I always feel like these services are designed wrong. You want to be able to have multiple identities for different people, but having one organization that can associate them all with one another defeats a lot of the purpose of that. Especially if you're using it for anything that could get you into real trouble if e.g. someone were to break into that service and obtain or publicly disclose all the associations, like democracy activists in oppressive countries. You can always create completely separate accounts and then use them over Tor one at a time blah blah blah, but that's a huge usability failure. What you really want is a UI that allows you to sign in to multiple accounts without the server knowing they're all the same person (which means native software, probably with something like Tor automatically using separate circuits for each account), and then allows you to seamlessly receive messages for any of them and clearly delineates which account you're sending from when you post something.
- aiiane 12y ago
  Chrome Profiles is almost that, except without the built-in Tor.
- rm445 12y ago
  For most of us, most of the time, having the central site aware of all our pseudonyms wouldn't be a problem. Even if they divulged your identity upon lawful (court order) request. Even if they consistently targeted advertising at you, through some kind of layer that let advertisers aim at demographics without revealing ID. Most of the time, it would be enough to have some sort of unified Google login (in a Google iframe or whatever), offered as a service to different sites on the Web, and different pseudonyms available that __don't reveal your 'true' ID or other pseudonyms to the site owner__. I'm a little surprised that Google haven't offered some kind of 'Google Identity' service to the web at large based on this sort of idea. It wouldn't be good enough for activists in oppressive regimes, but it would offer a convenience to general people who like to keep separate identities on different sites.
  - JadeNB 12y ago
    > I'm a little surprised that Google haven't offered some kind of 'Google Identity' service to the web at large based on this sort of idea. The problem, I think, is that, given the current "don't be evil, just creepily self-serving!" attitude that seems to guide Google, no one would trust them. Even if one could trust them to keep one's identity private at launch, I am sure that anything like this would come loaded with the kind of "T&C may change without notice at any time" codicil that would allow them to permit themselves to disclose your identity later.
    - aiiane 12y ago
      The popularity of "Sign In with Facebook" seems to belie that.
      - JadeNB 12y ago
        I think that I disagree (that this is a counterexample); it shows that people want a 'one-stop' identity solution, but not that they trust Facebook to keep their identity private.
        aiiane 12y ago
aiiane 12y ago
This becomes exceedingly complex (and unintuitive enough that it's likely to cause more problems than it solves) which you consider overlapping circle membership.
- drzaiusapelord 12y ago
  Agreed, and heaven forbid you screw up making a change. Now everyone on your Fetish circles list sees your real name accidentally or your family and coworkers see you as BondageBoy69.
- ejain 12y ago
  It would be easy to have your "cover" blown, e.g. by a friend (who sees your real name) innocently mentioning your real name in the reply to one of your posts that's visible to a larger circle...
modeless 12y ago
Much better would be if I could pick names to display for other people. That way when my friend chooses a silly nonsense pseudonym I can replace it with the name I want to see.
- hobs 12y ago
  This is a feature steam added that I really liked. 1. You have a canonical URL that identifies the user. 2. The user can have any name they want, and the name will only change if you are in a chat room, adding a (2) if they are a duplicate name. 3. Finally, you can add tags and a nickname (separately) so you can always see whatever name YOU assign to the person and the person in question can represent themselves anyway they want. Steam is one of the few social networks I participate in because I truly believe it adds some value to the basic digital distribution model. Say what you will about the ability to resell games or DRM or what have you, it is a compelling product.
notatoad 12y ago
that is almost exactly how Google+ has worked for some time now. Your actual identity (real name required) was your main profile, and you can set up as many pages as you like with whatever pseudonyms you want. A page functions as a Google+ identity that can follow other people or pages and can be added to other peoples' or pages' circles, so each pseudonym has a totally distinct set of circles. It's actually a pretty clever system, but the UI and language makes it somewhat unclear what do do with it all.
- pawelk 12y ago
  Yeah, it's a UX problem. The feature is right there, but had they renamed "Pages" to "Identities" it would possibly get some traction.
- e12e 12y ago
  > the UI and language makes it somewhat unclear what do do with it all. That's quite an understatement. The other aspect, is the lack of transparency Google has when making policy and product changes. Like suddenly trying to change app reviews and youtube comments from a pseudonymous to a real-name activity. Without any confidence in their service and policy stewardship, it's hard to trust them not to change this stuff randomly too.

by eco 12y ago

I kind of wish Google would have let you pick which display name to use on a per-circle basis. Then I could use a pseudonym with strangers, a nickname with friends, and my real name with family.

rhizome 12y ago

They would have to hire the best of the best in order to implement something like that.

dm2 12y ago

It's generally best to leave features out, then only add them when it's determined to be necessary. If they had that from the start and later decided to remove it, people would go insane.

AnthonyMouse 12y ago

I always feel like these services are designed wrong. You want to be able to have multiple identities for different people, but having one organization that can associate them all with one another defeats a lot of the purpose of that. Especially if you're using it for anything that could get you into real trouble if e.g. someone were to break into that service and obtain or publicly disclose all the associations, like democracy activists in oppressive countries. You can always create completely separate accounts and then use them over Tor one at a time blah blah blah, but that's a huge usability failure. What you really want is a UI that allows you to sign in to multiple accounts without the server knowing they're all the same person (which means native software, probably with something like Tor automatically using separate circuits for each account), and then allows you to seamlessly receive messages for any of them and clearly delineates which account you're sending from when you post something.

aiiane 12y ago
Chrome Profiles is almost that, except without the built-in Tor.
rm445 12y ago
For most of us, most of the time, having the central site aware of all our pseudonyms wouldn't be a problem. Even if they divulged your identity upon lawful (court order) request. Even if they consistently targeted advertising at you, through some kind of layer that let advertisers aim at demographics without revealing ID. Most of the time, it would be enough to have some sort of unified Google login (in a Google iframe or whatever), offered as a service to different sites on the Web, and different pseudonyms available that __don't reveal your 'true' ID or other pseudonyms to the site owner__. I'm a little surprised that Google haven't offered some kind of 'Google Identity' service to the web at large based on this sort of idea. It wouldn't be good enough for activists in oppressive regimes, but it would offer a convenience to general people who like to keep separate identities on different sites.
- JadeNB 12y ago
  > I'm a little surprised that Google haven't offered some kind of 'Google Identity' service to the web at large based on this sort of idea. The problem, I think, is that, given the current "don't be evil, just creepily self-serving!" attitude that seems to guide Google, no one would trust them. Even if one could trust them to keep one's identity private at launch, I am sure that anything like this would come loaded with the kind of "T&C may change without notice at any time" codicil that would allow them to permit themselves to disclose your identity later.
  - aiiane 12y ago
    The popularity of "Sign In with Facebook" seems to belie that.
    - JadeNB 12y ago
      I think that I disagree (that this is a counterexample); it shows that people want a 'one-stop' identity solution, but not that they trust Facebook to keep their identity private.
      - aiiane 12y ago

aiiane 12y ago

This becomes exceedingly complex (and unintuitive enough that it's likely to cause more problems than it solves) which you consider overlapping circle membership.

drzaiusapelord 12y ago
Agreed, and heaven forbid you screw up making a change. Now everyone on your Fetish circles list sees your real name accidentally or your family and coworkers see you as BondageBoy69.
ejain 12y ago
It would be easy to have your "cover" blown, e.g. by a friend (who sees your real name) innocently mentioning your real name in the reply to one of your posts that's visible to a larger circle...

modeless 12y ago

Much better would be if I could pick names to display for other people. That way when my friend chooses a silly nonsense pseudonym I can replace it with the name I want to see.

hobs 12y ago
This is a feature steam added that I really liked. 1. You have a canonical URL that identifies the user. 2. The user can have any name they want, and the name will only change if you are in a chat room, adding a (2) if they are a duplicate name. 3. Finally, you can add tags and a nickname (separately) so you can always see whatever name YOU assign to the person and the person in question can represent themselves anyway they want. Steam is one of the few social networks I participate in because I truly believe it adds some value to the basic digital distribution model. Say what you will about the ability to resell games or DRM or what have you, it is a compelling product.

notatoad 12y ago

that is almost exactly how Google+ has worked for some time now. Your actual identity (real name required) was your main profile, and you can set up as many pages as you like with whatever pseudonyms you want. A page functions as a Google+ identity that can follow other people or pages and can be added to other peoples' or pages' circles, so each pseudonym has a totally distinct set of circles. It's actually a pretty clever system, but the UI and language makes it somewhat unclear what do do with it all.

pawelk 12y ago
Yeah, it's a UX problem. The feature is right there, but had they renamed "Pages" to "Identities" it would possibly get some traction.
e12e 12y ago
> the UI and language makes it somewhat unclear what do do with it all. That's quite an understatement. The other aspect, is the lack of transparency Google has when making policy and product changes. Like suddenly trying to change app reviews and youtube comments from a pseudonymous to a real-name activity. Without any confidence in their service and policy stewardship, it's hard to trust them not to change this stuff randomly too.