Global coalition to Facebook: “Authentic names” are dangerous for your users

Re:Global coalition to Facebook: “Authentic names” are dange... by morgante on Monday October 05, 2015 @05:41PM (#10335181)

> Once your platform begins to become ubiquitous (Facebook Messenger), it starts to have certain responsibilities, similiar to a utility but not quite that far.

I think this is a decent argument. Facebook is pretty close to being a digital utility at this point.

But, a logical corollary of that argument is that if Facebook is a utility it's also expected for everyone to have it. Hence, it's fully okay for services to require Facebook access to log in (just as it's okay for companies to basically expect their employees to have a telephone).

So, which would you prefer: ubiquitous Facebook, with certain regulations keeping it in check, or a Facebook that you can readily opt out of because you don't agree with its policies.

> A compromise would be to allow Facebook users to get verified (similar to Twitter's verification)

I'm not sure I fully understand your proposal, but it actually sounds a lot like my opinion. It's not that I think Facebook profiles should be required to use their official legal name, just that they should use the name they use offline. Is that what you meant by verification?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Global coalition to Facebook: “Authentic names” are dange... by ambicapter on Monday October 05, 2015 @08:09PM (#10335923)

> if Facebook is a utility it's also expected for everyone to have it.

How so? I am in no way required to live with running water and electricity in my house. Even things that are tangentially related, like my workplace requiring me to bathe and wash my clothes occasionally, don't require me to have the equipment to do so in my house.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Global coalition to Facebook: “Authentic names” are dange... by superuser2 on Monday October 05, 2015 @11:35PM (#10336617)

Try getting a building permit for a residential dwelling without outlets or a bathroom. That might work in unincorporated territory where there is no municipal law, but not in a suburban neighborhood in the US.

Many workplaces will require that you are reachable by telephone. Pretty hard to do that without the equipment in your house.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Global coalition to Facebook: “Authentic names” are dange... by morgante on Tuesday October 06, 2015 @05:04AM (#10337566)

The vast majority of jobs expect you to have a phone number.

I'm not sure how you would have a phone number without working with some phone service.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Global coalition to Facebook: “Authentic names” are dange... by r00fus on Monday October 05, 2015 @11:06PM (#10336525)

No but it's mandated utilities offer service unless you've done something very egregious.

No simple EULA denials.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Global coalition to Facebook: “Authentic names” are dange... by toomuchtodo on Monday October 05, 2015 @05:49PM (#10335239)

> I'm not sure I fully understand your proposal, but it actually sounds a lot like my opinion. It's not that I think Facebook profiles should be required to use their official legal name, just that they should use the name they use offline. Is that what you meant by verification?

Yes.

[ Parent | on HN ]