privacy, anonymity, pseudonymity, and google plus

[Audio: English; Captions: English (more available at TED)]

Well worth watching. People have many very wrong assumptions about “real” names, pseudonymity, and anonymity online. As Matthew Ingram points out, “As a number of users have pointed out, Google and Facebook aren’t just focused on requiring real names because they want to improve behavior on their networks — there is also a very real interest on their part in being able to build a profile of a user for advertising and marketing purposes as well.” So, yeah. Don’t have all these warm fuzzies about how “real” G+ is and how “nice” it is that it’s a place where “people have their shirt on” (really, Gundotra?)

See also:
Preliminary results of my survey of suspended Google+ accounts
Who is harmed by a “real names” policy?
Google+ Names: No Shirt, No Service

One thing well worth noting: in this country, women make up a huge proportion of those needing more privacy than G+ is willing to supply. I won’t rehash all the arguments made in the above links, I do encourage you to browse through them if you haven’t already.

This entry was posted in communication, video and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.