(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-exp... ). Accounts at any major internet site, including Google, are inherently ephemeral and disposable.
> 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?
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??
33 bits (actually, 32.6) is enough to identify anyone personally.
As others have noted, there are multiple cases in which people have been identified through their online postings, even when not officially identified, by various disclosures.
It's among the reasons why those who take identity seriously are very, very careful about what they disclose about themselves online.
The Google, YouTube, and G+ names issues is really, really, really bad. It's quite specifically what turned me from a very positive booster of Google to a pretty deep critic.
And yes, while I make some use of Google's services, under various identities, it's an exposure I'm very consciously attempting to reduce.
> 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.
I have an very unusual name, making me almost certainly the only person in the US with my first and last name. When I google for my name in quotes and "whitepages" it shows my home address.
I'm not personally concerned about physical security, but the idea that name -> address lookup is inconceivable is a foolish claim. Note that all that means for me is that my name on Google+ is my name-shaped nickname instead of my legal name.
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.
>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.
Clearly you have not spent enough time on 4chan. Two instances off the top of my head:
1. Youtuber posts video of his room where he is being mean to his cat. Within 24 hours police are knocking on his door and making an arrest on account of cruelty to animals. 4chan got all his info from something as bening as a webcam's view of a teenager's room.
2. Girl throws puppies into river in bosnia. 48 hours later, police is knocking on her door on account of animal cruelty charges. 4chan had nothing to go on but a video of some average-looking wilderness.
Also a famous case of a few lads throwing a puppy off a bridge.
Now imagine how quickly all of those stories woudl unfold with a name attached! Unimaginably quickly.
Remember, 4chan is the kind of "guy" who tracked down Boxxy and harassed her so much she practically hid from the internet for ~4 years. All from videos of nothing but a face with a black background. They found her home address, her phone number, the school she goes to. Everything.
4chan is scary. I do not want my name on the internet publicly anywhere. Anywhere.
> Clearly you have not spent enough time on 4chan.
What's fun is that, thanks to the fact that 4chan happily embeds the Analytics/Recaptcha combo, Google may already know your creepiest fetish (along with your real name) in an instant. They can know what you say in 4chan by matching timestamps.
Unless, of course, you are a so called "nerd" and you stay behind 7 proxies and have a clean, incognito browser. dredmorbius' mention of http://33bits.org/about/ definitely applies here.
It's scary that having a name attached to other signals normally found in public profiles (schools, desires) will instantly yield an address for anyone determined enough.
It's scary that it became so ubiquitous. Sometimes, I really miss the old internet.
Not to be flip, and I'm a huge privacy guy, but all of that does matter less if you're not being mean to cats or throwing puppies off bridges. I imagine Google is cool with that. It's not like this is a free speech issue.
Not to single jmillikin out but the fact that people like him work at Google and fail to consider being able to match a name to location (it's not that hard especially for people with a high amount of uniqueness) is what really frightens me.
Similarly with FB, even if we assume for a second that they are not overtly malicious, the fact that there are myriad reasons why using a real name is a bad idea but yet we are constrained by the life experiences of what is usually a pretty young engineer that has limited interaction with bad use cases. Brushing this off as not important as Zuck has is very alarming.
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.
>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.
What?? Do you really work for Google? I mean, I'm not trying to be mean or anything, but when you say "work" what do you mean? Is this Google, the "search engine?" You know what it does right?
I've regularly used Google to match names to addresses, in fact many many people do this. I find this hard to take seriously.
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.
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.
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.
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-exp... ). Accounts at any major internet site, including Google, are inherently ephemeral and disposable.