48 replies to this topic

[sunrat]

The real reason for Google+http://www.thedoghou...ies.com/?p=2888

[LilBambi]

sunrat, on Jul 15 2011, 10:30 AM, said:

The real reason for Google+http://www.thedoghou...ies.com/?p=2888

For some reason, I can't load that page. :(Well, my account was suspended at Google+ because i wasn't using my real name.Here's my posting at Blogger about it: Google+:

Quote

Hi folks. My Google+ account was suspended because I did not use my real name. I used my 'stage' name for our JimmyLee and Bambi Show on CNI Radio.Since they required me to change to my real name, I deleted all social portions of my Bambi CNI Radio account and am no longer on Google+. I had a great time on Google+!!! I enjoyed seeing you all. It really is the best social site on the web, IMHO. I am sorry that they make such unreasonable requirements.Do I care so much whether my name is out there, my real name? Yes, and no.Here's the feedback I left for Google+ upon removing my account:

Quote

I am leaving Google+ because I believe you have no right to REQUIRE me to use my REAL NAME on my account.I removed my Facebook account in part for the same reasons. I would have loved to stay with Google+ but you made it impossible.I will miss Google+ as I have missed no other social account. But that can't be helped. I believe you put people at risk by requiring them to use their REAL NAMES. I believe it is a real security risk and I would strongly suggest you change that requirement. It was wrong of Facebook, and it's wrong of Google+.In some countries it is downright dangerous for them to use their real names.Google+ Teams should rethink their whole position on this policy.

I strongly feel that they should rethink their policies. Being able to find 'friends' does not give them the right to require people to use their real names online. Sad, because Google+ did the best so far on the balance of privacy and content. At least as long as I could test the Beta/Field Test about 10 days.Oh, well. No matter how much you may or may not have helped the field test with feedback, it really doesn't matter if they change the rules midstream and require you to use your real name.Google and the Google+ Teams should really review some of the information at EFF.org and reconsider their stance on REAL NAMES.

[Pete!]

How do they know if you're using your "real" name.If they're doing something intrusive enough to check, I want no part of it...

[LilBambi]

I don't know, but my name was Bambi CNIRadio so that was likely real obvious that it wasn't a real name.When I signed up, I hadn't heard that they were requiring REAL names. It wasn't until a few days later. I used a name related to our Internet radio station and my 'stage' name for the JimmyLee and Bambi Show on Saturday nights.Course they waited till they had 10M users...

[V.T. Eric Layton]

Google is suspending all "business" registrations at this time. "Bambi CNI Radio" probably got flagged as a business. You could have re-registered as "Lil Bambi" and you wouldn't get flagged at all; then just put your CNI and other links in your profile.

[Corrine]

I'm expecting "Security Garden" to be suspended as well.  As I commented in response to the sharing of LilBambi's blog post:"I've been using "Security Garden" on Google properties for over five years and used that "identity" when signing up for Google+. There was no indication at the time of signing up that "real" names are required and the name corresponds to my Google "identity". Unlike Bambi, this account has not yet received notice of being suspended. We'll see what happens down the road.Contrasting Google+ with Facebook, using my real name on Facebook was a choice I made. However, on Facebook, I have the option to select who can search for me, who can see and who can comment on the information I share there. That option is not available in Google+. As a result, I fully understand why, for purposes of protecting their privacy, people who want to participate in Google+ elect not to use their real name. In addition, many people are better known by their online persona."

[LilBambi]

I hear ya Corrine. Gonna be interesting to see if they pick up on yours and a few others I have seen that are still there that are obviously not personal names but actual business names not just a labor of love.

[Temmu]

wow.  i'm glad when i said, yes, i'd like an invite, to someone here at scot's that they never sent it.big brother, um, communist government, has way too much info on its, um, citizens.

[ChipDoc]

Temmu, on Jul 22 2011, 01:23 PM, said:

wow.  i'm glad when i said, yes, i'd like an invite, to someone here at scot's that they never sent it.big brother, um, communist government, has way too much info on its, um, citizens.

You don't really think that NOT signing up for Google+ is going to keep the government from having all of your personal data at hand, do you?  Here in Florida we just discovered that the Department of Transportation made  $63 million in 2010 selling drivers' names, addresses, dates of birth and what cars they own to employers, insurance companies and such personal data collection firms as LexisNexis.These are the same folks who doubled the fees for obtaining a license the year before last.

[LilBambi]

ChipDoc, on Jul 23 2011, 12:56 AM, said:

You don't really think that NOT signing up for Google+ is going to keep the government from having all of your personal data at hand, do you?  Here in Florida we just discovered that the Department of Transportation made  $63 million in 2010 selling drivers' names, addresses, dates of birth and what cars they own to employers, insurance companies and such personal data collection firms as LexisNexis.These are the same folks who doubled the fees for obtaining a license the year before last.

Now that just plains sucks, ChipDoc!

[Tushman]

Pete!, on Jul 16 2011, 09:54 AM, said:

How do they know if you're using your "real" name.If they're doing something intrusive enough to check, I want no part of it...

People think "Oh it's a google product - I love it - let's hop on the bandwagon".  Google is far more intrusive than people realize.  My mother sent me an e-mail in Korean language - immediately after that, I started getting google ads in what language?? Korean.There are some people think there is no such thing as privacy in this digital age.  I say BS.  YOU have DIRECT control over how much information you share on the internet.  I myself have a couple of GMail accounts - I have gradually begun the process of switching over to a new webmail service entirely.  I will have no part of Google other than using their search engine.

Edited by Tushman, 24 July 2011 - 01:01 AM.

[ChipDoc]

Tushman, on Jul 24 2011, 12:58 AM, said:

There are some people think there is no such thing as privacy in this digital age.  I say BS.  YOU have DIRECT control over how much information you share on the internet.

This is perfectly true.  All you really need to do in order to insure a high level of privacy is to drop all of your internet and telephone access, close all of your bank, utility and credit accounts, and walk out of town past where all of the roads end.  Bring a rod and rifle and accessories for both, and cash to replenish those accessories over the years.You also have the option of accepting that the massive diminution of privacy is the price you pay for the massive growth of your access to information.  I read the story of some former KGB operative marveling that he could see his house on Google Earth, stunned that such detail was not only available publicly but free.Ain't nothing in this world for free, my friend.

[Tushman]

ChipDoc, on Jul 24 2011, 12:54 AM, said:

This is perfectly true.  All you really need to do in order to insure a high level of privacy is to drop all of your internet and telephone access, close all of your bank, utility and credit accounts, and walk out of town past where all of the roads end.  Bring a rod and rifle and accessories for both, and cash to replenish those accessories over the years.You also have the option of accepting that the massive diminution of privacy is the price you pay for the massive growth of your access to information.  I read the story of some former KGB operative marveling that he could see his house on Google Earth, stunned that such detail was not only available publicly but free.Ain't nothing in this world for free, my friend.

Those are some extreme examples.  No one is suggesting that you should live an austere life or live like a hermit in order to protect your privacy.  It is rather impossible to function in a society such as ours by depriving oneself of the services you've detailed unless you're some type of social deviant or recluse that can't fit into society.   I personally don't believe it's necessary to go to the extremes you've suggested just to protect your personal information.  You sound like you have a defeatist attitude where big brother has already won and we are powerless to do anything about it.  Throw your hands up in the air and say 'oh well....c'est la vie'.   I disagree.  The whole point that I was trying to make is that there are many companies (including government agencies) do regard data privacy of utmost concern & priority.  Google on the other hand has taken a stance on personal privacy that goes against everything I believe in.  Therefore, I choose NOT to use some of their services and stop believing that I am somehow powerless against this ever reaching and intrusive corporation.You're also convoluting the issue of "free" versus what is being discussed in this thread which is personal privacy.  You're suggesting that somehow it is "acceptable" for Google to invade or harvest my personal information because it doesn't cost a dime to user their service??    I could care less what they charge - $1 or $1,000 - it doesn't matter.  Giving away all of my personal information to Google is a not an "acceptable" trade for me.  May work for you because of the convenience factor, or whatever, but I certainly don't have a defeatist attitude "oh well....they've already won".  No sir - that does not work me.  You can argue that it's almost impossible not to leave a digital fingerprint of who you are - well that part I can agree with to a certain extent.  It depends on what context you're making that claim and what services/company you're dealing with.

Edited by Tushman, 24 July 2011 - 12:29 PM.

[V.T. Eric Layton]

Like how I did my Google+ profile images (scrapbook album)? Ain't The GIMP c0oL?

[LilBambi]

Awesome Eric!  

[V.T. Eric Layton]

If anyone is interested...I made a 750 x 150 banner and then copied 150 x 150 chunks of it to upload to my profile.

[V.T. Eric Layton]

Here... I made one for you, Josh.Here's what it would look like chopped up and uploaded to your G+ profile (scrapbook album):If you like, let me know and I'll email you the images for you to upload.Later...

[securitybreach]

V.T. Eric Layton, on Jul 24 2011, 08:08 PM, said:

Here... I made one for you, Josh.Here's what it would look like chopped up and uploaded to your G+ profile (scrapbook album):If you like, let me know and I'll email you the images for you to upload.Later...

That is awesome Eric, I love it :thumbup:Send me the links please!!

[mac]

Tushman, on Jul 23 2011, 11:58 PM, said:

People think "Oh it's a google product - I love it - let's hop on the bandwagon".  Google is far more intrusive than people realize.  My mother sent me an e-mail in Korean language - immediately after that, I started getting google ads in what language?? Korean.There are some people think there is no such thing as privacy in this digital age.  I say BS.  YOU have DIRECT control over how much information you share on the internet.  I myself have a couple of GMail accounts - I have gradually begun the process of switching over to a new webmail service entirely.  I will have no part of Google other than using their search engine.

Tushman, give Scroogle a try and dump Google altogether. It uses the Google search engine, but blocks your IP from Google, and you don't see any ads.Scroogle home page.

[Tushman]

mac, on Jul 25 2011, 07:14 AM, said:

Tushman, give Scroogle a try and dump Google altogether. It uses the Google search engine, but blocks your IP from Google, and you don't see any ads.Scroogle home page.

Thanks Mac.  I've never heard of them but I will definitely try it out.

[LilBambi]

Startpage powered by IXQuick is great too and it's enhanced by Google.startpage.comHere's more about it: https://startpage.co...ct-privacy.html

Quote

Startpage Protects Your Privacy!Startpage is powered by Ixquick.The only search engine that does not record your IP address.

Quote

Startpage's position: You have a right to privacy. Your search data should never fall into the wrong hands. The only real solution is quickly deleting your data or not storing them to begin with. Since January 2009 we do not record our users' IP addresses anymore. We are the first and only search engine to do so. Our initiative is receiving an overwhelmingly positive response!Startpage will wholeheartedly continue on its mission to offer you great search results in the best possible privacy!

Be sure to use the settings and save the page after you set how you want it to work for you.

[V.T. Eric Layton]

I was in Arch last night when I made that, Josh. I'm in Slack right now, though. I have some running around to do in a bit, but later this afternoon/early evening I'll email you the complete banner and the five 150 x 150 numbered pieces. Upload the five segments to your Google+ scrapbook photo album in their numbered order... 1 - first, 2 - second, etc.Later...

[securitybreach]

Thanks a lot Eric!!

[V.T. Eric Layton]

Aw h3ll, what am I saying? This is Linux. I can just mount my Arch from Slackware. There. Done. Check your archlinux.us email.

[securitybreach]

V.T. Eric Layton, on Jul 25 2011, 12:22 PM, said:

Aw h3ll, what am I saying? This is Linux. I can just mount my Arch from Slackware. There. Done. Check your archlinux.us email.

Thanks Brother