(no subject)

[aedifica]

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/10/victory-google-surrenders-nymwars

That's all the information I have.

Comments

[justhuman]

Wow! I was hoping they'd back down, but they were so consistent with their response that I didn't think they were going to back down on this one.

We'll have to see if the format they ultimately choose is one that's really useful to the pseudonym users.

[erika]

Wow. I would have thought the lost advertising revenues would persuade Google to "be evil" in this one.

[whump]

As skud has pointed out there's very little in that announcement that hasn't been said before.

[puzzlement]

See also jwz, EFF declares premature victory in Nymwars, in which he calls the EFF post "shamefully credulous".

[reddragdiva]

The EFF blog has been really off the ball of late.

Let's see how well Storify works here.

[azurelunatic]

(answer: embed = not so much; copy the screen to show in order = coherent, at least)

http://storify.com/azurelunatic/chill-the-fuck-out-about-the-g-pseudonym-promise-s

everyone needs to calm down about vic saying g+ would support pseuds. they've been saying that for months, no specifics no timeline #nymwars
Skud
Skud October 19, 2011 at 16:11

i'm not trusting g+ will support pseuds til i see it. or at least a decent explanation of HOW and a specific WHEN. #nymwars
Skud
Skud October 19, 2011 at 16:12

@Skud The Mashable post makes me boggle. The statements from Gundotra in no way support the title, yet it's quoted everywhere.
ordinal
ordinal October 19, 2011 at 16:13

agreed 100% RT @ScottMadin: I have little faith that they'll "support" them in a way that doesn't involve some kind of 2nd-class status.
Skud
Skud October 19, 2011 at 16:16

G+ supporting "other forms of identity" could mean business accts, could mean pseuds linked to IDs that Google knows, THIS IS NOT VICTORY
Skud
Skud October 19, 2011 at 16:21

@rbtbenterprises yes, quite. they've been saying "soon" and "a few months" for the best part of a year. colour me dubious.
Skud
Skud October 19, 2011 at 16:17

@Meatwad650 no, we have empty promises, still. no timeline, no actual design specs. they've been saying EXACTLY THAT for months.
Skud
Skud October 19, 2011 at 16:20

@Skud We said we are cautiously optimistic. We stand by that statement. @evacide
jilliancyork
jilliancyork October 19, 2011 at 16:21

@jilliancyork @evacide the "VICTORY!" headline belies that.
Skud
Skud October 19, 2011 at 16:22

RT @Swiftstories: Google+ will soon support pseudonyms, moving away from strict real name ID policy, says +Vic Gundotra at #w2s
lizthegrey
lizthegrey October 19, 2011 at 16:24

interesting ... @lizthegrey's RT of @Swiftstories' tweet re: "g+ will support pseuds". THAT lends credibility. i trust liz more than vic.
Skud
Skud October 19, 2011 at 16:34

@Skud Is liz one of Google's employees/officials?
ZauberExonar
ZauberExonar October 19, 2011 at 16:36

@ZauberExonar liz is one of the google staff who works on G+ identities, yes. but she's not allowed to speak publicly about it.
Skud
Skud October 19, 2011 at 16:39

interesting ... @lizthegrey's RT of @Skud's tweet re: @lizthegrey's RT of @Swiftstories' tweet re: g+ will support pseuds. THAT lends cred
czircon
czircon October 19, 2011 at 17:07

@Skud they're also continuing to lock out people for using their own real name http://t.co/rgxVPSw1
mairin
mairin October 19, 2011 at 17:31

EFF declares premature victory in Nymwars. In a shamefully credulous statement, they say: Proponents of... http://t.co/L2SjmH82
jwz
jwz October 19, 2011 at 17:05

Jwz says Google's allegedly forthcoming pseudonym support is "obvious bullshit" http://t.co/4ee9HfGj
mathewi
mathewi October 19, 2011 at 19:17

[reddragdiva]

They were blocking people just yesterday because they didn't like the name on their goddamn passport.

I fear we would need solid behavioural evidence before accepting anything's changed.

[hrafn]

That was a seriously irresponsible article on the EFF's part. The title especially, since -that's- what most people on Twitter are quoting. Apparently it's easier to just quote something that makes you happy than to actually think about whether it IS good news.

I'm seriously disappointed that people who work for an organization that makes a point of being paranoid about privacy are so trusting over such little information.

Also, ditto what a couple previous posters have said about this being 1) not new news and 2) useless info until we see them -actually- implement it in a thoughtful, respectful way.

[tuzemi]

First, I still don't believe it. Until they turn the name field into a basic text field and never ask for ID, they still don't support nyms. Whatever Vic is saying will be coming along in a few months isn't nym support.

Second, even if we do see real nyms, I no longer trust Google to be a good steward of that information. They have enough info to tie anyone to anything, and they have now generated a history of not caring who they leak identity information to.