|
|
 |
...fantastic. YouTube are pushing for people to use their full name on YouTube, which shows up in place of their username. I just got a prompt suggesting I do that.
I've posted about this matter in the past, though this is slightly different, because at the moment (and hopefully this'll be the case always), YouTube aren't forcing people to use their real name. You can decide whether to use your full name on YouTube, or to continue using your username. (Though it should be said that YouTube ask you to justify continuing to use your username if you want to go that way, which really rubs me the wrong way.)
It is nice that they offer a choice, somewhat. But when I said that they're pushing it, I mean that the UI is such that you're fairly likely to go through with it if you don't read carefully. And as I say, the fact that you have to justify your reasons for continuing to use your username is just... eugh. It gives you a choice of 6 buttons IIRC, and one of them is a button saying "I'm not sure, I'll decide later", but that sounds like they still expect a justification later.
There's also a slight annoyance because it makes it harder to tell who's who for me, but that's basically protesting change because it's change, and I'm sure I can get used to it. I'm much more concerned about what I've written above.
What are your thoughts?
Post A Comment | 12 Comments | Add to Memories | Tell Someone | Link
Dear Google, did you learn nothing from the nymwars?
(I have a hundred thousand emails archived in Gmail and I have yet to encounter a webmail interface I like as much as Gmail. Nor have I found a web RSS as good as Google Reader or a web appointment book as good as Google Calendar. And of course YouTube has all the things. I don't think there's anything under any of my names on the Internet that I could be fired for, and most of that I've said to my parents' faces and they haven't kicked me out yet, and I am not a stalking victim that I know of, so my privacy is not as high a priority as ease of use. But I do not like this.)
Reply | Thread | Link
No. They did not. Because it's all about the marketing.
Reply | Parent | Link
|
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png) mfb |
| 2012-10-10 20:14 (UTC) |
| nightmare |
| (no subject) |
|
I'm unsurprised and disappointed. I really wish Google wasn't such a big player in the fields alexseanchai mentioned, because they seem dead-set on making poor decisions like this. Why, I have no idea.
Reply | Link
 |
| alexwlchan |
| 2012-10-10 20:41 (UTC) |
| Upset, but not surprised (or perhaps pleased?) |
|
As a Google property, it doesn’t surprise me that YouTube is pushing this. They showed their hand with Google+ several months ago, and it fits with their need to control as much of this information as possible. Your wallet name is a fairly easy way to track you across lots of places, which makes it easier to shove ads in your face. Woot.
I can see two ways to take this:
1. Google is really serious about making everybody use their wallet names, and the directive from Google HQ is to get that everywhere, which makes sense if you want to better integrate YouTube with Google+, where you force wallet names.
2. (Optimistic take.) Google has learnt from the wallet name clusterfuck of Google+, and is experimenting with ways to allow people to use non-wallet names in their properties. If this is the case, it makes some sense to do it on YouTube, which isn’t as directly affiliated with the Google+ brand (yet).
Honestly, I think it’s very likely that it’s 1, and I can see why Google is doing it. Doesn’t mean I like it though. I would be happy if it was 2, because then they might be improving, but I seriously doubt it. When pigs fly and all that...
Meta-discussion of Google: related to what alexseanchai has said, I’m always disappointed that Google doesn’t have more competition in their big fields, especially when stuff like this happens. *cough* FeedBurner *cough* Reader is probably the big one, but Gmail’s dominance is sucky too. I’ve been trying to reduce my dependence on Google services for several years now.
Meta-discussion of online identity: it should be fairly clear that I don’t feel the need to hide my wallet name online, but this still makes me uncomfortable. Although I don’t need this yet, it’s definitely important. (And you’ve also reminded me that I must get on and finish that post about my thoughts on using (or not using) wallet names on the Internet.)
Edited (Added a comment about flying pigs) 2012-10-10 08:43 pm (UTC)
Reply | Thread | Link
 |
| sophie |
| 2012-10-11 16:33 (UTC) |
| Re: Upset, but not surprised (or perhaps pleased?) |
|
Your wallet name is a fairly easy way to track you across lots of places, which makes it easier to shove ads in your face. Google can already track you across lots of places; they don't need a wallet name for that. In fact, advertising companies go to great lengths to be able to say that none of your data is personally identifiable to you, while at the same time getting as close to that line as is possible. In other words, they know what sites you visit, who you talk to, what you order online, what times of day you're on, and plenty of other things - they just don't know your name. The thing is, they don't need to... Edited 2012-10-11 04:33 pm (UTC)
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link
|
| alexwlchan |
| 2012-10-11 16:51 (UTC) |
| Re: Upset, but not surprised (or perhaps pleased?) |
|
Very true. But I think in Google’s mind, they do need to know this. (Whether Google’s mind reflects reality is another matter entirely.) So much of our data is flowing through social networks like Facebook and Twitter, where Google can’t index it. And more importantly, where they can’t push ads at you.
If you start sticking wallet names on everything, calling yourself a social network for relationships in the physical world becomes a much easier sell for a lot of people. And they will continue to do this because they can, and the vast majority of people don’t care enough to do anything about it. Win-win for Google.
Upsetting times.
Reply | Parent | Link
 |
| princessofgeeks |
| 2012-10-10 22:11 (UTC) |
| bitch please by anadapta |
| (no subject) |
|
I feel strongly about this; I hate it that the internet is going to Real Names Only, with a few exceptions, because I know it's all about the marketing and is not actually beneficial to me. Why should they know who I am when I just want to find whitney houston videos, you know?
But unless they know Who I Am, they can't Sell Me Stuff.
When Google bought You Tube, I knew it was all over.
I deleted a bunch of stuff.
Privacy and pseudonimity is not the way the net is going. I disapprove. Because sometimes people claim it's about authenticity and accountability. But really? It's all about the marketing.
Reply | Link
 |
| marahmarie |
| 2012-10-11 00:30 (UTC) |
| My thoughts on it. |
|
):
The end.
(As you know I got most of my angst over real-name policies on not just G+ but also TechCrunch and FB out in the open months ago in writing this post, but I don't think it's "nice" of them now to offer a choice on YT so much as I think they're getting afraid for whatever reason not to - they know shit we don't know; what they know now we'll know in just a few more few months, is my thought on that - but outside of that, yeah, same story, different day. This should not surprise you or anyone familiar with the idea that they want to ultra-target ads by tracking you all over the damn Web; God knows it does not surprise me.)
Edited (in pre-editing got hungry and ate part of my own comment...mmmm, yummy) 2012-10-11 12:33 am (UTC)
Reply | Link
|
| xaea |
| 2012-10-11 16:37 (UTC) |
| (no subject) |
|
i hate it and if it's ever required, i'll be off of YouTube. facebook is the ONLY place i'll use my real name and i do NOT share that info with people i know online (usually).
Reply | Link
|
| elinor |
| 2012-10-12 13:26 (UTC) |
| (no subject) |
|
Ugh ugh ugh!!! I already have a vimeo account. I just hope they don't go the same way.
Reply | Link
 |
| codeman38 |
| 2012-10-13 06:14 (UTC) |
| contemplation |
| (no subject) |
|
When I got that prompt, I ended up choosing the option that was essentially "my pseudonym is one that people know me by". Because that's the interesting thing: outside of Actual Academic Stuff, more people online know me as "codeman38" than by my real name. And quite a few of my in-person friends have a similar thing going on.
And that's yet another thing that the "real name only" folks don't get. They're actually being more restrictive than real life in doing that.
In the offline world, people use nicknames regularly, and nobody complains. You can go for months without even knowing what a close friend's surname actually is (this has happened to me on several occasions!). And people use different levels of formality in different situations-- e.g., "John Quincy Public" among co-workers, "Johnny P" among friends. (Which is something else that these sites don't get-- I want to be my real name among professionals but be "codeman38" among hobbyists, but so few social networks will allow me to be both at once!)
Reply | Link
 |
| maiden |
| 2012-12-26 22:30 (UTC) |
| (no subject) |
|
(belated, I know)
It's stupid. I declined posting my full name simply because I prefer to have a pseudonym. At least they learned (I assume) from the Google+ debacle.
It's also stupid that they required justification. Mine was that I prefer to keep my persona private - as a woman on the internet, it's easy enough to attract stalkers, and avoiding them where possible just seems smart. I don't have any videos actually showing myself, but what if I chose to? Sure, I could privatize it, but if I ever wanted to started a vlog, I don't think that I'd ever associate it with my Facebook or anything with my actual name on it. I'm sure people would be able to link me to it, but... I just prefer a pseudonym (disclaimer here being I have no interest in a vlog due to the fact I wouldn't want people to be able to link it with my personal life - internet trolls can be pretty tenacious).
Reply | Link
|
|
|