Hacker News Reader

Comment by natesm | Hacker News Reader

Is this really a huge deal? I haven't really been using Google+ (after I finally dropped Facebook, I guess I just... stopped caring about this sort of thing), but this topic keeps showing up everywhere.

I'm not sure why it's a problem. Google+ isn't that kind of website to me. Reddit, HN, etc. are really in a different class of websites and should be treated as such. Google+ is like my Address Book. I want real names, because they look nice. I should not that (in my mind) this doesn't make "JK Rowling", "Mark Twain", or "Jon Stewart" unacceptable. "rms" or "natesm", on the other hand, aren't the sort of thing that I'd want to see on Google+.

Similarly, I have Adium set up to display real names and real pictures instead of ugly AIM screen names. I don't talk to ladygagafan05, I talk to "John Smith".

View on HN

"rms" or "natesm", on the other hand, aren't the sort of thing that I'd want to see on Google+.

You, as the recipient or the viewer, don't really get to decide how people would like themselves to be referred to. That doesn't really stop people from referring to others however they want to, which leads directly into...

Similarly, I have Adium set up to display real names and real pictures instead of ugly AIM screen names.

And that's most likely the best or real solution to all of this: allow people to change the labels they see for other people to something custom, which only they see. This actually mirrors how the real, non-Google+ world works.

I want real names, because they look nice.

This is part of the problem: what you want is nice-looking names, but what you're asking for is real names. Unfortunately, not everybody's real name matches your "niceness" rules, and even the people who have sensible "real names" don't always use those names in all their social contexts.

What I want is for Google+ to list my friends under names that I recognise. I don't care whether they happen to use that name when talking with their parents, their employer or their tax-office, I want to see the name they use when talking with me.

In the first real name discussion I had a lengthy debate about exactly this point. The issue I see here is that you argue for keeping the rules with 'I don't want THEM to show up as ...' while the other side argues 'I don't want ME to be listed as ...'.

One side of the argument wants to force their standard on others. The other side wants to be left alone and decide about their own account as they please.

It's a huge deal. I don't use Google+ either but a social network this big will set precedents for everything that comes after it. Every website that might allow you to sign in with g+ id will be affected.

That seems to be how they intended people to use it, but that doesn't seem to be how people are actually using it. From what I've it looks like people are using it much more like LJ (or a similar type of blogging network) rather than like Facebook. That is essentially what it does, after all!

Plus, who's actually taken it up? Looks like internet people mostly... who will want handles/pseudonyms. So they put out a service, but they misguessed who would use it and what for. :)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com