Comment by ipython
Comment by ipython 2 months ago
Isn’t that what Facebook is supposed to provide? From anecdotal evidence, people are happy to engage in vitriol online that they would never do face to face, real name or not.
Comment by ipython 2 months ago
Isn’t that what Facebook is supposed to provide? From anecdotal evidence, people are happy to engage in vitriol online that they would never do face to face, real name or not.
And to that point LinkedIn makes an active effort (in my experience) to highlight the most extreme political comments (I assume for the same reasons as any other social network- anger is a simple formula to fuel engagement).
It insists on sending me push notifications of the most bizarre conspiracy theories, even after I muted the accounts. Super frustrating when all you want is basically an electronic business card catalog.
1) No, Facebook does not confirm people’s real names
2) This isn’t a solution to vitriol, it’s a solution to inorganic amplification
They absolutely do require confirmation in some cases - https://www.facebook.com/help/1090831264320592
Of course that’s not foolproof and there are millions of bot accounts by facebooks own admission. But at the scale of billions of active users across the globe I’m not sure what approach could be 100%
> in some cases
some != all
therefore, it is not a real-name only network.
I'm not asking for Facebook to become a confirmed real-name only network. I am not asking for anyone to be compelled to supply a confirmed real-name only network.
I am saying: I wish that one existed and caught on with consumers.
this is the way…
I find absolutely ridiculous every social media / free speech discussion if platform does not have proof of identity. while you and I may have right to free speech the bots etc do not. hence, there is no free speech without proof of identity imo
Heck I’ve seen some nastiness on LinkedIn with people’s government name and employer right next to it.
Real names don’t do much to prevent online assholery.