Young People will have to change their names to escape their past on the Internet

Log in to reply
B

bdw

  • #1
    An interesting story from the Telegraph.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technolo...pe-cyber-past-warns-Googles-Eric-Schmidt.html

    The private lives of young people are now so well documented on the internet that many will have to change their names on reaching adulthood, Google’s CEO has claimed.
    Click to expand...

    In an interview Mr Schmidt said he believed that every young person will one day be allowed to change their name to distance themselves from embarrasssing photographs and material stored on their friends' social media sites.
    Click to expand...

    I think the higher echelons at Google really think they are going to rule the world one day.
     
    H

    harryboon

  • #2
    And this is why I am very careful about my identity while online and using site's like facebook etc - I know someone who was turned down for a job in banking because his future employer looked him up on facebook :eek:
     
    Upvote 0
    D

    Dawg

  • #6
    It's just electronic Darwinism in play, (self) selection of the fittest.

    I fail to see how Schmidt's comments extrapolate into Google thinking they will rule the world.
    His comments are merely part of a well documented discussion about changing attitudes to privacy. The commercial ramifications of all this often go under a banner called 'transparency', which seems to be a good thing, no? Is transparency about one's own life a bad thing? Maybe, and maybe not. But it is all part of a fantastic change in the flow and availability of information which is ill served by tabloid like silly season articles about the Great Google Bogeyman.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: stugster
    Upvote 0
    B

    bdw

  • #7
    Silly Season? Countries all over the World are taking action against Google over privacy issues. Spain is the latest to take them on for their disgraceful actions in collecting personal information from their street view car. Their claim that this was done accidentally is clearly a lie. Anyone who still thinks Google is a big "Do no Evil" cuddly toy is deluding themselves.

    Is transparency about one's own life a bad thing? Maybe, and maybe not.
    Click to expand...
    I don't think this has anything to do transparency. It's about people, many of whom are who are not old enough or intelligent enough to make rational decisions, being encouraged to use these "social networking" websites and to engage in dialogue that is potentially damaging to them.

    It's a known fact that employment agencies have been using the Internet to research job candidates for the last few years. What kind of impression do they get from someone who effs and blinds to their friends on FB about all sorts of controversial stuff? Is this just a silly young person or someone with no standards?

    Schmidt's proposed identity change solution is nonsense. This should be about education and warning young people of the consequences of their actions when they post things onthe Internet.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Clinton
    Upvote 0
    D

    Dawg

  • #10
    bdw said:
    Silly Season? Countries all over the World are taking action against Google over privacy issues. Spain is the latest to take them on for their disgraceful actions in collecting personal information from their street view car. Their claim that this was done accidentally is clearly a lie. Anyone who still thinks Google is a big "Do no Evil" cuddly toy is deluding themselves.


    I don't think this has anything to do transparency. It's about people, many of whom are who are not old enough or intelligent enough to make rational decisions, being encouraged to use these "social networking" websites and to engage in dialogue that is potentially damaging to them.

    It's a known fact that employment agencies have been using the Internet to research job candidates for the last few years. What kind of impression do they get from someone who effs and blinds to their friends on FB about all sorts of controversial stuff? Is this just a silly young person or someone with no standards?

    Schmidt's proposed identity change solution is nonsense. This should be about education and warning young people of the consequences of their actions when they post things onthe Internet.
    Click to expand...

    The silly season referred to the newspaper article which you linked to. It is the silly season in the newspaper business, whether you know, accept or approve, so why try and derail a perfectly accurate comment?

    According to The Freedom Association, Germany, Australia, America and South Korea are taking action against Google in this matter. That leaves an awful lot who are not taking action. Also known as The Vast Majority. Does this say anything?

    Anyone in the last decade who thought Google was and is anything but a large corporation, answerable to it's shareholders has being living in a juvenile noddy land. However I would love to see credible proof that their justification for street view car actions is "clearly a lie". Can you provide any such proof? Any at all? Links to credible sources?
    (If you can I am fully prepared to praise you to the heavens as far smarter than the Google board and their lawyers.)

    Schmidt's comment was contentious, and I'd guess meant to be so, to further debate and to ignite discussion. Is this a bad thing? Or should we all say nothing that might incriminate us a a later stage, refuse to enter into debate, stick our fingers in our ears and utter the mantra of the frightened: Nyehnyehnyeh, can't hear can't hear...?
     
    Upvote 0
    B

    bdw

  • #11
    The silly season referred to the newspaper article which you linked to.
    Click to expand...
    I know.

    According to The Freedom Association, Germany, Australia, America and South Korea are taking action against Google in this matter. That leaves an awful lot who are not taking action.
    Click to expand...
    38 US states are taking action and about ten countries. Google it! That makes an awful lot who are taking action.

    However I would love to see credible proof that their justification for street view car actions is "clearly a lie". Can you provide any such proof? Any at all?
    Click to expand...
    Having spent part of my life working in software development I know that even the smallest companies could not introduce a feature like this to software by "accident". It's impossible. Perhaps that is not proof to you but I am happy with my conclusion.
     
    Upvote 0
    J

    jelly3

    Free Member
    Jul 29, 2007
    348
    47
    manchester
  • #12
    And one day John Conner will send his father back in time to impregnate his mother.............:)



    My real name is not as common as Smith but neither is it particularly unique. I have googled myself and added the city and I am in the top 2 results.
    I think it is all gloom mongering to be honest. People will not have to change anything, the world will go on.
     
    Upvote 0
    D

    Dawg

  • #13
    bdw said:
    I know.
    Then why?

    38 US states are taking action and about ten countries. Google it! That makes an awful lot who are taking action.

    So, mmm, lets see; about 11 countries. Out of 192 in the UN.....
    181 to go, Lawyer up ya lazy boogas!

    Having spent part of my life working in software development I know that even the smallest companies could not introduce a feature like this to software by "accident". It's impossible. Perhaps that is not proof to you but I am happy with my conclusion.
    Click to expand...

    You are right. It isn't proof. And Alan Sugar was happy with his conclusion on the ipod.     Has it struck you that it might be the wrong use of the software, rather than the software being wrong? Or that another explanation might be possible apart from Google telling "clearly a lie"?

    I know. Bad form to ask rhetorical questions.
     
    Upvote 0
    KidsBeeHappy

    KidsBeeHappy

    Free Member
    Oct 9, 2007
    7,371
    1,573
    Sunny Troon
  • #15
    The great big online world works exactly the same way as the little tiny towns and communities. Anything you say will be noted down, and may be used against you. Simples. So, as long as you assume that everyone you know, past present and future, may read anything/everything you've ever said or written online, then you'll be fine.

    i.e. go back to the good old days where you never said anything in public that you could be embarrassed by. Think before you speak. Never have a rant unless it's privately to a single person that you completely trust. And beaware that you can say/do stupid things whilst under the influence of drink that people will remember even when you can't.
     
    Upvote 0
    Gillie

    Gillie

    Free Member
    Apr 12, 2006
    13,065
    1,463
    North West England
  • #18
    Hilarious ....

    I have two of my brats whose names have been plastered all over the internet with information about them since they were knee high to a grasshopper - in fact since middle on was 11 and he is now 18!! In fact its thanks to the ease of the internet that the eldest got herself sponsorship so easily. Hell if mine change their names it will cost them!

    As for the facebooks of this world, I actually dont know of one of their friends who doesnt and hasnt always had privacy set on ie myspace for instance, if you put in it years ago your date of birth - up to the age of 16 you didnt have the option to show details, of course you could cheat the system and lie about your year of birth .... but again, dont know of anyone that did of my brats mates!

    Its been me recently thats been having problems with privacy on things such as facebook and people getting access to it without me realising - my kids showed me how to stop it ...

    I do think that as the 'grown ups' we can be mighty patronising to them, when in fact they are more savvy and with it than we are!!
     
    Upvote 0
    B

    bdw

  • #19
    Flattering as it was to credit me with this I have to admit that I do not have "infinite knowledge" of software but I do tend to keep with goings on in the industry.

    I subscribe to "The Register" (try it), which is probably the worlds biggest and most respected online publication for IT professionals. Most Register readers are software engineers, database administrators, sysadmins, IT security people, networking managers and so on, all the way up to CIOs. Here's what they say about Google's data theft.

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/06/17/googlegate/

    With that in mind it is clear to see that at some point this code should have been noticed. At the design stage technical specifications should have been written which would have been used to determine the scope and functionality of the project by the development team. It is absurd to suggest that the development team would then create software outside the boundaries of those specifications. It simply doesn't happen that way and no amount of protest by Google will lead me to believe otherwise.
    Click to expand...
     
    Upvote 0
    D

    danielmeade

    Free Member
    Aug 13, 2010
    151
    28
    London SE1
  • #20
    Let's take another look at this...

    This topic has sparked a lot of conversation over the past few days, and I can't help but think it was simply a Marketing effort from the good people at Google. I really cannot see vast amounts of people going as far as changing their names in order to erase their online past, that just isn't going to happen.

    And should potential employers want to delve into your past using Social Media platforms, surely alarm bells would start ringing when no profiles are found? After all, this is an age where every young person has a whole portfolio of social media accounts.

    There are also software and plug-ins freely available to trace a users activity through their email address, and given that most people don't have their full name for their email it is unlikely they will think to change that as well.

    So is this likely to be a marketing effort from Google? I think so.
     
    Upvote 0
    B

    bdw

  • #21
    Personally I think it is shocking that a would be ethical company like Google is happy to be associated with comments like this. Isn't identity change normally associated with criminals and people on witness protection?

    Perhaps they are trying to promote Adwords for plastic surgeons? ;)
     
    Upvote 0
    N

    Newbus

  • #24
    I have already started using the internet to find out more information about candidates apply for jobs.

    Myspace, facebook and linked in all provide an insight into the individual, their personnality habits and whether they are telling the truth.

    SO far I have never come across anyone where I have found anything negative or that causes me concern. However, that couldbedifferent if I found their work history was not as per their CV or if they had spoken poorly about a previous employeer or if it appears they are acting in their private life in a manor that could effect their performance at work

    It's harsh but employees need to think about us that pay the money. It's not a right to have a well paid job. We invest significant sums into individuals and we expect a return on investment. As nobody would invest their money ina poor deal why would we invest it in people now we can see more and more about everyone.
     
    Upvote 0
    B

    bdw

  • #25
    Public opinion against Google is gathering momentum. Their dubious practices are being discussed all over the Internet in forums and blogs. They had a highly publicised demonstration outside their HQ last week. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-10961776 :mad:

    They are also being accused on being in bed with the FBI and CIA in the states. It's squeaky bum time indeed. I would love to be a fly on the wall at some of their recent board meetings. ;)

    .
     
    Last edited by a moderator:
    Upvote 0
    V

    Vintage06

    Free Member
    Aug 3, 2010
    169
    16
    Blyth Northumberland
  • #28
    I just set my profile to private. now only my friends can see my profile.. Even then facebook allows you to select different settings, say one friend can see everything, the next can't view your wall etc. It'd be a hassle to do that for me.. with so many friends added now.

    But anyone starting out on facebook can set every friend a setting, what they want to view.

    With being at university and part of a sports team there's many embarrassing photo's of me, Dressed in women's clothes, drunk as hell. But that's what facebooks for.

    Why should a boss care what you get up to in private (apart from extreme) life as long as you don't bring it into the workplace?
     
    Upvote 0
    B

    bdw

  • #29
    Last edited by a moderator:
    Upvote 0
    D

    Dawg

  • #32
    bdw said:
    More of the same...
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-...by-paris-regulators-over-data-collection.html
    Click to expand...

    I agree. More bloody state interference by a bunch of overempowered Euroweenies reacting to the latest Bogey Man story, as subscribed to by idiotarians everywhere.

    Ze Mozzerland, La belle France, she is the only one to be allowed to haf any data. How else can we kill ze greenpeace activists in New Zealand wis out ze data, and vat eef the tree 'uggers get ze data from ze Goologle. Alors!
     
    Upvote 0
    F

    FaerieB

  • #34
    I have just been on a forum where as part of a game a bunch of people have posted all of their personal details and a photo of themselves :eek: :| tis OK for you guys who live in the cyberworld ... plenty of the rest us just don't realise the dangers :(
     
    Upvote 0
    B

    bdw

  • #35
    You know it's just as well we have moderators in here to take out the abuse that some members seem to be fond of dishing out. If that stuck it could also be harmful to them.

    Protecting people from themselves like like this wouldn't happen on FB.
     
    Last edited by a moderator:
    • Like
    Reactions: OldWelshGuy
    Upvote 0
    G

    gordano

    Free Member
    Jan 19, 2010
    456
    100
    London
  • #37
    Care needs to be taken about what you publish on the internet, it can affect your financial rating, employment prospects, and leave you exposed to fraud.
    We are often asked to carry out searches on people on behalf employers, for senior positions these searches include alias names (e.g. we will find name changes), we then search each identity for past information.
    The bottom line is that changing your name is not a guarantee to protecting any historical online indiscretions , always take care when publishing any information on the internet.
     
    Upvote 0
    M

    movietub

    Free Member
    Nov 6, 2008
    4,858
    1,106
  • #38
    Whilst I can see that clearly more people will consider a name change with a very well documented questionable past, I really don't think it's a big enough problem for most people.

    Google seem to be imaging the effects of this happening in today’s world, instead of the world we will live in then. Sure my parents would probably hate it if I could look back in time and see their entire social life prior to my existence. But will the Facebook generation feel that way?

    The generation in question, are growing up with effectively no privacy by choice. The idea of lost years of youth is in every way becoming a thing of the past. I really don't know anyone within 10 years of my age that isn't on face book. Will we all be running around screaming when we're middle aged and worried about the kids knowing we used to get drunk at least 4 times a week and run around naked? Probably not. And will employers only employ people that don't have their social recklessness exposed online? Won't be very many to choose from, most of us deliberately post the most shocking and stupid comments and photos because we want people to see our 'wild side'.

    Kids have always known their parents used to be young and in trouble. Employers have always known that at Christmas even Colin from accounts runs around with his pants on his head. The fact that they can now see evidence of this posted publicly, will not shock for long. People will get used to it!
     
    Upvote 0
    D

    Dawg

  • #40
    I agree with Movietub. The world is changing, expectations of privacy are changing, transparency in both commercial life and personal life is changing. What is seen as unacceptable by one generation is a matter of supreme indifference to the next*, life has changed, moved on, and it's no big deal to a vast amount of people.
    That's why I think that stories about bogeymen/Google/CIA/FBI are so much baloney. They seem excuses for trying to refuse change, but hey, the Luddites will always be with us, to paraphrase Jesus.


    *And vice versa. The younger generation will find the supreme indifference with which the current generation saddled them with vast debt unacceptable, I'd guess.
     
    Upvote 0
    Log in to reply

    Latest Articles

    Join UK Business Forums for free business advice
    Top Bottom
    Community
    Articles
    Menu