I know at this point a lot of it is related to money, but there was a transitional time that led to this point that I’m still confused by.
What details changed about online spaces that made many folks more comfortable sharing so much under their real names between the “Be careful!” times to where we are now?
Can confirm. Before FB, almost nobody told their real name online. Nowadays you can easily find out who is a racist and who believes in conspiracy theories just by looking at what they post. Usually there’s also their real name and face attached to the post so that you can be sure who you are talking about.
How did this happen? FB made it normal and almost obligatory.
Why did it happen? So that FB could make more money. Simple monkey brain people like to socialize and share stuff with everyone, and FB is simply exploiting that vulnerability.
I mostly avoided it so my memory may be off here, but weren’t there still a fair number of folks that posted to MySpace using parts of their real name and, imo slightly worse (in terms of privacy), using photos of themselves as profile pics? Real names are one thing but photos of yourself are just a dead giveaway.
Neither is very useful until you can correlate it with something else. Like, it takes a lot more effort to find someone in meatspace than in a database. Though, the number of databases with your face in them is a number that goes up faster every year.
That’s true, although as I recall there was often enough additional info even back then that someone determined enough could become a concern.
You aren’t wrong. There were also plenty of software-related mailing lists back in the day where folks used their real names regularly. And even if someone did go by a handle, their real name was often known anyway.
Yeah. and there were a lot of tech type folk that had a blog on domains that required ‘real names’ and more, that was quite often public.
And more importantly, if you post something the racist conspiracy theorists don’t like, they know your real name and what you look like. So it makes anyone who doesn’t like unwanted attention from violent lunatics keep quiet, thereby emboldening the violent lunatics.
Oh, rats! You’re right. Didn’t think of that at first.
However, that thing is’t too different from the “mainstream” vs. “the others” situation we’ve had for millennia. Previously, it wasn’t acceptable to let your neighbors know you don’t conform to the generally accepted sexual norms or that your gender identity doesn’t match your biological gender. Not too long ago in Germany you couldn’t publicly support people from different ethnic backgrounds. There was even a period of time when it was believed that women don’t even have a soul. Arguing against that would have labeled you as “one of them” as opposed being an outstanding member of the “mainstream”. It’s just that whatever “mainstream” happens to mean seems to change from place to place and decade to decade.
The current era of diversity and acceptance is truly exceptional when you look at the big picture. Interestingly, using your name and your face in online conversations seems to bring ups back to to age of self-censorship. If your reputation is on the line, you better try to blend into the mainstream, even in online conversations.
Even if you’re entirely within the mainstream, you don’t want to risk upsetting some dangerous bigot. Or worse, a dangerous bigot with a following.
I got told off on kbin for saying 80% of the world’s population are idiots… and then I realized who I was talking to.
All humans have this vulnerability, and it’s part of the human experience. We think of ourselves as highly advanced, but in reality, we aren’t that different from creatures we consider inferior.
I actually think it’s somewhat of a human trait… the need to brag and show off yourself. Some people (most) have it, some don’t. I am really interested at what an IQ test would show about those that post their lives on social media, or do influencer things, whatever. And do the same one on people thay use social media like Reddit or Lemmy. I think the results would favor the ones that use link agregators. But, as I said, this is only a theory I have, it’s not proven or anything, but I would like to actually know. If the results are more or less equal, than that would mean that it’s just a human trait and nothing more… which would surprise me, but you can’t argue with science.
You may already be aware of this, but in case not, IQ isn’t a necessarily a great way to evaluate intelligence.