|
|
|
|
|
|
by hc-taway
1928 days ago
|
|
|
The norm used to be never to post personal info online. Yes, some things could still be found out, and there were still attack vectors, but typing your real name in a web form, except maybe (and only fairly late in the time period I'm talking about) to pay with a CC on a well-known site? LOL no. Posting photos of yourself, and with your name and maybe even a location attached? Madness! Are you nuts!? I'm convinced Zuckerberg's infamous "dumb fucks" comment was made in a state of puzzlement that all these n00bs just had no idea they shouldn't be giving him that info, and indeed, the dawn of Facebook and all the people it added to the set of folks posting information online ended the previous "no-one knows you're a dog" set of norms of the Web. Now there's money tied up in it, so of course people insist they must be able to post all kinds of things under their real names so they can market themselves. Never mind that it remains a terrible idea. This is the source of conflict, I think, between people who want more real names online and those who want none. The former are the new folks who think posting personal info online is normal, or even necessary (see again: personal brand-building and marketing) and believe that we need to be able to ID everyone to prevent abuse (i.e. be able to find abusers to punish them), and the latter are the old-school Web users (post-Eternal-September, pre-Facebook) who don't get why all these idiots are making themselves easy to abuse in the first place, who see more anonymity as the obvious cure. |
|
|
I think there is a space for both, tbh. There is always business based on reputation, and for that you need to self-identify. I used to be a professional gigging musician, and there was absolutely no way to do that while remaining anonymous online, nor would I want to.
The difference being, I suppose, was business vs personal, but personal brand was a thing long before the internet (I assume).