Google's Eric Schmidt said in a recent interview that
Google+ users should be not be anonymous since it would be better "if we had an
accurate notion that you were a real person as opposed to a dog, or a fake
person, or a spammer." Schmidt's comments thoughts reinforce one of my favorite
cartoons from 1993 with two dogs sitting in front of a computer with
one saying to the other "on the Internet nobody knows you're a dog!"
Schmidt's interview is posted at Google+ which now has an estimated 25 million users also included these
my general rule is that is people have a lot of free time and people on the
Internet, there are people who do really really evil and wrong things on the
Internet, and it would be useful if we had strong identity so we could weed
them out. I'm not suggesting eliminating them, what I'm suggesting is if we
knew their identity was accurate, we could rank them. Think of them like an
Since we really have no clue who is
using the Internet and Social Media whether a dog or an evil person maybe Eric
Schmidt is right that forcing people to identify themselves would be better.
But in his interview included the following:
we want people to stand for something, we want people to be willing to express
themselves. There are obviously people for which using their real name is not
appropriate, and it's completely optional, and if you're one of those people
don't do it.
Clearly the debate about anonymity
will continue, so stay tuned.
Visit Peter Vogel's Internet,
Information Technology and e-Discovery Blog
For more information about LexisNexis products and solutions connect with us
through our corporate