Introduction
As technology is widely accepted, by 2018, nearly 4 billion of the world’s 7.6 billion people use the Internet, about two-thirds have mobile phones, and more than half are “smart” devices, so people can always Get a rich Internet experience more easily, anywhere. This is a manifestation of social progress and a milestone in civilization. But with the rapid increase of the network population, we also face many network supervision issues. Who should be responsible for network security in a complex network environment. In recent years, in order to protect the network environment more effectively, the “real name system” has been used as a solution to maintain the network civilization. Many Internet platforms implement real-world politics, such as Facebook. But can real-name systems really become a shield against the uncivilized phenomenon of the Internet?
The real-name policy means that the Internet service provider requires the collection of the user’s real name and ID number while providing the service. South Korea is the first country to incorporate online real-name systems into practice. Since 2009, 35 websites in South Korea have implemented a real-name registration system in accordance with the law. The Korean real-name policy was enacted after the death of Choi Jin-sil. (Choi Jin-si is an excellent actress in Korea. She suffered tremendous cyber violence during her lifetime.) The original intention of implementing the real-name system in Korea was to minimize malicious comments and to require netizens to be responsible for all their actions on the Internet. However, after the promulgation of the online real-name policy in South Korea, the behavior of cyber violence has not decreased. In addition, there are more and more problems caused by real-name systems. This has to be rethought, what role does the network real name system play in the network environment? There are a lot of disputes about real-name systems on the Internet. In this article I will specifically analyze some of the problems caused by real-name systems.
Part II: Real name policy ubdermines the privacy of citizens
In Facebook’s real-name policy, in order to allow Facebook to confirm the information, the user needs to provide Facebook with a real name proof file, and the file sent must include the name and date of birth. These documents can be birth certificates, passports, marriage certificates, ID cards, checks, credit cards. Facebook says that their links to all users are encrypted, and that user-uploaded files are permanently deleted after they are verified. But as ordinary citizens, we can’t know who the files we uploaded will be seen, or whether they are actually deleted.
I believe that many people have received pushes from advertising companies. They control our spending habits, buying demand, credit card processing requirements, and even estimating when we need to change a car. These information pushers always know us well, even they are ahead of us. So what do they get from every Internet user? Acxiom is a very large data brokerage company worldwide, The company’s sales can reach $1.1 billion per year. Acxiom’s customers range from small businesses to large Fortune 500 companies. The main business is collecting data from Internet users, analyzing and even selling data. According to Jason Morris and Ed Lavandera, CNN reporters, “the average consumer has no idea that their intimate personal details are up for sale on these sites, They argue that having this information one click away could be a privacy risk” (2012).
As an ordinary user of the Internet, it seems difficult to imagine why our information can have great commercial value. When we use the mobile take-out app, we exchange geographical location information to get the service. When we use the social app, we exchange friends to get more mutual attention. When these services are linked to real-name systems, citizens’ privacy rights become difficult to define. In order to get the services provided by the Internet, we don’t know how much we paid. To give consumers more peace of mind, Abine has launched a “delete me” service. The content of this service is to remove people’s information from the network. At $99 per year, they will coordinate the removal of all your information, including phone numbers, faxes, emails and certification letters, from the data agency website.
This sounds ridiculous because we ourselves need to spend money to delete our own information from others. And, in order to better delete data, many times, these companies require users to submit more personal information. The Internet does not give users too many choices. When we need to use Internet services, we can only provide personal information. When the real name system appeared, it facilitated companies that collect personal information. They don’t need to do more work because our real identity has already appeared on the Internet. We are behind the screen, but we are still transparent for those who want to spy on us.
Due to the vague boundaries between privacy and personal information, today people are willing to distinguish this boundary between “online behavior” and “offline ID”. For example, as an Internet user, my words and deeds on the Internet, personal information published, such as political positions, belong to my personal information. But once it matches my true identity, it is personal privacy. Real-name policy blurs the boundaries between personal information and personal privacy.
according to Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: “There are basically two reactions to the flood of new technology and its impact on personal information and privacy: the first reaction, held by many people in IT industry and in R&D, is that we have zero privacy in the digital age and that there is no way we can protect it, so we should get used to the new world and get over it.The other reaction is that our privacy is more important than ever and that we can and we must attempt to protect it” (2014). In other words, if we choose to defend our personal privacy, then we will oppose the promotion of the real-name system.
Allen, professor of law and philosophy from University of Pennsylvania, mentions: “Privacy is a foundational good, Allen argues, a necessary tool in the liberty-lover’s kit for a successful life. A nation committed to personal freedom must be prepared to mandate privacy protections for its people, whether they eagerly embrace them or not” (2011). We are committed to providing and protecting a sound privacy system. For centuries, if the development of the Internet is the choice of the times and the only way to develop, then we must first ensure that the process of users using the Internet is safe and respected. of. The real-name system of the network blurs the boundaries between personal information and privacy, and more people are plagued by the network.
Part II: The real name system cannot effectively determine the true and false accounts
In the reading “commutational propaganda during the UK-EU Referendum”, The authors suggest that robots can easily send hundreds of tweets in the network and get comments and forwards. And the article survey shows that of the ten active accounts in “StrongerIn-Brexit”, 7 are robots. This means that the real-name policy of the network is not perfect, and there will still be many robot accounts active in it. And for the public, it is difficult to see the true and false of the account, these accounts are the same as the human account. Especially for the larger social platforms, they are not artificially detecting the authenticity of the account, but using computer algorithms to apply through the user on a large scale.
For example, you may often see an “I am not a robot” icon, and many times when we need to click on this image to confirm the human operation. But this design did not produce satisfactory results. Because there are many new algorithms and programs that can automatically and automatically click on this icon, or ignore this icon. So the real-name system can’t filter out the robot accounts and close them.
Let us review the purpose of the real-name system, which is that people who want to use the network can regulate their behavior and be responsible for their actions. And reduce the existence of false accounts, thus reducing the spread of false information. But the real-name policy did not make the situation better. More exaggerated is that there have been some articles on the Internet, these articles are mainly to teach people how to create a fake Facebook account.
In this wiki how page, there are detailed steps to teach users how to create a fake Facebook account. This site knows how all Facebook approves an account, so they try to find some vulnerabilities. For example, avoid using real faces, add unreliable credible details, and more. We only need to enter “Facebook” “account” in the search engine, you can find this page, it is not difficult to find. This shows that while Facebook is designing a real-name system, many people are also trying to disintegrate it.
In addition, there are many imperfections in Facebook’s real name policy. It does not allow words, phrases, unusual letters, and so on. But the problem is that not every country or tribe has a different form of name. For example, Native Americans, Irish, Japanese, and even Spanish all have account closures, because their names are not true. Moreover, there are some people who have reason to reasonably need an alias. For example, some humanitarians use their own accounts to write users who have comments about specific religious views. If their views are different from their families, communities, or countries, They are likely to receive imprisonment from an intolerant government.
According to Lil Miss Hot Mess, one of organizers of MyNameIs campaign: “One user wrote that her abuser showed up for events to which she had RSVPed on Facebook after being forced to change her account to her legal name.”If the account is judged according to Facebook’s rules, there are many people who should receive protection and there is a phenomenon that Facebook cannot be used normally.
According to Danah and Ellison: “teens are aware of potential privacy threats online and that many are proactive about taking steps to minimize certain potential risks, 46% reported including at least some false information in the account” (2007). This shows that in the Internet environment, no matter how the real-name system is operated, many people fill in false information more or less. Therefore, the real-name system does not improve the network environment. On the contrary, if people want to destroy the real-name system, they will have more ways to destroy the real-name system.
Part III: Real-name system creates opportunities for crime
The real-name system has deepened the Internet’s understanding of everyone. In the reading “Daily Me”, The author predicts the emergence of a phenomenon: the Internet can predict people’s preferences, political inclinations, beliefs, tastes, etc. based on your clicks and online activities. This information is only through people’s online traffic, and the placement of “cookies” on the Internet. You can get it. This is very terrible, but if the real-name system becomes a mandatory means of the Internet, we must bind our ID card and bank card when using the Internet, then the penetration of “daily me” in daily life will be more serious. We can imagine that in the absence of online real-name system, Internet algorithms can speculate on our identity and information through our reading of some websites, but most of them are limited to our favorite authors, stars, shopping habits and so on. Many people may be tired of such push messages, but there are many people who do not have any problems with this approach, and even make our online experience better. However, if the online real name system is implemented, our online behavior is linked to our ID card, race, and bank card information. Each of us, even if we are behind the screen, we are still transparent to the computer. Computer algorithms can collect all of our information to infer all the purposes of our online activities.
According to Chell “Everything you do online will be connected to you – and forever. The Internet never forgets and does not make a distinction between a good or bad representation of you.”
For example, if I buy a luxury item online, the cookie program on the computer can estimate my consumption level and purchasing ability according to my consumption habits. But if in the real name system, the computer can still grasp what kind of bank card I am using, and sell this information to a third party, so I will get countless advertisements about credit card processing. What’s more, when a malicious third party masters our information, they may swindle our friends and family around us, and it is easy to succeed because the information they have is very complete and true.
Conclusion
Many people use real-name systems to hope that more people can regulate network behavior and want a better network environment. However, real-name systems are not the best approach. If we want the Internet environment to improve, we can start from ourselves and introduce ourselves. We can actively introduce our situation on our personal homepage, such as career, hobbies and names. This does not necessarily involve a document, the bank card information will allow more people to know who you are. If we are willing to introduce ourselves more actively, we do not need to use any coercive means to force us to fill in the real information. The security of the network environment should rely on more people to consciously maintain in order to last.
References
Allen, A., 2011, Unpopular Privacy: What Must We Hide? Oxford: Oxford. University Press. Anderson, R.J., 2008, Security Engineering: A guide to building dependable distributed systems, Indianapolis, IN: Wiley.
Chell (2017). Should You Disclose Your Real Identity on YouTube? Pros, Cons & Tips. Retrieved from: https://viewsreviews.org/2017/07/disclose-real-identity-youtube-pros-cons-tips/
Danah, B. & Ellison, N; Social Network Sites: Definition, History, and Scholarship, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, Volume 13, Issue 1, 1 October 2007, Pages 210–230, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00393.x
Harp, D., Bachmann, I., & Guo, L. (2012). The whole online world is atching: Profiling social networking sites and activists in China, Latin America and the United States. International Journal Of Communication, 6 (24), 298-321. Retrieved from https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/1272/702
Howard, P.N., & Kollanyi, B. (2016).Bots, #StrongerIn, and #Brexit: Computational Propaganda during the UK-EU Referendum. COMPROP Research Note, 1-6. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2798311
Lil Miss Hot Mess (2015) Facebook’s ‘real name’ policy hurts real people and creates a new digital divide. Retrieved from: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jun/03/facebook-real-name-policy-hurts-people-creates-new-digital-divide
Morris, J. & Lavandera, E. (2012). Why big company buy, sell your data. CNN News. Retrieved from https://www.cnn.com/2012/08/23/tech/web/big-data-acxiom/index.html
Privacy and Information Technology, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. First published Thu Nov 20, 2014. Retrieved from: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/it-privacy/#Bib