background preloader

On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog

On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog
Peter Steiner's cartoon, as published in The New Yorker History[edit] In response to the comic's popularity, he stated, "I can't quite fathom that it's that widely known and recognized".[1] Context[edit] The cartoon marks a notable moment in the history of the Internet. Once the exclusive domain of government engineers and academics, the Internet was now a subject of discussion in general interest magazines like The New Yorker. The cartoon symbolizes an understanding of Internet privacy that stresses the ability of users to send and receive messages in general anonymity. Influences[edit] The Apple Internet suite Cyberdog was named after this cartoon.[14] See also[edit] References[edit] ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f Fleishman, Glenn (December 14, 2000). Further reading[edit] Jones, Christopher R. (2004). External links[edit] Related:  Social Media Lanscape

Who is harmed by a "Real Names" policy? This page lists groups of people who are disadvantaged by any policy which bans Pseudonymity and requires so-called "Real names" (more properly, legal names). Often theses policies attempt to reduce or eliminate the veil behind which online bullying, harrassment, and stalking can occur. However, there are unintended consequences to anti-pseudonymity policies. This article is an attempt to create a comprehensive list of groups of people who are affected by such policies. The cost to these people can be vast, including: harassment, both online and offline discrimination in employment, provision of services, etc. The groups of people who use pseudonyms, or want to use pseudonyms, are not a small minority (some of the classes of people who can benefit from pseudonyms constitute up to 50% of the total population, and many of the others are classes of people that almost everyone knows). Marginalised and endangered groups Edit People with direct identity concerns Subject-related considerations

natashenka | Hack those Tamagotchis! Marc L*** Mis en ligne le mercredi 7 janvier 2009 ; mis à jour le mardi 28 avril 2009. Bon annniversaire, Marc. Le 5 décembre 2008, tu fêteras tes vingt-neuf ans. J’ai eu un peu peur, au début, d’avoir un problème de source. Alors, Marc. Revenons à toi. On n’a pas parlé de musique. J’ai triché, une fois : pour avoir accès à ton profil Facebook (ce qui m’a bien aidé pour la suite), j’ai créé un faux profil et je t’ai proposé de devenir mon « ami ». Je pense à l’année 1998, il y a dix ans, quand tout le monde fantasmait déjà sur la puissance d’Internet. À la demande de l’intéressé, ce texte a été entièrement anonymisé et modifié (villes, prénoms, lieux, etc.) à la différence de la version parue dans Le Tigre en papier, dont seuls les noms propres des personnes citées étaient anonymisés.

Miscellany: Pseudonyms vs. Autonyms Recently there's been a controversy concerning Google's "Google+" social network. It seems that Google is actively enforcing a policy of using "real names" on the service. To quote from the published justification: Google services support three different types of use when it comes to your identity: unidentified, pseudonymous, identified. Google Profiles is a product that works best in the identified state. This way you can be certain you’re connecting with the right person, and others will have confidence knowing that there is someone real behind the profile they’re checking out. Google says they support three types of identities, but for Google Profiles "identified" ones (shown to be the same as on state-issued documents) work best. This rationale is clearly very weak. The use of the word "pseudonym" by both Google and the (innocent) victims of their policy to describe the name they are using, is, I believe revelatory of the source of the problem and needs to be cleared up.

FFDN ISP Database Outils de social bookmarking : comparatif de delicious, diigo et pearltrees Accueil > Boîte à outils, CDI, Etudiants 2.0 > Outils de social bookmarking : comparatif de delicious, diigo et pearltrees On désigne par « social bookmarking » le fait de stocker, de classer et de partager des signets. Ces derniers, appelés également favoris ou marque-pages, sont des pages Web au contenu pertinent auxquelles on souhaite avoir un accès ultérieur facilité. Cette activité participe pleinement à la veille informationnelle.En pratique : Vos pérégrinations sur le Web vous ont amené à découvrir des sites/pages dignes d’intérêt. Au lieu de saturer l’espace « favoris » de votre navigateur (Mozilla Firefox, Internet Explorer…), vous enregistrez leur adresse (c’est-à-dire leur url, du type : sur une interface en ligne. L’intérêt : retrouver vos favoris de n’importe quel ordinateur connecté à Internet,gérer une très grande quantité de signets,découvrir des sites à l’intérêt similaire en navigant dans les favoris publics des autres utilisateurs.

Google+, the pseudonym banstick, and the netizen cultural schism. « point7 As we all know by now, Google+ has a policy of only using real names (real world identities) in profiles. And they’re enforcing that policy with a big lumpy banstick. This is causing much angst, a lot of gnashing of teeth. However it seems that the technorati, as well as the Googlers (and Facebook before them) are unmoved by the arguments, and sincerely puzzled by the outcry. The big deal is that we are having an identity related clash of values, I think, between two very different kinds of heavily engaged online people: Integrated Identity: These are people who live online and offline with the same personality (including the Technorati because in fact their unified identity is their bread and butter), andSeparate Identities: people who keep their online and offline worlds quite separate, not for duplicitous reasons but because they are in many ways two people; the online person and the offline person. The integrated identities tend to work in the web 2.0 universe. Like this:

PAGES IN THE MIDDLE OF NOWHERE (former FIRST AND THE ONLY REAL NET ART GALLERY) Tran Phuong Thao - JAIST: Tại sao người Do Thái giỏi Đây là topic mà mình thích là vì: - Ko hiểu sao các giải Nobel, số người thắng giải từ Israel nhiều hơn những nước khác - Trong research, những giáo sư đầu ngành toàn là người Israel - Mình có 3 idols (Albert Einstein, Eminem, và Adi Shamir) thì hết 2 trong số họ là người Do Thái. + Einstein: là người quá nổi tiếng với những phát minh thế kỉ và có những câu nói mà mình luôn thấy đúng + Adi Shamir (hiện vẫn còn sống): người chế ra RSA, Secret Sharing Scheme và rất nhiều bài báo được cited. H-index hiện tại là 75. + Eminem: 1 ca sĩ Bài viết sau đây của tác giả Hoàng Anh Tuấn. Bài viết cho thấy sự hiểu biết rất sâu sắc về người Do Thái - cả con người, tôn giáo, chính trị lẫn văn hóa. Chỉ có cái là mình ko biết độ tin cậy của bài báo ra sao thôi. Anyway, bài super hay Phần 1: Với tổng số khoảng 14,5 triệu người sống rải rác tại 73 nước trên khắp thế giới (trong đó riêng tại Israel là 6 triệu, ở Mỹ 5,6 triệu), người Do Thái chiếm tỷ lệ rất nhỏ là 0,2% tổng dân số thế giới. Một số điểm nổi bật:

skud | I’ve been suspended from Google+ Mirrored from Infotropism. You can comment there or here. So, just to backtrack and fill everyone in on the details: I’ve been a strong advocate of pseudonymity for a considerable time. Viral shows off his home-made "I know Skud" button, on my second-last day at Google So today, I got off a plane this afternoon to find a pile of tweets, emails, and blog comments asking whether it was true that my Google+ account had been suspended. I know there’s a lot of people wondering what happens when you get suspended, so here is my experience so far. Gmail works fine, I can check my email. When I click on “+Skud” in my Google toolbar (top left), it takes me to Google+, and I can see my stream, and that 16 new people are following me. Your profile is suspended. Note, by the way, that the Google+ “Community Standards” (actually linked as Content Policy at the bottom of most pages on the site — just one of many inconsistencies) says: Anyway, I clicked through the form, which looked like this:

Olia Lialina Olia Lialina (born in Moscow) is a pioneer Internet artist and theorist as well as an experimental film and video critic and curator. Lialina studied film criticism and journalism at Moscow State University, then followed with art residencies at C3 (Budapest,) and Villa Walderta (Munich,).[1] She founded Art Teleportacia, a web gallery of her work, which also features links to remakes of her most famous work "My boyfriend came back from the war" [2] and was one of the organizers and later, director of Cine Fantom, an experimental cinema club in Moscow co-founded in 1995 by Lialina with Gleb Aleinikov, Andrej Silvestrov, Boris Ukhananov, Inna Kolosova and others. "[My boyfriend came back from the war" is a site where there are many frames consisting of sentences and pictures. The user has a choice of clicking what frame they want. Works[edit] Olia Lialina created the netart work My Boyfriend Came Back From The War. References[edit] Further reading[edit] Rosenthal, S., & Dinkla, S. (2002).

Related: