Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Apple's Game Center Shares Your Real Name

Soulskill posted more than 3 years ago | from the slow-erosion-of-anonymity dept.

Iphone 182

dotarray writes "Apple's Game Center has just made itself a few enemies through a simple change to their Terms of Service. Now, whenever you send a friend invitation, your real name will be attached as well as your Apple ID." Apparently they didn't learn from the poor reaction to Blizzard's similar idea.

cancel ×

182 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

First Impression (5, Insightful)

Haedrian (1676506) | more than 3 years ago | (#34401660)

First thought which came to my mind:

1. Apple has a game center?
2. This will have 0 negative reaction whatsoever. This is Apple people. If apple forced you to sign your name in blood to buy an iPhone, you would.

Re:First Impression (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34401686)

Wait, you didn't?

Re:First Impression (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34402224)

Well I opted for 5 minutes in the woodshed with the devil.

Re:First Impression (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402268)

Never again. That guy's so damn vanilla, simply no fun at all with him.

Re:First Impression (5, Funny)

dzfoo (772245) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402274)

OMG! you met Steve Jobs?

      -dZ.

Re:First Impression (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34402682)

Yes, but not face-to-face.

Re:First Impression (1)

VisiX (765225) | more than 3 years ago | (#34403484)

Steve Jobs salad isn't going to toss itself.

Re:First Impression (1, Insightful)

TheLink (130905) | more than 3 years ago | (#34401688)

First thought that came to my mind:

Real Name? You're just writing it wrong...

Re:First Impression (2, Informative)

spagetti_code (773137) | more than 3 years ago | (#34401730)

Have you actually *read* the iPhone contract? I'm surprised they didn't require blood.

When I got my iPhone, I asked to read the contract.
The store workers had never had anyone ask, so they didn't know where it was.
Took them a long time to find a copy.
It was pretty nasty, but from memory (they wouldn't let me keep their
only copy now that they knew where it was) the worst section was something of the form:

"if we suspect you may have altered your phone, you agree to let us cancel
your phone service, and you will keep paying out the rest of your term."

Suspicion (not proof, just if they felt like it) was enough to give them the right
to cancel my phone service (and reclaim the phone phone IIRC) and I had to
keep paying. the monthly fee. And there was no
appeal or ability to protest your innocence.

Re:First Impression (1)

TheLink (130905) | more than 3 years ago | (#34401842)

So did you keep the phone and agree to the contract?

Re:First Impression (1)

MrQuacker (1938262) | more than 3 years ago | (#34401936)

Course he did.

I'm tempted to go to an ATT or Apple store and do the same thing. Then explain how their legalese word fuckery lost them a customer.

Re:First Impression (1)

Cwix (1671282) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402514)

It would be lost on the drones your speaking to.

Re:First Impression (5, Informative)

DJRumpy (1345787) | more than 3 years ago | (#34403118)

Amazing. I love how the Anti-Apple folks on Slashdot are so quick to jump on the bandwagon based on hearsay without the slightest bit of proof offered except for word of mouth.

Here is the Oh So Elusive customer agreement. it's offered with every phone. I seriously doubt the AT&T store couldn't give you a copy. It's freely available on the web.

http://www.wireless.att.com/cell-phone-service/legal/index.jsp?q_termsKey=wirelessCustomerAgreement&q_termsName=Wireless+Customer+Agreement&print=true#whatIsTheTermOfMyService [att.com]

FYI, jailbreaking is legal, so it doesn't meet the definition of 'unlawful' in the contract. In addition, this won't satisfy your anti-Apple craving because the contract is with AT&T, not Apple.

if we have reasonable cause to believe that your Equipment is being used for an unlawful purpose or in a way that (i) is harmful to, interferes with, or may adversely affect our Services or the network of any other provider, (ii) interferes with the use or enjoyment of Services received by others, (iii) infringes intellectual property rights, (iv) results in the publication of threatening or offensive material, or (v) constitutes spam or other abusive messaging or calling, a security risk, or a violation of privacy,

Of course what you do with that phone after it's jailbroken is up to you. You might also try to remember the fact that every cell provider has similar verbiage in regards to unauthorized tethering, IP Rights, etc. If you opt to break the contract after signing it, then that is your responsibility, not theirs.

Re:First Impression (1, Insightful)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 3 years ago | (#34403224)

>>>I love how the Anti-Apple folks on Slashdot are so quick to jump on the bandwagon

Maybe they just haven't learned to shut-up. I have. I got tired of being modded "troll" whenever I made a "Apple acts no better than microsoft" or similar comment. Apple Fanboys have mod points and they use them to censor people that criticize their Holy Relics or messiah.

BTW:

(1) The store has a photocopier. I would have asked for a copy of the contract else: No sale.
(2) Contracts are not binding if they violate State or Union law. You can not sign your rights or legally-protected privileges away. Paypal discovered that earlier this decade when the judge nullified most of their Terms of Service, and then ordered them to repay all the money they had stolen from customers w/o due process.

Re:First Impression (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34403278)

FYI, claiming someone treats their phone as a holy relic just makes YOU look like a fanboy, not them. Folks are modded as trolls because they tend to do just as the parent above described. They post hearsay, inflammatory text about 'holy relics' and the 'Alter of Steve', or unsupported 'facts' that when examined, often turn out to be less than truthful.

Did you ever stop to consider that perhaps you actually were being a troll?

Re:First Impression (2)

intheshelter (906917) | more than 3 years ago | (#34403564)

Damn you and your facts!! This is Slashdot. Where people attempt to look cool by putting down Apple and saying that Apple products are only for people who want to look cool!

Not blood ... livers! (5, Interesting)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | more than 3 years ago | (#34401916)

I'm surprised they didn't require blood.

Apple needs livers! Soylent iPhones are made of human livers!

I finally bought my girlfriend an iPhone 4, because I could buy it officially unlocked. It did annoy me that I had to install iTunes to get it activated, though.

On the positive side it is a very impressive chunk of technology, and it is fun to play with. Both of us are left handed, and we have not experienced any problems with dropped calls, which are apparently more common with left handers.

Although I am not an Apple fanboy, I can understand how the Apple Inquisition's three main weapons, are: fear, surprise and ruthless efficiency...and an almost fanatical devotion to the Jobs . . . their *four*...no... *Amongst* their weapons . . .

Re:Not blood ... livers! (2, Funny)

stealth_finger (1809752) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402778)

Although I am not an Apple fanboy, I can understand how the Apple Inquisition's three main weapons, are: fear, surprise and ruthless efficiency...and an almost fanatical devotion to the Jobs . . . their *four*...no... *Amongst* their weapons . . .

Nobody expects the Apple Inquisition!

Re:First Impression (3, Interesting)

houghi (78078) | more than 3 years ago | (#34401930)

This would be great in Belgium. If you were not allowed to take (a copy of) the contract with you it would pretty much mean you do not have a contract, regardless of wehther you signed some other paper where it says that you read it.

Here you would need to write at least "written and approved" and sign. Also the other party (sales rep) would need to sign and each of you must have a copy.

In reality it would mean that the customers would not have a contract.

And even then cancellation would mean then end of payment, regardless of what the contract says as that will be against the law (and could make part or whole of the contract void).

Re:First Impression (1)

AEton (654737) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402172)

And if the contract is in Dutch but you're not in Flanders, it's null and void, right? :)

Re:First Impression (1)

GNious (953874) | more than 3 years ago | (#34403232)

Vlanderen or Brussels - both allow contracts to be in Dutch.
I always request my official documents in Dutch (living in Brussels). It confuses people, and the responses I get boil down to: "This is Belgium - we speak French here!"

*sigh*

But the "Read and Approved" thing I have to do is both annoying and nice. Protects all parties.

Would *you* keep paying them? (1)

RulerOf (975607) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402838)

And even then cancellation would mean then end of payment, regardless of what the contract says

If my service was canceled and my hardware was taken away from me, I sure as hell wouldn't keep paying the bill.

Gotta make sure it's less than $2000 though. A judge would throw that shit right out. But if Jammie Thomas is any indication, a jury would be stupid enough to hand back a verdict saying you actually owe them the money.

Re:First Impression (1)

noidentity (188756) | more than 3 years ago | (#34401970)

Suspicion (not proof, just if they felt like it) was enough to give them the right to cancel my phone service (and reclaim the phone phone IIRC) and I had to keep paying the monthly fee. And there was no appeal or ability to protest your innocence.

By signing the contract, YOU would be giving them that right. Your appeal or ability to avoid this is to not sign the contract. It's ALL voluntary, which is why you shouldn't sign contracts you find disgusting.

Re:First Impression (1)

delinear (991444) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402726)

Depending on your jurisdiction, it's still not necessarily binding. Plenty of countries have laws or legal precedent to the effect that, to be legally binding, a contract must be equitable to both parties and cannot be unfairly one-sided, meaning any clause in said contract in said jurisdiction would be open to challenge in court (that's not necessarily saying this particular clause would be thrown out, but it's at least not so black and white as many people believe).

Re:First Impression (1)

nosferatu1001 (264446) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402868)

Not legally binding in the UK or, I suspect, most enlightened countries.

Being able to force contracts of adhesion (not actual contracts, from a basic idea of how contracts should be formed) means you are then regulated as to their content.

Re:First Impression (0, Troll)

farnsworth (558449) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402092)

[...] I asked to read the contract. The store workers had never had anyone ask, so they didn't know where it was. Took them a long time to find a copy. It was pretty nasty, but from memory [...]

How do you function in life spending your time reading every last bit of every last detail of every last "contract" you enter into? I had to terminate a Sprint contract because I moved to a place where I couldn't get service. According to my "contract" with Sprint, it was all my fault and I owed them thousands of dollars. Of course in actuality, I didn't. We parted ways after a quick phone call, and it was fine.

Do you pore over the signs on the door of a super market before you go in? Do you read all the licence and copyright agreements before you update your OS? Do you go outside before you memorize every aspect of your city's civic code?

Or do you just have a bone to pick with AT&T? I'm seriously curious...

Re:First Impression (2, Insightful)

gshegosh (1587463) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402180)

And you've bought the phone anyway. What do you think is going to stop them from such practices? Government? Or declining sales?

Re:First Impression (0)

delinear (991444) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402758)

Maybe he has no intention of modifying his phone in such a way that it would ever be an issue - that doesn't stop him thinking it's a poor deal for the purchaser, but likewise it doesn't necessarily preclude him buying the phone. I hardly think a handful of people refusing to buy the phone will stop them including these clauses. More likely the backlash from existing customers with jailbroken phones if they ever try to enforce them would be a bigger concern.

Re:First Impression (0, Redundant)

eugene2k (1213062) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402190)

So where was the part about selling your soul then?

Re:First Impression (2, Informative)

khchung (462899) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402292)

Welcome to the broken America mobile market. In places where the market actually has competition, eg, Asia , we can buy phones without contract and then use whichever carrier we like, and switch carrier whenever we like. If you enter into a contact with the carrier, you can do so without telling them what's model is your phone (none of their business anyway), and your can change/jb your phone without affecting the contract.

Re:First Impression (1)

dimeglio (456244) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402444)

Those terms and conditions are meaningless if they attempt to override any of your legal rights. At least that's how it works in our country. Sure they can cancel but they can't force you to pay for a service you no longer have.

Re:First Impression (1)

delinear (991444) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402772)

Those terms and conditions are meaningless if they attempt to override any of your legal rights. At least that's how it works in our country. Sure they can cancel but they can't force you to pay for a service you no longer have.

We're talking about the US, where I'm given to understand the cust^H^H^Honsumer pretty much has no rights.

Re:First Impression (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34402954)

"where I'm given to understand the consumer pretty much has no rights."

You should review consumer rights then. We have MANY rights.

http://www.ftc.gov/consumer

Of course, it is easier to suggest we have zero rights than use Google. >_>

Re:First Impression (1)

delinear (991444) | more than 3 years ago | (#34403496)

You're right, I haven't spent a great deal of time reading up on this because it has little bearing on me. To clarify, I wasn't trying to be disparaging, I just know that often when people here talk about consumer protections that we take for granted in much of Europe, many people from the US comment there are no equivalent rights or greatly diminished equivalents over there (hence "I'm given to understand" as opposed to "I know for a fact").

Re:First Impression (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34403136)

Those terms and conditions are meaningless if they attempt to override any of your legal rights. At least that's how it works in our country.

In our country (USA) the way it works is that corporations lie about your rights until you believe the lies. It also helps that they can buy judges and juries, and have highly paid lawyers.

Just because we have laws that prevent these Apple "contracts" from being legally binding, doesn't mean you can assume that you are not bound. Nor that the hounds will not be released upon you for breaking those bonds.

Face it, we stopped being consumers somewhere over the last 30 years, now we are just slaves to our corporate masters.

Re:First Impression (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34403634)

Whoever you are, would you please get an account so I can give you mod points? I'm not going to waste them on an AC.

If you are registered but posting as an AC (like me) then never mind...

Re:First Impression (1)

zippthorne (748122) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402824)

They just stick that stuff in there. It's probably not enforceable.

The real issue is the spaghetti approach to contracts that our current legal system seems to create a preference for: just throw any onerous terms in and see if anything sticks, maybe you'll slip something through the courts.

I think the solution would be to get rid of severability. If you want contract terms to be separable, they should be in separate contracts.

Not everything in a contract is binding. (1)

Zero__Kelvin (151819) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402842)

You do not that everything in a contract is not legally binding, even if you sign it right? This is why there is a clause to the effect that if any part of the contract is found to be invalid, the remaining parts are still binding. A lot gets put in there just so they can convince you that you don't have a leg to stand on, in hopes that the client doesn't know any better, as is quite often the case. I rather doubt that a court would order you to keep paying on the contract, or give up the phone for that matter.

Re:First Impression (2, Insightful)

nosferatu1001 (264446) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402844)

My suspiciion is that this would be in the US?

In the UK such a term would fall foul of UCTA as well as general Sales of Goods, and would be unenforceable.

Re:First Impression (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34403548)

When I got my iPhone,

Way to protest shitty business practices there...

Re:First Impression (1)

BasilBrush (643681) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402112)

I'm sure it'll have similar reaction to Facebook using real names. A few privcy nuts on Slashdot will get their knickers in a twist. Meanwhile, real people will prefer it - they know their friends real names far better than their usernames.

Re:First Impression (1)

pete's-brain (1712936) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402718)

1. Apple has a game center?

Exactly, don't expect an uproar. No one cares.

---------
petes-brain.com - where you'll find waaayyyy better terms than apple will ever give you

Re:First Impression (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34403068)

My first thought was "if you have nothing to hide, why do you care?".

After all, it is the logic that every fucktard out there applies to every invasion of MY privacy.

Spartacus! (4, Funny)

Random Data (538955) | more than 3 years ago | (#34401704)

As far as Apple is aware, I'm Steve Jobs.

Re:Spartacus! (2, Funny)

martin-boundary (547041) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402026)

Don't worry, the Apple billing system knows you're not the real Steve Jobs, he's already registered under the name God...

Re:Spartacus! (1)

Adambomb (118938) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402394)

Don't worry, the Apple billing system knows you're not the real Steve Jobs, he's already registered under the name God...

God wouldn't be up this late...

Blizzard RealID does the same (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34401708)

Using Blizz RealID to contact friends will share your real name.

What was changed after the uproar was that RealID didn't become necessity to write to forums.

Re:Blizzard RealID does the same (2, Informative)

Montezumaa (1674080) | more than 3 years ago | (#34401768)

You can add people without sharing your real name in either the World of Warcraft, or through the Battle.net service for Starcraft 2(SC2) and other games. You can choose you share your real name with others, when adding them as a friend, or you can choose not to.

it's apple (1)

bakamorgan (1854434) | more than 3 years ago | (#34401724)

either this will go like blizzard or everyone will be all happy cuz apple did it then everyone will follow suit... my hope is towards the same as blizzard

Re:it's apple (1, Interesting)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402288)

My hope is, people will follow through it like the sheeple they are, then it backfires BADLY at them, with stalkers and stolen IDs that make the evening news.

That's my hope.

Re:it's apple (1)

truthsearch (249536) | more than 3 years ago | (#34403530)

I don't know anyone who "invites a friend" on the GameCenter who doesn't know them in person. Unless you're friending people you randomly find in forums this isn't an issue.

If you're not an Apple customer why would you care what people's reaction is? Or are you just a hater?

Re:it's apple (1)

dzfoo (772245) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402306)

Blizzard tried to introduce this feature to an already existing community of anonymous people. Apple introduced the Game Center and Ping services as a way to interact with your family and friends. It was never intended to be a free-for-all, anonymous community and lots of people accept this.

        -dZ.

Re:it's apple (3, Informative)

delinear (991444) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402848)

Blizzard tried to introduce this feature to an already existing community of anonymous people. Apple introduced the Game Center and Ping services as a way to interact with your family and friends. It was never intended to be a free-for-all, anonymous community and lots of people accept this.

Never intended? Maybe some should tell Apple that, they seem to think otherwise [apple.com] :

Game Center lets friends — and soon-to-be-friends — in on the action. Invite someone to join, then get a game going. Or go up against people you don’t know, from anywhere in the world, in a multiplayer game.

Emphasis mine, wording very much Apple's.

Re:it's apple (1)

DJRumpy (1345787) | more than 3 years ago | (#34403312)

Not quite. Blizzard tried to force people to use their real name on the blizzard Forums as well as on Battle Net, so that any stranger could see your real name. As far as I know, the only people who see your real name in this case are those you specifically send an invitation to (meaning someone you know).

Blizzard tried to introduce this feature to an already existing community of anonymous people. Apple introduced the Game Center and Ping services as a way to interact with your family and friends. It was never intended to be a free-for-all, anonymous community and lots of people accept this.

Re:it's apple (1)

dzfoo (772245) | more than 3 years ago | (#34403642)

I think your comment agrees with my point, though you said it more directly: the Blizzard Forum was public and people expected to be anonymous, while the Apple service is intended for private interactions between already acquainted people.

        -dZ.

Popularity? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34401772)

Do enough people use this service to complain about it?

Correction, do enough people not members of the Flock of Jobs use this service to complain about it?

World of Warcraft players are a lot different than "Apple Game Center" players.

If it's a friend... (2, Insightful)

91degrees (207121) | more than 3 years ago | (#34401826)

Chances are they know your real name.

Blizzard users objected to needing to use their names on the forums.

not quite like Blizzard (3, Informative)

Achoi77 (669484) | more than 3 years ago | (#34401838)

I figured Apple's intention is to thwart spammers; if you were able to recognize the real name of your buddy you were more likely accept the invitation rather than someone with a username like "THISISNOTVIAGRASPAM." Playing the whole social angle.

What Blizzard was intending was different. They wanted to put paper trail on all users on a publicly viewable form, in the interest of minimizing trolls and thus improving the quality of posts on their forums - to 'shame' the trolls from posting mindless drivel. Yeah, that didn't work out too well.

Re:not quite like Blizzard (2, Interesting)

Haedrian (1676506) | more than 3 years ago | (#34401994)

Since the game center works on their iProducts only, any spammer who is going to buy a ton of those in order to spam other players deserves a medal for stupidity.

I'm pretty sure you can easily lock the phone of a spammer (or at least stop him making accounts) without needing to spread names around.

Re:not quite like Blizzard (1)

Barny (103770) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402034)

But all my friends know me as CHEAPMEDS$$$NOPRESCRIPTIONNEEDED, if it uses my real name half of them won't recognise it.

Re:not quite like Blizzard (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402352)

You might be kidding, but it is actually true for me. I have a few fairly good friends whose real names will at best make me go "who?" because I never even heard their real name, let alone connect it with the person. Likewise, they have no idea what my real name would be. And there is effectively no reason for it.

A name is an identification string, preferably only usable within context. Just as global variables are bad because they can interfere with local requirements, so are globally known names bad because they might give away information that certain functional units are not supposed to have. Plus they make it very much impossible to encapsulate anything sensibly.

Likewise, I use different names and IDs for different circles of people I deal with. Partly for good reason, partly because I don't see why person A needs to know that I deal with person B in other circumstances, even if these two people do not even know about each other's existence. It does not provide me with a benefit and there is a nonzero chance that it might be a drawback. Should it turn out to be beneficial I can still opt to connect two different IDs and inform the respective circle of people about them belonging to the same person.

Where is my benefit for using a real ID?

Re:not quite like Blizzard (1)

truthsearch (249536) | more than 3 years ago | (#34403558)

"Fairly good friends" whose real names you don't know? I don't think that phrase means what you think it means.

Bullshit, sorry (4, Insightful)

Moraelin (679338) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402164)

Actually, BS. While the trolls were the first excuse Blizzard thought of, they also gave interviews in which they explicitly stated that they want to get more users out of it. They were hoping you'd basically advertise their cash cow for them, either directly or via the human tendency for mindless conformism. Think, "ooh, Jack and Jill from work and 10 of their facebook 'friends' are playing WoW, let's join them."

Heck, they even tried to spin it as a positive thing that they want your "friends of friends" (read, and anyone from the list of 2000 names someone can't even remember without the list, of someone you added just because there was no other global friend option) to keep messaging you they want you to return and tank for their preciousss epics. That's their #1 way to retain players long past the point where they've seen all quests and got bored with the repetitive raid grind. There must be a million people just in Blizzard's player base who are there just because of some delusion that if they quit a game they got bored with, or even if they skip one raid, they'll be somehow failing their guild and their "friends" who need them. Blizard just wanted to take that to the next level: let those people know who you are, where you are and what are they doing, and basically just help create more peer pressure to keep paying.

Heck, for their own BattleNet the above _still_ is listed as an advantage. That you can see if someone is playing Diablo or StarCraft instead of coming help get your epics, and you can message them to come back.

Basically I doubt that trolls were even a factor there, except as a more palatable excuse.

And in that aspect, I don't think Apple's move is any different. They too hope to use people's names to get more business, and probably give just as little about your privacy if it helps make a quick buck.

And frankly, how is it different from spam anyway? Anyone who knows me well enough to be called a friend, already knows how to contact me and ask me if I want to join in anything. Like, you know, send an email first, or give a call, or even an SMS, or whatever. If an invitation comes out of the blue actually needs something -- name or otherwise -- to convince me it's not random spam, then it _is_ spam. The only difference is that instead of being a batch run, it gives idiots a button to spam all their contacts for Apple's benefit.

And really, how's plastering someone's name on it going to help anyway? If I see my buddy's John Doe' name on an unsolicited email trying to sell me Viagra or wanting me to open a "taxes.xls.exe" file, I will think "Joe Job", not "ooh, it must be genuine". Why would I think if it's an other kind unsolicited ad, and John never bothered telling me about it before, it's any better? And yes, there will be smacktards who fall for it anyway, but then you could give most of those an email from "login.scam@i-pwn-u.ru" and they'd follow it anyway.

Re:Bullshit, sorry (1)

stewbacca (1033764) | more than 3 years ago | (#34403584)

Think, "ooh, Jack and Jill from work and 10 of their facebook 'friends' are playing WoW, let's join them."

And the problem with that is what, exactly? Isn't that kind of the entire point of social media?

Re:not quite like Blizzard (1)

ukyoCE (106879) | more than 3 years ago | (#34403150)

I'm not sure if it's spammers exactly, but Apple probably wanted people to see something to indicate who was adding them besides an email address.

WOW is an MMO where you spend a lot of time with people you only know from the internet. Real names don't even mean anything there between most friends. "Tom? Who the crap is that? Oh, you mean elwinlybronzebottom?"

Gamescenter, from what I can tell, is for you to play Scrabble with people you're already friends with. Does it even support playing with random players on the internet? Maybe some games do, but without voice or fast-typing chat, you're probably not going to be making many friends on the service.

They could avoid the whole issue by only showing your real name when you add someone by e-mail address, which you tend to give out to people you know IRL, and not using real names when friending by Apple/Gamecenter ID. If you're adding someone from a menu within a game, for instance, odds are you don't know the person. (If such alternate friends-adding options even exist, which they probably don't)

Kiinda like Liberals cheering for Wikileaks (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34401844)

I'm hoping Apple users embrace this. After all, what do you have to hide? Hmmm???? If you aren't guilty of anything, why not share your name with the world. Of course, people that understand computers will do what I'm doing, and go anonymous. But that's not Apple's market is it.

It's for retards that think they're computer savvy.

Re:Kiinda like Liberals cheering for Wikileaks (1)

powerspike (729889) | more than 3 years ago | (#34401858)

to hide nothing....
but this is games we are talking about, if you beat some kiddie in his mothers basement, he's going to take exception to you...

Re:Kiinda like Liberals cheering for Wikileaks (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34402082)

Kiinda like Liberals cheering for Wikileaks

Ahh, bringing politics into this discussion, and implying governments and corporations should have the same right to privacy as real people (not that legal definition BS with corporate personhood). Fuck you.

Re:Kiinda like Liberals cheering for Wikileaks (1)

iainl (136759) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402162)

Sure, you've probably got perfectly good reasons to hide your real name from the Internet At Large, e.g. ID theft.

But, as I'm a computer-savvy 'retard', could you explain a bit more why I should be hiding my real name from those I send a friend request to? After all, they're my friends, and already know it.

Re:Kiinda like Liberals cheering for Wikileaks (2, Informative)

delinear (991444) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402870)

The way this works in reality, people send friend requests to complete strangers all the time. Say you've trawled through hundreds of idiots in various online games and you finally meet someone who matches your play style and seems like they'd be fun to play with again. You can either send them a friend request while not really knowing the first thing about them, or you can hope that, over the course of hundreds more games, you will meet them multiple times until you eventually consider them a real friend. Most people go with the former, you wouldn't necessarily want to send that person your name.

Re:Kiinda like Liberals cheering for Wikileaks (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402372)

Care to show how opening government secrets (read: Secrets my employee has from me as his employer) is somehow similar to relaying private secrets of a person to the public?

Re:Kiinda like Liberals cheering for Wikileaks (1)

zippthorne (748122) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402852)

Didn't wikileaks wiki leak the climategate emails..?

Re:Kiinda like Liberals cheering for Wikileaks (1)

konohitowa (220547) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402926)

Didn't wikileaks wiki leak the climategate emails..?

Obviously you haven't accepted what's written in the handbook. Back to stage one of reintegration for you!

This is serious (2, Funny)

Chrisq (894406) | more than 3 years ago | (#34401862)

This is serious. I mean everyone knows that using the Apple game centre is tantamount to an admission of being gay.

Re:This is serious (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34402050)

Nah, its apple products in general, we call it the "three iStrikes rule" or "the hardest part of buying a mac, is telling your parents you're gay".

Do I get double mod points for using both your/you're correctly in a sentence?

Re:This is serious (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34402364)

Do I get double mod points for using both your/you're correctly in a sentence?

Nah, you get a back-knuckle *PUNCH* for being a homophobic twat.

Re:This is serious (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34402562)

Do I get double mod points for using both your/you're correctly in a sentence?

Nah, you get a back-knuckle *PUNCH* for being a homophobic twat.

Ooooh scratch my eyes out. You are butch deary.

Re:This is serious (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34403450)

Do I get double mod points for using both your/you're correctly in a sentence?

Nah, you get a back-knuckle *PUNCH* for being a homophobic twat.

You keep using that word, "homophobic". I do not think it means what you think it means.

Just sayin'. I'm not scared of you fags, I just think you're immoral sexual deviants that spread AIDS faster than any other group of people so just I don't like you. (Plus your speech impediments or fake accents to alert everyone to your deviancy is just fucking ANNOYING. Thssssssooooooo annoying!)

Not a problem (1)

duk242 (1412949) | more than 3 years ago | (#34401874)

When Blizzard did it, a bunch of people complained, but then you realise that you're adding friends of your own, it's not like it's broadcasting your email and name across the internet to everyone. Who over the age of 15 these days cares if their supposed "friends" knows their real name?

Re:Not a problem (3, Insightful)

xclr8r (658786) | more than 3 years ago | (#34401938)

I don't share my last name with people I game with. Actually I don't even share my 1st name with them, they just call me by my avatar's name. Having my real name + an e-mail address for a guild forum where some one can log my ip address is just asking for trouble.

Re:Not a problem (1)

MareLooke (1003332) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402402)

There is no reason to give your RealID (as the thing is called) to anyone in your guild. It's only useful for cross-game (as long as you stay with Blizzard games anyway, yay for another closed platform) and cross-realm messaging and if I care enough to bother contacting them when they/I move to another realm they probably know my name anyway. For guildies (why even add those to your friends list anyway, something wrong with the guild listing?) or realm specific buddies you can just use the good old nickname based functionality.

Your name's also not displayed anywhere on sites or anything except possibly for people you added, if you use your real name for a guild website that's your choice, not something Blizzard forces onto you.

Whooptie-crap. (1)

magnusrex1280 (1075361) | more than 3 years ago | (#34401880)

Anyone I'm sending game invites to already knows my real name. I only care about gaming with people I already know in the real world.

Apple doesn't "get" Social Media (4, Interesting)

Renderer of Evil (604742) | more than 3 years ago | (#34401882)

Apple is great at many things. They're just excellent in their core competencies. No debate about it.

But they absolutely suck at social media on a grand scale. Hard to believe how tone-deaf they are when it comes to stuff like Ping and Gamecenter. Does it come from the leadership? Maybe. The company is run by old guys in their 40's and up. Maybe they just don't get it.

Perhaps they can hire back Guy Kawasaki to spearhead their social media wing. He saved Apple's bacon once. Perhaps he'll do it again if they asked him nicely.

Re:Apple doesn't "get" Social Media (4, Interesting)

dzfoo (772245) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402354)

I think you do not understand Apple's approach to "social media". There is a large part of the population who is not interested in the accretion of unknown and anonymous "friends", and thus shy away from vastly over-abused services like Facebook. Apple is attempting to fill that gap by offering a "social media" experience that is truly social, and revolves around people's real friends and family.

Their intention was never to compete with Facebook or the like, but to offer their users a way to participate in music sharing and games with their friends without having to go out into the wilderness.

          -dZ.

Re:Apple doesn't "get" Social Media (1)

capmilk (604826) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402920)

You do realise Guy Kawaski also isn't as young as he used to be? Though he probably aged a lot slower than the management guys...

Re:Apple doesn't "get" Social Media (1)

boarder8925 (714555) | more than 3 years ago | (#34403544)

The company is run by old guys in their 40's and up. Maybe they just don't get it.

On the contrary, I think they see millions of young people who are willing to hand over much more than their real names to Facebook and so are trying to extend that concept to their own products.

Re:Apple doesn't "get" Social Media (2)

stewbacca (1033764) | more than 3 years ago | (#34403608)

Hey, hey...easy with the "40 and up" zingers! I'll be 41 in a couple of weeks and you are right. I really don't get it (social media). I do have a facebook account that I use to post random musing and pics of my children, but other than that, we "old" guys are mostly too busy with real life.

Good idea (0)

teg (97890) | more than 3 years ago | (#34401990)

This is a good idea. When you send an invite to an email address of a friend today, they won't know it's from you - they will just see a gamer tag. Similarly, I have no idea who sent the requests I've gotten.

A key difference to the Blizzard scenario, is that this is you sending this information targeted to a friend - rather than broadcasting it to everyone in forums, and, eventually, google. People are understandably a bit squeamish about getting their name attached to this when people google you in 5 years.

Re:Good idea (5, Insightful)

Haedrian (1676506) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402032)

The thing is that-

1. If your friend already knows your first and last name, you probably know him enough to be able to talk to him about it on another communication channel ("Hey, I'm adding you to my apple game list")
2. If you don't know your friend personally, because you met him in another game, or another community - then you probably don't want him knowing details like that. I play a lot with the same community. In this case they will know me enough to recognise my nickname, but giving them my name and surname will not help them identify me any more than I would want them to.

So said stave (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34402004)

all hail stave!

The difference between Apple and Blizzard (2, Informative)

Sharp-kun (1539733) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402156)

The difference between this and Blizzard's RealID is that RealID is a service on tp of the normal friends system in WoW - you can friend someone without giving your name, you just don't get as much info (see what char/server they're on at any time etc). Blizzard marketed it as something to use with people you actually know, not that Death Knight you thought was hot that one evening in Gundrak". That to me made it a lot less objectionable since there was no obligation to use it with all my friends. Apple on the other hand seem to be going with this by default.

Nope, not really (1, Insightful)

Moraelin (679338) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402228)

Blizzard too wanted to do just that. They backed down on RealID only because of the massive negative reaction -- and the cynics would say probably temporarily, until they manage to find some better excuse.

The original idea for RealID was precisely that it will be on for everyone. Including, yes, that Death Knight who you think has teh hots for you because she boosted you once in the Deadmines, and that healer who must be all over your junk 'cause she was healing you more, and that hunter who probably wants your child because she agreed with you twice on the boards, and whatnot. And everyone who ever posted on the boards, including to ask for some tech support. Why do you think there was that much outrage and some women were scared shitless of stalkers and rapists when that idea came out?

So let's not pretend that Blizzard was so much smarter or better people. Blizzard wanted to rape your privacy twice as hard as Apple for a quick buck, they just had to back down when their idea turned out as popular as free kicks in the crotch for everyone.

Re:The difference between Apple and Blizzard (1)

stewbacca (1033764) | more than 3 years ago | (#34403638)

No, the difference between Blizzard and Apple is that my kids' WoW account gets hacked at least once a month. Apple stuff is important enough to hack into (my mobile me account is super boring, and I have no idea what Ping is supposed to be..maybe you can buy songs with my credit card if you hack me?).

No problem (3, Funny)

Rik Sweeney (471717) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402238)

My apple ID is some random rubbish and I can just make up something stupid for my real name! Now no-one will know who I really am!

Re:No problem (4, Funny)

Rik Sweeney (471717) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402262)

Shit, I forgot to check "Post Anonymously" :(

Re:No problem (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402388)

...until Apple finds it fishy that your credit card belongs to someone different than the name in your "official" name and locks your account until you prove that you are the person whose name you used.

Good luck, sir.

Re:No problem (1)

delinear (991444) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402916)

He probably only has to prove that he's the person named on the credit card. I'm sure they don't really care if one person wants to pay on behalf of another person, so long as they get the agreement of the person with the money. Aside from verifying the payer is who he says, I'm not sure they'd be too bothered about proving who the beneficiary is, unless there is some condition of the service that says these must be the same person (I know I've paid for things on behalf of family and friends using my CC before and in every case my identity was the only one the vendor cared about verifying).

Re:No problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34402948)

...until Apple finds it fishy that your credit card belongs to someone different than the name in your "official" name and locks your account until you prove that you are the person whose name you used.

Good luck, sir.

Well, at least it doesn't take long for the Apple enforcers to get the truth out. Most people will reveal their true identity between breaking their first and second finger.

Same as Blizzard? I don't think so... (4, Insightful)

cbope (130292) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402560)

I believe the Blizzard reaction was justified because RealID was going to be used in their forums. You know... where everyone in the world with a Blizzard forum account will be able to see it. Dumb idea.

This on the other hand, is very different. I didn't RTFA, but from the information in the news post, only friends to whom you send invitations will be sent your real name.

Entertain me here, but I would guess that if you are sending an invitation to someone specifically, you already know them and they probably know your real name anyway. If you are the sort of person who sends invites to people you don't know, then you deserve what you get if unknown_person_a gets your real name along with the invitation and does something bad with it. That's just being Darwin stupid.

At least on the surface, this is FAR different than Blizzard's RealID fiasco.

What's the problem? It's actually useful! (1)

Lord Satri (609291) | more than 3 years ago | (#34402760)

I invite friends, and my friends know my name. I don't see the problem at all.

Actually, when I tried Game Center some time ago, the fact that I did not know who was "Weird Username Here" who accepted my invitation was kind of awkward. As much as usernames are cool, I also want to know which username is associated to which friend.

This change sounds like a improvement to me.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>