Another issue I'd add is that real names are potentially too generic. Basically, if everyone used their real name, how many John Smiths would there be? Would it be confusing?
The rigidity around 1 username/alias per person on most platforms forces people to adopt mostly memorable names that should distinguish them from the crowd.
Interesting conclusion. It sounds like the bystander effect. I wonder how many big ideas don't get the action they deserve because upon hearing it we assume it's already getting the effort/energy it deserves and that there isn't room for our contribution.
I've recently started to try and participate more in online discussions like LessWrong (technically this is my first post here). However in doing so I've realized what feels like a gaping hole in digital identity. No one knows who I am, and how could they? They see my name, my photo, my short bio, and they have no way of knowing the complex person behind it all.
In my experience, when I interact with others, I feel like I am often misunderstood because the people I'm interacting with don't have adequate context of me to understand where ...
I think this is caused by the fact that we lack tooling to adequately assess the amount of free-energy available in new markets sparked by new ideas. Currently it seems the only gauge we have is media attention and investment announcements.
Taking the time to assess an opportunity is operationally expensive and I think I've optimized to accept that there's probably little opportunity given that everyone else is observing the same thing. However, I'm not sure that it makes sense to adjust my optimization without first increasing my efficiency in assessing opportunities.