How to live 100 years (ca. 1504) (web.archive.org)

I think he's a piece of shit, but his name changes aren't any less valid than anyone else's that came from a broken home with step parents and couldn't decide on how they wanted to be known.

fp64 · 1d ago

I thought it was not proper to discuss names of people they do not like to use anymore?

esseph · 23h ago

That would be an ignorant misunderstanding of why that is done, or an intentionally and aggressively obtuse one.

fp64 · 23h ago

I understand what you are saying, but how am I supposed to know the reasoning behind it if for certain reasons I am not supposed to know it?

In this case, I do not care why he had changed his name, I read the beginning of the article and it did not explain why this is something that needs discussion, and stopped reading when it just stated his birth name.

bbaw · 22h ago

The article seems to often quote from a book he wrote and it seems like covering a book from a political figure is newsworthy enough.

Posting an article from Nov which is itself an edit from even older on HN now on the other hand is likely just attempting propaganda.

AStonesThrow · 23h ago

Speaking as someone who has made up myriad "screen names" and email addresses and forum usernames, and someone who has struggled with the validity of his own given name, I considered why it is called a "given name" and how arrogant it may be to unilaterally make one up instead. These are commonly known as "assumed names" or "aliases".

I decided that not only was it futile, after a lifetime of going by one name, to convince people to call me something else, or know me by another name, but it is also arrogant to try and manipulate those names which have been given to me by people who love me. And furthermore, how insulting and appalling it was, for me to say that I didn't like the name I was given, in fact being baptized with that name, would be a repudiation of not only my parents, but my mother church and her authority to accept the name which my parents proposed at that time.

jrs235 · 20h ago

Huh? The platinum rule is treat an individual the way they wish to treat others. So, if someone wishes to dismiss calling others by their preferred names then others can treat that individual in that manner. If it's good for the gander, it's good for the goose.

unsupp0rted · 22h ago

And why did he remove the periods, turning J.D. into JD? We've got him now.

jrs235 · 20h ago

Perhaps he thinks periods are bad, evil, or lesser; that anyone who has periods shouldn't be in positions of power.

keepamovin · 1d ago

So interesting! Can’t believe I’m just learning this now

myflash13 · 23h ago

Name changes are fairly common for famous people at the top of society, especially those who immigrated. At least 7 US presidents legally changed their name. Trump's family was originally Drumpf. Netanyahu was originally Mileikowsky. Obama was enrolled as "Barry Soetoro" in Catholic School. Joseph Stalin was Iosif Dzhugashvili. Lenin was Ulyanov. Marilyn Monroe was born Norma Jeane Mortenson. Freddie Mercury was Farrokh Bulsara. Bob Dylan was born Robert Zimmerman. Elton John’s original name was Reginald Dwight. Even Queen Elizabeth II’s family originally carried the name Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, changing it to Windsor during WWI to sound less German.

foogazi · 14h ago

Do you think there’s causal significance here with people changing their names manifesting or attracting fame ?

Or is it more common to change one’s name and then some of them become famous ?

myflash13 · 13h ago

As a person who changed my name, I think it simply signifies a massive internal, personal shift in identity and self-image; that is usually a characteristic of highly ambitious (aka crazy) people. I don’t think the name Elton John is any “better” than Reginald Dwight, it just probably made him, as a person, act differently and feel different from within.

Other reason is for branding. Names matter. Trump is more brandable in America than Drumpf.

keepamovin · 22h ago

Wow, this is fantastic, thank you!