Author Topic: Will facebook ever be the same? (Read 18,442 times)

zridling · « **on:** July 12, 2011, 11:50 AM »

cmpm · « **Reply #1 on:** July 12, 2011, 12:25 PM »

I haven't figured out how to get in g+.
All I see is that g+ sign on some pages.
I signed up for it and have heard nothing....

f... 'em

Still I can hot link to any google account pic or doc in Facebook.
So I still have plenty of storage from many sources,
Even without anything google.

Deozaan · « **Reply #2 on:** July 13, 2011, 12:37 AM »

Quote from: cmpm on July 12, 2011, 12:25 PM

I haven't figured out how to get in g+.
All I see is that g+ sign on some pages.
I signed up for it and have heard nothing....

Re-read rule #1.

Then send me a PM with your e-mail address so I can send you an invite.

JavaJones · « **Reply #3 on:** July 13, 2011, 12:57 AM »

Google has done the "invite only" thing on multiple product launches now. It hasn't always (or even often) resulted in a long-term success, in some cases I would argue it even hurt adoption, but it's generally a good strategy I do agree.

I think if G+ were, say, like Buzz, or something else equally unimpressive and poorly executed, then it would not have the interest it does. It is exciting because it is truly and legitimately a better system, despite its faults and bugs (for being out less than a month, it has surprisingly few actually). Google has, in my opinion (and evidently in the opinion of a lot of the current users) "gotten it right". I can think of no better reason for a product/service to succeed than by just doing things better.

Sure, Google is leveraging existing systems and services (and their corresponding existing membership and content). So this is not necessarily something a random tech startup could do (at least not as well). Still, it's the underlying cleverness and usefulness of the ideas (Circles, especially) that are making the product shine right now. The UI is great too, but admittedly needs some bug fixes and polish. Rather than complain about it (or in addition to doing so), people should submit bug reports through the also well implemented bug report tool.

Google is iterating remarkably fast here. We'll see company/interest/etc. pages soon, apps also (hopefully with a better way to manage them than Facebook has), and likely every other important feature FB has. They're not hard to implement, and Google has already shown with what we have in G+ *today* that they can, in fact, implement a slick, intelligent system with a high level of features, and still maintain a fairly intuitive UI.

- Oshyan

cmpm · « **Reply #4 on:** July 13, 2011, 02:25 AM »

Thanks Deozaan.

Since I showed how I really feel about it.
Not proud of the way I did, but sheesh, tired I guess.

PM on it's way.
peace on...

Deozaan · « **Reply #5 on:** July 13, 2011, 02:29 AM »

Quote from: cmpm on July 13, 2011, 02:25 AM

PM on it's way.

Invite sent. Welcome to G+.

zridling · « **Reply #6 on:** July 13, 2011, 03:27 PM »

Signed up today. Can be found at:
https://plus.google.com/108871877301789098084

Stoic Joker · « **Reply #7 on:** July 13, 2011, 04:43 PM »

I can't figure out how to get in. I'm assuming the G+ thing is different than the Google (public) profile thing, yes?

cmpm · « **Reply #8 on:** July 13, 2011, 05:11 PM »

PM me with your email, if you don't have an invite.

I invited my son and he had trouble getting in cause of a .edu address.
Not allowed yet I think for that email ext.
So watch what email you use.

We are trying with another email with my son, when he gets around to it.

40hz · « **Reply #9 on:** July 13, 2011, 06:24 PM »

Quote from: zridling on July 13, 2011, 03:27 PM

Signed up today. Can be found at:
https://plus.google.com/108871877301789098084

Proust huh? (Exquisite taste in lit.

)

But how come I can see your profile info at that link if I'm not a G+ member?

rgdot · « **Reply #10 on:** July 13, 2011, 06:26 PM »

Profiles (name and gender at a minimum) are public.

JavaJones · « **Reply #11 on:** July 13, 2011, 08:18 PM »

Looks like soon gender will also be optionally private:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2011/07/google-plus-users-will-soon-be-able-to-opt-out-of-sharing-gender.html

- Oshyan

Stoic Joker · « **Reply #12 on:** July 13, 2011, 10:24 PM »

Okay, I'm in:
https://plus.google.com/103121931736662107198

...Now what'd-I-do?

40hz · « **Reply #13 on:** July 13, 2011, 11:49 PM »

Just out of curiosity...

I clicked on Zaine and Stoic's links above.

I'm not a part of G+.

I can see the profile info including the About page plus all the posts made; I can also click on the people in their Circles - and do the same with their pages...and the people in their Circles...

Is all that info out in public by design or can you elect to restrict who can see it?

I was under the impression that stuff was only available to G+ members and was restricted to those who were in your Circles.

Stoic Joker · « **Reply #14 on:** July 14, 2011, 12:01 AM »

There does seem to be a good degree of granularity as to what is (public/private/inner "circle") shown. There are multiple default circles, and a create your own option with optional exposure.

Might as well jump in ... I need at least one friend so I don't look totally pathetic.

40hz · « **Reply #15 on:** July 14, 2011, 12:40 AM »

Quote from: Stoic Joker on July 14, 2011, 12:01 AM

Might as well jump in ... I need at least one friend so I don't look totally pathetic.

Awww...

@Zaine - could you please 'friend' (or circle or whatever) Stoic so he doesn't look pathetic?

Pretty please?

Stoic Joker · « **Reply #16 on:** July 14, 2011, 03:22 AM »

*Face Palm*

To clarify... I don't know the proper "circle etiquette" (having just got there), so I don't want to just start adding names I recognize blindly and end up looking like some weirdo stalker.

Remember, this really is my first venture into a "Social Network".

steeladept · « **Reply #17 on:** July 14, 2011, 03:39 AM »

SJ, Let us know how it goes. Maybe some of us other reticent folk will eventually join you in the foray into Social Networking....

zridling · « **Reply #18 on:** July 14, 2011, 05:05 AM »

@40hz:
Thanks for the Proust nod. Everyone has their literary loves, but Proust is mine simply because I would have loved to lived from 1870-1914 with one big qualification: If I were rich!

Found Stoic Joker and added him to my "tech" circle. I do like that early on, Google is asking for one or more specific detail (or personal photo) so that when people search for "Adam Smith," they have the right one. The one possibility I do see with G+ is that I could effectively blog from it -- and do so selectively since it allows pictures and video. That is, if I'm writing a post on politics, my work friends need not see that, and all that implies. I need to test the censorship, however. If I upload a photo of a nipple, is Google going to cancel my account? The TOS blah-blah-blah'd about illegal content, but other than cp and snuff films, what will be considered illegal to them? (Remember, these are the same Eric Schmidt-like mugs who happily turn over all your info to the cops when asked.)

In a few months or year when it goes public, Google has already said that everyone with a Gmail account will also have access to G+, so there's potentially a 100mn new users right there waiting in line.

zridling · « **Reply #19 on:** July 14, 2011, 05:23 AM »

This just in: Zuckerberg's out, closes G+ account:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-20079226-71/zuckerberg-closes-off-his-google-account/

"We're in the early days of making the Web more social, and there are opportunities for innovation everywhere."

40hz · « **Reply #20 on:** July 14, 2011, 07:04 AM »

Quote from: zridling on July 14, 2011, 05:05 AM

Thanks for the Proust nod. Everyone has their literary loves, but Proust is mine simply because I would have loved to lived from 1870-1914 with one big qualification: If I were rich!

@Z- That's a good qualification for living in any era.

Also +1 on the 1870-1914. I'm a big Sherlock Holmes fan for precisely that reason. Like the character. Love the stories. But I adore the period. Probably why I like Steampunk, Verne, and Wells so much too.

Jibz · « **Reply #21 on:** July 14, 2011, 09:34 AM »

Quote from: 40hz on July 13, 2011, 11:49 PM

I can see the profile info including the About page plus all the posts made; I can also click on the people in their Circles - and do the same with their pages...and the people in their Circles...

Is all that info out in public by design or can you elect to restrict who can see it?

I was under the impression that stuff was only available to G+ members and was restricted to those who were in your Circles.

Like rgdot said, the profiles are public, so you can always see people. The posts you can see are any posts that person chose to share as public, that is posts that are shared with anyone. The same goes for the information on the profile, you will see what pieces of information the person has chosen to share with everybody (except for name and gender which are currently required to be public).

For instance, if you go to my profile you will only see a single post there, which is certainly not because I haven't written quite a few, but because that is the only shared as public. In the same way, if you were in my family circle you would see my address on the about page.

Showing who is in your network and who has you in their network is optional, I figured showing who has me in their network could help identify me and find others in the current phase, whereas I chose not to show publicly who are in my circles.

Quote from: Stoic Joker on July 14, 2011, 03:22 AM

To clarify... I don't know the proper "circle etiquette" (having just got there), so I don't want to just start adding names I recognize blindly and end up looking like some weirdo stalker.

I think part of the beauty here is that adding someone to your circle can mean different things. If your favorite actor was on G+ you could add him to you 'Following' circle to be able to keep up with any news on his profile, even though it's probably unlikely he would follow you back .. here it works much like following someone on twitter. On the other hand you could add your college buddies to your 'College' circle and they will (hopefully) follow you also, and then it works like being friends on Facebook.

In other words, at the moment I wouldn't be too worried about making a DonationCoder circle and adding whoever you find from DC to that. Other than a sharp increase in posts on your stream nobody will be offended I'm sure

.

zridling · « **Reply #22 on:** July 15, 2011, 11:02 AM »

Anyone else impressed by the coding of G+ so far? I can't imagine the complexity. Had an old friend who pissed all over the idea and hates Google (no beef with that), but he used it for two days and has since said he's been playing with it for 24 of those 48 hours. Go figure. I think the first impression for a lot of folks is how it will replace blogging. But it will need a robust linking framework to be effective; that is, make a post and it auto-posts to Twitter as Wordpress does. I'm sure someone's already written an extension unless I'm missing the obvious.

JavaJones · « **Reply #23 on:** July 15, 2011, 08:51 PM »

When you add someone to a circle it notifies the person that you've done so, but does *not* tell them what circle you've put them in. This is key. You can put people into your "Annoying people who I don't like but occasionally want to share something with" circle and they'll have no clue, they only know they're in *some* circle. So no worries about starting to add people to whatever circles you want.

What Zuckerberg did with his G+ account is interesting. The headline implies he *removed* his account, but no, in this context "closes" means he closed it to public access. He's opting for privacy, basically, which of course is also possible on FB. Not surprising really, but an interesting move given he's testing the service and has a potential opportunity to be a voice for FB on there.

- Oshyan

Stoic Joker · « **Reply #24 on:** July 15, 2011, 08:59 PM »

Quote from: JavaJones on July 15, 2011, 08:51 PM

What Zuckerberg did with his G+ account is interesting. The headline implies he *removed* his account, but no, in this context "closes" means he closed it to public access. He's opting for privacy, basically, which of course is also possible on FB. Not surprising really, but an interesting move given he's testing the service and has a potential opportunity to be a voice for FB on there.

Maybe he's testing for leaks...