Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google Introduces Facebook Competitor, Emphasizing Privacy

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 66 posts

Re: Google Introduces Facebook Competitor, Emphasizing Privacy

#21

Post by ltamake »

pavel_lishin wrote: post #6
ltamake wrote: post #3

Advertising your site as a "Facebook competitor" (instead of implying it) is a recipe for failure because you want people to look at your site as something completely unique rather than putting it next to Facebook immediately.

I think that's true for small startups, but for someone like Google? Presumably, nearly everyone with a gmail address will already be a user, which means that there won't be any migration hassles - "I'd join, but Timmy and Jimbo aren't on GooBook yet!"

Apple tried to use the same philosophy: everyone has an Apple ID, so there's no migration issue. Look how that turned out.

But I understand what point you're trying to make. This will get used, but I don't see it becoming a true Facebook rival because of the network effect Facebook relies on. If users were to migrate in masses, on the other hand, Facebook would be dead within a short amount of time. Sadly, that's not going to happen anytime soon.

Re: Google Introduces Facebook Competitor, Emphasizing Privacy

#22

Post by paganel »

> One of the nice things about the product is its whimsical nature — a puff of smoke and a -1 animation appears when you remove a friend, and when you remove a social circle, it rolls away off the screen.

They left out the tag or the comic-sans font, because that's what I call whimsical.

Anyway, I wish them most of luck in stealing FB's 500+ million users. They're going to need it, both the luck and the users.

Re: Google Introduces Facebook Competitor, Emphasizing Privacy

#23

Post by ltamake »

haberman wrote: post #9
ltamake wrote: post #3

Advertising your site as a "Facebook competitor" (instead of implying it) is a recipe for failure because you want people to look at your site as something completely unique rather than putting it next to Facebook immediately.

Is Google+ being advertised that way? I see that in the news articles about Google+, but not in Google's own materials.

That was my fault. The article gave an impression that Google was advertising it like that.

Re: Google Introduces Facebook Competitor, Emphasizing Privacy

#24

Post by websymphony »

What if the exact same service, with exact same feature set was introduced by a startup and not Google? Would we still see the same type of hostility towards that too? I don't think so.

Yes, it is correct that google harvests your information to feed you more targeted ads. But it doesn't mean that if a startup, started initially as a "do no evil" company becomes as big as google or facebook won't do the same(targeted ads).

Since all these services are free to use, easiest or maybe only possible way to make profit off them is by advertising. Since nothing comes for free, you will pay for the service by sharing your personal information. Which in turn means onus lies on you to see what is it that you want to share.

Re: Google Introduces Facebook Competitor, Emphasizing Privacy

#26

Post by paganel »

cryptoz wrote: post #17
brown9-2 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How so? How will knowing what my friends and contacts "like" help Google not respond to my searches with content farm-ed crap?

> How will knowing what my friends and contacts "like" help Google not respond to my searches with content farm-ed crap? If your friends "like" a Stack Exchange post but not Experts Exchange, isn't it obvious how this would help them filter out the bad ones?

98% of my FB friends don't know about Stack Exchange or Experts Exchange. The other 2% are my IT-department co-workers.

Re: Google Introduces Facebook Competitor, Emphasizing Privacy

#27

Post by MatthewPhillips »

ltamake wrote: post #21
pavel_lishin wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that's true for small startups, but for someone like Google? Presumably, nearly everyone with a gmail address will already be a user, which means that there won't be any migration hassles - "I'd join, but Timmy and Jimbo aren't on GooBook yet!"

Apple tried to use the same philosophy: everyone has an Apple ID, so there's no migration issue. Look how that turned out. But I understand what point you're trying to make. This will get used, but I don't see it becoming a true Facebook rival because of the network effect Facebook relies on. If users were to migrate in masses, on the other hand, Facebook would be dead within a short amount of time. Sadly, that's not…

Switching social networks is not the same as switching email services. You don't just up and move. Millions switched from MySpace to Facebook but what they really did was join Facebook while still using MySpace. And then using MySpace less. And then not at all. So, in theory, people could "join" Google+ because they see it in the toolbar while they're searching, and if there are a few killer features that bring them back (Hangouts? Sparks?) they might use Facebook less. And eventually maybe enough of their friends are on Google+ that they stop using Facebook. Or maybe not. But they definitely don't need to make a walk-the-plank decision today.

Re: Google Introduces Facebook Competitor, Emphasizing Privacy

#28

Post by brudgers »

websymphony wrote: post #24

What if the exact same service, with exact same feature set was introduced by a startup and not Google? Would we still see the same type of hostility towards that too? I don't think so. Yes, it is correct that google harvests your information to feed you more targeted ads. But it doesn't mean that if a startup, started initially as a "do no evil" company becomes as big as google or facebook won't do the same(targeted…

>"What if the exact same service, with exact same feature set was introduced by a startup and not Google?"

I suspect that the New York Times would be more circumspect in their use of the word "privacy" and not employ it in such a narrow sense in their headline.

To put it another way, I agree with your argument regarding the relationship between free services and advertising. The lack of journalism in the article is more unusual, which given the huge changes in what constitutes news over the past several years, is saying a lot.

Re: Google Introduces Facebook Competitor, Emphasizing Privacy

#29

Post by alecco »

brudgers wrote: post #2

> "Mr. Gundotra and Mr. Horowitz said that knowing more about individual Google users will improve all Google products, including ads, search, YouTube and maps, because Google will learn what people like and eventually be able to personalize those products." I am obviously ignorant in my belief: privacy != Google obtaining and storing increasingly intimate personal data

They mean privacy with respect with other users. Newspeak. I hope this way of interpreting the word doesn't catch on.

Re: Google Introduces Facebook Competitor, Emphasizing Privacy

#30

Post by contextfree »

alecco wrote: post #29
brudgers wrote: post #2

> "Mr. Gundotra and Mr. Horowitz said that knowing more about individual Google users will improve all Google products, including ads, search, YouTube and maps, because Google will learn what people like and eventually be able to personalize those products." I am obviously ignorant in my belief: privacy != Google obtaining and storing increasingly intimate personal data

They mean privacy with respect with other users. Newspeak. I hope this way of interpreting the word doesn't catch on.

I'm sympathetic to these worries, but to play devil's advocate I wonder which kind of privacy most people actually care more about. Given the choice between having one's boss/co-workers/family/spouse learn some embarrassing secret about you, and having random strangers at a large corporation learn it, which would most people pick?
Post reply on HN