I guess, the title was moderated again.
Google+ grows 43% in June
161–170 of 190 posts
Re: Google+ grows 43% in June
#162Earlier quoted context omitted.
First, the OA's comparison is meaningless. It focuses on vanity metrics rather than engagement or retention. A lot is written on that topic, so I won't repeat (see Tim Ferris: http://www.fourhourworkweek.com/blog/2009/05/19/vanity-metri... ). This article is excellent optimization for link baiting. And it doesn't matter because most of these sites don't compete against each other. Each of these media sites has a diff…
Claims of G+'s amazing growth always looks silly when I run this bookmarked Insights: http://www.google.com/insights/search/#q=Google%20Plus%2CIns...
isn't is a bit redundant to search for google+ on google? i'm not sure how accurate this is, for this reason.
Re: Google+ grows 43% in June
#163Earlier quoted context omitted.
Conversation is pretty worthless when it's speculation piled on speculation. If that's your thing, then well... okay. I mean... if there's much ado about little data, why is it that MORE ado is better?
The simplest answer: see work on abductive reasoning and hypothesis building. But, more fully, anecdotes aren't speculation. They're individual experience. They are not, of course, a statistically representative sample. That doesn't mean it's worthless – it's just not authoritative, but it is still some person's real experience (internet truthiness aside). The all-or nothing view of validity and knowledge is problema…
> Beyond that if it sparked discussion that either spurred the uncovering of real data or identified the requirement of further considerations, it's still of value.
Which it didn't. We're not going to get better data until Google releases it, and Google is clearly not going to be doing so.
> But, more fully, anecdotes aren't speculation.
This claim would be okay if the anecdote was offered in a neutral environment. Here, however, it's being offered as contradictory evidence. The speculation isn't in the anecdote: it's in the purpose of offering the anecdote in the first place.
The anecdote was about the same as a TIOBE survey result coming out and responding with, "Oh, but I know a lot of Haskell programmers and don't know any Python programmers." That's wonderful for you and all, but your experience is seriously not relevant, nor does it prompt useful discussion or the discovery of useful data.
I agree that anecdotes can be useful. That's half the purpose of journalism: finding anecdotes.
I disagree that they are useful here.
Re: Google+ grows 43% in June
#164Earlier quoted context omitted.
That link hasn't always been there and isn't there in your browser search box and doesn't even say "Google+" or "Google Plus" at least from where I'm sitting. Page view data we have is, frankly, terrible. If Google wants to prove to the world what a huge success G+ they could do this in 10 seconds by giving us some pageview, photo, post, etc stats. The fact that they don't do this is telling. "anyone who is engaged i…
If Google wants to prove to the world what a huge success G+ they could do this in 10 seconds by giving us some pageview, photo, post, etc stats. From the linked article: During the Google I/O Conference in June, Google’s Vic Gundotra announced that the Google+ mobile traffic is now larger than the desktop traffic. Gundotra also announced that Google+ has 250 million accounts, 150 million active users during a month…
Uh, yes they have. Have you seem Facebook's press page?
Re: Google+ grows 43% in June
#165Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seconded. Compete's numbers are just made up. I know for sure they are off by more than an order of magnitude for reddit (or at least were a year ago).
Compete's numbers are pretty good, you just have to understand the source. Digg showed more traffic, because Compete's datasource is US ISP logs, and any site with a digg button was added to digg's traffic. The comparing reddit/digg on compete doesn't make much sense because of the digg button penetration. Just like comparing linkedin to google plus is stupid because many google properties make requests to plus.googl…
That's a reasonable explanation, but it's dishonest for Compete to put these numbers on a graph labelled "unique visitors". The Google+ poster didn't have any inkling about what the numbers represent.
Re: Google+ grows 43% in June
#166How does he define a 'visit'? It's a vague concept now - from an ISP perspective hitting a page with G+ (or T or FB) button on it when signed-in takes down a 'visit' sized payload. When I +1 a page using Chrome Extension - is that a visit? Same with mobile apps - what's a mobile 'visit' - an API GET?
It's labelled "visitor", which is even more bogus (most measures might discriminate browsers, cookies, or IPs, which adds systemic errors in both directions).
According to jcampbell1, this is requests per domain from a traffic sample intercepted by ISPs, which means that Facebook like buttons and Google +1 buttons dominate. All we have is a 47% or so change in how many of those ISP logs contain +1 buttons.
Re: Google+ grows 43% in June
#167Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wait, you have a G+ page, space, whatever automatically because you have a gmail account? Is there a way to get rid of that?
> Wait, you have a G+ page, space, whatever automatically because you have a gmail account? No - you have to opt in. > Is there a way to get rid of that? If you want to disable G+ on your account (which will also remove your G+ profile), you can go to the "Google+" section of your Google account settings page ( https://www.google.com/settings/plus ). At the bottom there is a section labelled "Disable Google+".
Not for me. Nothing on that link even mentions google+. I have looked several times as I know I'm a dopey twit and often miss the blinding obvious, but I cant see it!! Regional difference?
Re: Google+ grows 43% in June
#168Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here in Brazil we do say "twelve comma three million", even tho our word for "comma" is much harder to say than our word for "dot". But since everyone says it, it just sounds natural anyway.
Thanks for the insight. One more thing I can't figure out based on your reply is: how do you differentiate a decimal number from a list of numbers? For example, consider the list: 12.3, 7.6, 3.2 It's easy to see the three different numbers. But otherwise, wouldn't it be: 12,3, 7,6, 3,2 And how would you dictate that? "twelve comma three comma seven comma six comma..."?
We mostly used ; in math classes.
For a set: { 1,2; 3,5; -12,1 }
Calculators that are otherwise internationalised force the dot convention.
Re: Google+ grows 43% in June
#169Earlier quoted context omitted.
If Google wants to prove to the world what a huge success G+ they could do this in 10 seconds by giving us some pageview, photo, post, etc stats. From the linked article: During the Google I/O Conference in June, Google’s Vic Gundotra announced that the Google+ mobile traffic is now larger than the desktop traffic. Gundotra also announced that Google+ has 250 million accounts, 150 million active users during a month…
Uh, yes they have. Have you seem Facebook's press page?
Do you mean http://newsroom.fb.com/?
I'm not seeing any detailed statistics - actually I can't even see the known publicly available numbers.
Do you have a direct link?
Re: Google+ grows 43% in June
#170Earlier quoted context omitted.
If Google wants to prove to the world what a huge success G+ they could do this in 10 seconds by giving us some pageview, photo, post, etc stats. From the linked article: During the Google I/O Conference in June, Google’s Vic Gundotra announced that the Google+ mobile traffic is now larger than the desktop traffic. Gundotra also announced that Google+ has 250 million accounts, 150 million active users during a month…
Uh, yes they have. Have you seem Facebook's press page?
Do you mean http://newsroom.fb.com/?
I'm not seeing any detailed statistics - actually I can't even see the known publicly available numbers.
Do you have a direct link?