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

You know, Google, the web already had this feature

blog.vrypan.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 444 posts

Re: You know, Google, the web already had this feature

#201

Post by omegaham »

tomkarlo wrote: post #154
omegaham wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a little bit more complicated than that. Every smart person I know browses Youtube. Youtube isn't like a TV network; most videos are only a few minutes long, so it's not inherently a timesuck the way that watching an hour long drama is. The difference is that because Youtube has no moderation in its comments, smart people look at the comments and immediately decide that it's not worth their time. So, the only pe…

Unfortunately, everyone browses YouTube. And there's a lot more not-smart people than smart people. (And teenagers have a lot more time on their hands than adults.) I'd argue the root problem of YouTube comments is that they're not associated with any real community at all, in most cases. There's almost no benefit to posting a good comment, and no penalty to posting a stupid one. Imagine how stupid the comments would…

This is definitely true. The smart people will be on a community like this, Reddit, or forum, post a link to the video, and discuss it within their own community. Only the idiots will post comments directly onto the video's page.

Re: You know, Google, the web already had this feature

#202

Post by cageface »

mortehu wrote: post #193
r00fus wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> One could make a very well-founded argument, for example, that Microsoft, Oracle, Apple, and even EA or Comcast are not, strictly speaking, "evil" companies. I'll venture to say this is the case. Most tech firms are small-fries when it comes to evil. Cargill, Monsanto, and pretty much any oil company - now that's serious evil. And that's just in recent history. We're not even talking the East India Trading company.…

Are you sure Monsanto is evil? As far as I understand, contrary to popular belief they only sue farmers who use their patented seeds if they also buy the pesticide that goes along with those seeds. Maybe they're evil for some other reason I'm not aware of?

Look into their role in the Agent Orange poisoning of Vietnam during the war. If that's not evil then the word has no meaning.

Re: You know, Google, the web already had this feature

#203

Post by petsos »

turing wrote: post #173
coldtea wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think you're fixating on Google+ as a social network, when that's not really the point. Google+ is meant to serve as an identity layer for Google, so you don't have a bunch of different logins / passwords to silo-ed properties, which makes a frustrating user experience. No, it's not meant like that at all. Google didn't create Google+ to have a single sign on. It created it specifically to compete with Facebook.…

"No, it's not meant like that at all." Cool, so it's your baseless opinion vs Google's public stance on their motivations. How productive. "I, for one, never wanted my YouTube account linked to my Gmail account etc." I'm sorry that you feel entitled to have Google bend to your will with regards to their high-quality services for which you pay nothing.

Do you think Google is a charity?

Re: You know, Google, the web already had this feature

#204

Post by jodrellblank »

angryasian wrote: post #51
jodrellblank wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Because Facebook tracks you, mentioning Google's tracking is fearmongering bs". I don't follow your argument. I do, however, follow the like-button-blocker ShareMeNot https://addons.mozilla.org/en-us/firefox/addon/sharemenot/ http://sharemenot.cs.washington.edu/

it is fear mongering because the entire point of the article is to point out another widget/tracker, when its absolutely nothing new. Event their +1 button probably does the same thing. So the author wants to obviously use googles name to get more page views when this is nothing new and has been done for years by facebook and twitter.

But that's not the point.

The point is claiming that Google took one existing open thing (RSS), killed it off, and replaced it with a Google-proprietary alternative. The spying agitating part is just side-complaining.

Re: You know, Google, the web already had this feature

#205

Post by redorb »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #128
redorb wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would hope to never disagree with you - a very smart fellow on here. I however believe Google has put multiplies more money and 'skin in the game' when it comes to Google+... examples of what I think are the way they are pushing it so aggressively by integrating it everywhere. Wave was a pretty large launch I'll admit - but it still felt like an experiment - It felt like to me Google has said publicly in many ways…

Did you try http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_Wave ? > Apache Wave is a software framework for real-time collaborative editing online. Google originally developed it as Google Wave.[1] It was announced at the Google I/O conference on May 27, 2009. [...] > Development was handed over to the Apache Software Foundation which started to develop a server-based product called Wave in a Box.

When I gave it a whirl back when wave was cancelled - it felt half baked.. Then again my skills are half baked as well :)

Re: You know, Google, the web already had this feature

#206

Post by hawkharris »

coldtea wrote: post #151
blhack wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Google has overstayed the web's welcome. Then stop using their products. Switch to bing, switch to Internet Explorer, get an iPhone and shut up about it. No, google has not "overstayed the web's welcome", google has overstayed the welcome of a few entitled silicon valley golddiggers who will continue feeling wronged for the next 10 minutes until they realize what wonderful things google has created in the world for…

> Then stop using their products. Switch to bing, switch to Internet Explorer, get an iPhone and shut up about it. And who exactly are you to tell him to "shut up about it"? He made his case. You might disagree. State your case and let the discussion continue. Anything else --like telling him to "shup up"-- should be beneath HN standards. For one, people do use alternative products. It's not as if Chrome is the ultim…

I agree that telling someone to shut up should be beneath HN standards. That was rude and unnecessary.

Re: You know, Google, the web already had this feature

#207

Post by mercutio2 »

DanBC wrote: post #125
mercutio2 wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? Why in the world would they do that? Effectively zero of the smart people I know browse YouTube. Most of my programmer friends listen to podcasts, but I honestly have no idea what smart people do with YouTube.

Some of the smart people I've heard of are on YouTube. ( http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2013/02/provos/ ) ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vyUkYJeZtW4 )

Wow. That article was awesome. The video was cool, too, although it didn't hold my interest like the story did.

The thing is, I don't doubt there's lots of interesting content on YouTube. I just can't conceive of browsing through it for fun. There's too much good stuff to read.

Re: You know, Google, the web already had this feature

#208

Post by anoncow »

kunai wrote: post #176
ender7 wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know, he/she didn't really "make a case". Read it again -- the OP doesn't actually say anything in the grandparent post besides "they used to be great, but now I hate them". Why does the OP hate them? Who knows! The fact that such a contentless diatribe is at #1 is depressing. That too should be beneath HN's standards.

> Why does the OP hate them? Who knows! I quite clearly stated this in my post. Everything that isn't research-based, or what is user-oriented, like Google+, YouTube, etc. has been milked to death and ruined in the process. Other things, like how they consistently buy off startups and kill them, also annoy the hell out of me. > The fact that such a contentless diatribe is at #1 is depressing. That too should be benea…

>they consistently buy off startups and kill them

Shouldn't we be citing sources, so that readers can learn and decide for themselves?

Re: You know, Google, the web already had this feature

#209

Post by alexakarpov »

mythz wrote: post #132
kunai wrote: post #2

Google has overstayed the web's welcome. What started out as a quirky, innovative company that bucked all of the suit-and-tie trends (see Microsoft, HP, even Apple in some regards) of Silicon Valley, has now turned into a monstrous calamity with no regard for its users. Up until 2009, it was breezy and beautiful, but right now, at this moment, it's a different story altogether. Don't be evil? Pfeh. The only thing lef…

Google, more than any other company, has made the web a better place. The web was horrible dumping ground before Google - laced with Portals and flashing display ads, pathetic Search, fragmented content. Chrome's the best browser, Gmail the best Email client, Google Maps / Earth the best mapping client, there's only 1 YouTube, the Mobile landscape would be a walled garden with every user a hostage if it wasn't for An…

It's an odd argument to make - that is, yes, of course the web is now better in many aspects than what it was 10 years ago -- but what makes you think that without Google the progress would stop, or even stall? If you think about it, anything that a lot of people care about and work on will get better after 10 years of work. You don't need a dictator, even a supposedly benevolent one, to have progress.

Re: You know, Google, the web already had this feature

#210

Post by OGinparadise »

kunai wrote: post #2

Google has overstayed the web's welcome. What started out as a quirky, innovative company that bucked all of the suit-and-tie trends (see Microsoft, HP, even Apple in some regards) of Silicon Valley, has now turned into a monstrous calamity with no regard for its users. Up until 2009, it was breezy and beautiful, but right now, at this moment, it's a different story altogether. Don't be evil? Pfeh. The only thing lef…

Don't be evil? Pfeh. The only thing left of Google that they haven't managed to screw up or cause outrage over is search. The only thing they can't afford to change, for fear people will stop using it.

Search is gone too, virtually all ads: http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/google-sear... http://www.click-conversion.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/g...

Post reply on HN