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

We Need To Talk, Google

f-secure.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 245 posts

Re: We Need To Talk, Google

#131

Post by oscargrouch »

last night i was trying to comment a youtube video, and before i could post, i got this message: "you must have a g+ profile, we will create it for you" but i dont want another social network profile (im even leaving my facebook acount) i already have a gmail account and think that this should be enough to someone comment on youtube..

anyway.. nevermind the comment to youtube, ive drop it.. I dont like to be forced to do something i dont want to, without a reasonable fairness to the matter..

this is a sign that the corporate internet is swallowing day-by-day the belle-epoque internet that used to represent freedom, knowledge share, and power to the voiceless for all human kind..

its that kind of internet we all want to grow... the bad feeling this guy has, i think we are all feeling it..

a feeling that the internet we used to know is disapearing because greedy people want to own the internet and the people who use it..

its a shame its being going this way.. its a sign we should not trust the corporate world to take the lead on where the internet should go...

we should do it! they should not lead us, they should follow.. we can do it, we can act as a collective mind stronger than anything else..

use other services, create new ones, we should be in control.. use your choice as a weapon

Re: We Need To Talk, Google

#132

Post by gwu78 »

Your experience may be different, but I welcome any confirmation from anyone using a tablet:

I notice that when user signs up for a Gmail account on a tablet, after she completes all the required info, she is then presented with a "one-click" style sign up screen for Google+. This screen does not have a "No thank you" option. Nor is there a "Back to previous" link. There is nothing to indicate the new Gmail account has successfully been created. It is more or less a dead end. There are only two options: Sign up for Google+ by clicking a link or close the browser tab.

How many users will know their Gmail account has successfully been created and close the tab?

Closing the browser tab and then navigating to gmail.com will take the user to her new account. There is no need to sign up for a Google+ account.

I have a difficult time believing this process of opening a new email account where seemingly "all roads lead to a Google+ account" is accidental. Then again, it could be. If not, then I'd say the G+ team is doing a fine job at manufacturing consent.

The question is why do they need to do that? I thought Google was in good health. This just seems desperate and try hard.

Re: We Need To Talk, Google

#133

Post by andrewaylett »

fluidcruft wrote: post #69
3825 wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>possibly Amazon App Store could be a good alternative to the Google Play morass. Sorry but the last time I tried, Amazon App store was a resource hog. Also apps will stop working if you get signed out of the Amazon app store app. It is like they are trying to prevent one guy who they think will buy a copy of their app, get on a stranger's device, log in to the app store, download their apps, and log out and repeat i…

I don't think any of that is true anymore.

Unless it's changed in the last couple of weeks, it's still the case that you have to remain logged in to Amazon's app store. They don't use the native account manager either, which is irritating, and the store app sometimes loses your login credentials.

Re: We Need To Talk, Google

#134

Post by wil421 »

No offense Google, but Google+ is not good. I dont want another social site or to be forced into yours. It should go the way of Google Reader even though Reader was a much better service.

Re: We Need To Talk, Google

#135

Post by andrewaylett »

MichaelGG wrote: post #25
gilrain wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can still do this, and I recently did. You have to have an alternate email address set and confirmed. Then, you delete your GMail account, which can by done through the products section of the account management page. After that, your Google account's primary email (and thus login) will be whatever your alternate address was set to.

Do you have solid instructions on this? I tried this once, and it sorta worked, then didn't. Then I re-registered the Gmail address (separately) and all my Google Groups subscriptions snapped back over and so on. Plus, don't Android 2.3 devices require a Gmail account to setup/login? I just tried using my normal Google Account and it complained "oh you don't have Gmail".

I still have two Google accounts on my phone for this reason. I've turned off syncing for most things for the GMail one, though.

Re: We Need To Talk, Google

#136

Post by lazyjones »

cromwellian wrote: post #49

Google is simply trying to unify their services. YouTube was an acquisition, with it's own login system and social network. They don't want to maintain this separation forever, they want a single signon for everything. Ditto for sharing and contacts. You had separate 'contacts' in Gmail, Latitude, G+, Reader, YouTube, and probably others I'm missing. Users shouldn't be prompted to maintain N different copies of this…

> Google is simply trying to unify their services

That's silly. If they wanted to unify their services, they'd turn youtube channels into G+ profiles. And they'd do it without any hassle for the users.

I'm sorry, but it's obvious that Google is desperately trying to inflate their G+ profile numbers by any means they can devise, because they won't admit to themselves that they've already lost the social network battle to FB. No amount of being apologetic and spin-doctoring can make this less obvious.

Re: We Need To Talk, Google

#137

Post by snowwrestler »

The fundamental problem here is that some Google properties, like Google Analytics and Google Plus, recognize the concept of enterprise account management, and some, like YouTube, do not.

Want a Google Plus page for your business? Great, first create a personal account for yourself, then create a Page account for your business. You can add other employees as admins on that Page.

Want to create a YouTube channel for your business? Great, create an account called "yourbusinessname." Only one login can manage it, so email the password to your other employees. (Real secure, Google.)

YouTube still can't tell the difference between a person and an organization, which is IMO indefensible. Twitter does this too. I find it astounding that they have not improved this yet.

Re: We Need To Talk, Google

#138

Post by graedus »

cromwellian wrote: post #63
ryanhuff wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You would be fooling yourself if you think somebody within Google isn't planning for the day that YouTube commenting is merged with G+ social streams. As they look to leverage social signals to improve search, centralizing the user's social footprint will be an important component, and using one of their more prolific social streams (YouTube) to prop-up G+ will be key.

If that day comes, I'll might celebrate, because YouTube comments are mostly worthless, full of sexism, racism, insults, and sheer idiocy. I rarely come across a YouTube comment that imparted useful information. G+ doesn't really need propping up, most of the people I enjoy reading are on it, I get more engagement than I ever did on Twitter or FB with the people I'm interested in (note, not friends, but interests), a…

> If that day comes, I'll might celebrate, because YouTube comments are mostly worthless, full of sexism, racism, insults, and sheer idiocy. I rarely come across a YouTube comment that imparted useful information.

One could argue two ways here. On one hand I think it's actually interesting and instructive to read comments from anonymous sources - what people "really" think, without the filter of being tied to their real identity. On the other hand, there are countless examples of people proudly posting/tweeting/etc horribly sexist, racist, insulting, and idiotic things under their real names along with a profile picture of themselves, so it's not so clear that removing anonymity will transform the comments section into a particularly erudite and informative place.

Re: We Need To Talk, Google

#139

Post by periferral »

VikingCoder wrote: post #108
v13inc wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if different properties have different profiles, Google will still have access to each more then enough data to create these clever integrations in the future. I don't even mind if they have a hidden 'aggregate' profile they use for those features. The frustration comes from removing the option of customizing my profile for each service.

Banana72 shared a YouTube video with you...? What the hell? Banana72...? Oh, right, on YouTube VikingCoder is called Banana72. I think you're asking for a feature which would confuse the hell out of most users.

I don't disagree with your sentiment so I had to go back and re-read the OPs thoughts.

I think he had a Group Youtube channel. He logged in using his individual account onto his Group Youtube channel and it linked his individual G+ to the group Youtube. When he unlinked this, it disable his Group Youtube.

I think this is pretty serious stuff. If youtube allows you to group individual accounts, then you dont want to link a group channel to an individual account. I think thats the concerns being raised here.

Re: We Need To Talk, Google

#140

Post by lazyjones »

lawdawg wrote: post #10

Get over it people, Google+ is the new account system for all Google products. If you don't like Google having a single account/profile system, or the fact that Google+ profiles include a "social" network product, then you best look for alternatives ASAP.

> Get over it people, Google+ is the new account system for all Google products.

Maybe Google should finally get over the fact that they've lost this fight and that noone wants to be in a social network whose member numbers are inflated by such desperate moves (which most of us have experienced now and are well aware of).

Post reply on HN