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

Nonplussed

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 250 posts

Re: Nonplussed

#81

Post by rejoinder »

stephp wrote: post #33
itafroma wrote: post #22

I am mostly for the ostensible cleaning up of YouTube comments, but what got me was that any time you share a YouTube video on Google+ proper or comment in a thread where someone shared a YouTube video, it automatically cross-posts what you said back to the comments underneath the video on YouTube. And that's not just for shares/comments going forward: it's everything you've ever shared publicly, ever. I'm now gettin…

Ugh. This was my problem with Google+ too. Everything you do ripples out into the rest of the internet in a creepy way. When I was freelancing, I emailed back and forth with potential clients through the Gmail interface. One day I saw this party pic of a 20-something girl with beer in hand, identified by the full name of a receptionist I had emailed with professionally but never actually met. It was a suggestion from…

I got freaked out by Facebook because I signed up there using a work email.

I think Facebook's recommendation system was using the data from other users' address books. As in I'd get a list of various people that I'd done business with in the past as suggested friends on Facebook. Those people had my address in their address book and I can only assume they'd uploaded their contacts to Facebook. Facebook retains that data. Here I am a new user. Wow how does it know I know such and such? I can only assume that it also works the other way: I join and I pop up in their account.

Google got into a mess with Buzz and the address book leaks, and email address leaks.

So there's a fine line here between privacy and helpfulness.

Re: Nonplussed

#82

Post by rjd »

grandalf wrote: post #68

The "real name" movement is an attempt to turn internet behavior into something more like a credit score.

From what I've read it achieves no detectable improvements, and in some places can bring out worse problems causing people to amplify themselves to reenforce ego (and vice versa become nastier to push others down to achieve the same goal). So it just becomes a pissing contest more than a credit score.

Re: Nonplussed

#83

Post by rejoinder »

spyder wrote: post #45
itafroma wrote: post #22

I am mostly for the ostensible cleaning up of YouTube comments, but what got me was that any time you share a YouTube video on Google+ proper or comment in a thread where someone shared a YouTube video, it automatically cross-posts what you said back to the comments underneath the video on YouTube. And that's not just for shares/comments going forward: it's everything you've ever shared publicly, ever. I'm now gettin…

And cross-posting G+ comments makes YouTube comments worse not better because many times when people share video on G+ the text is just the video title or something like: Must watch video title or "Checkout this video on YouTube". Showing these in the YouTube comments is useless spam. Also there is lot of "empty" comments with only a "shared this via Google+" thing which is even more useless. It's turning into someth…

I find public facing popular G+ accounts suffer much the same, loads of useless comments. 140 comments that you can't be bothered to read. If you do ever read them, you'll notice no one else can be bothered to read so it's just a long reel of repetition in the main.

The Youtube comments used to just be weird as comments would refer to other comments, and then they'd get promoted and end up completely disjointed. At least now there is threading.

Re: Nonplussed

#84

Post by oceanplexian »

k-mcgrady wrote: post #67
enraged_camel wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm pretty sure Snapchat notifies you if the other party takes a screenshot of your photo, though.

They notify you but that other person still has the photo. It's better than nothing but it's not that helpful.

Unless you have a jailbroken phone...

Re: Nonplussed

#85

Post by jurassic »

> You know what? Forget it, I don’t even want to comment any more. It was a dumb video anyway.

I went through this exact process and thought ("screw this, ugh!") several times before I just decided to stop hanging out on youtube and commenting on peoples' videos. I used to waste a huge amount of time doing this, but now I only sometimes watch things that others have discovered and shared with me. I don't comment or browse like I used to, and I'm sure their advertising revenue off of me has dropped off a cliff.

It also seems like the amount of intrusive/unskippable advertising has rocketed up, too, over the last couple of years while they were forcing G+ on the world. They're kidding themselves if they think I'm going to happily watch a 30 second ad before a 2 minute viral video.

I was annoyed/sad at first when they started making these changes, but now I realize I was mostly wasting my time doing that stuff anyway. So thanks, Google, for making your site less fun to use; it really has saved me a lot of time.

Re: Nonplussed

#86

Post by dlgeek »

cjg wrote: post #71

Nonplussed is a dreadful word. It means either: 1) so surprised and confused that one is unsure how to react; 2) not disconcerted; unperturbed. Definitions 1 and 2 are opposites. So, is he perturbed or not? "This is totally weird", or "this is weird, but I can so cope with it". Who knows.

It's a play on Google+ - he canceled the service, so he's not plussed...

Re: Nonplussed

#87

Post by maaaats »

devindotcom wrote: post #57

Hey all. I'm the author. I don't really have much to add here except that I was afraid the article, which I dashed off as all that stuff was happening, would come off as whiny. Hope that isn't the case. Thanks for reading and linking.

I think it's to the point and reflects my own thoughts. Thanks for putting it down in such clear words.

Re: Nonplussed

#88

Post by oceanplexian »

Bahamut wrote: post #7

I'm probably in the minority here, but I'm all for this change, largely because of the crappy anonymous comments you see out there on YouTube, which was the point of this transition in the first place. However, forcing Google+ onto people does have me wary as well. I don't mind using Google+, but it seems like Google's way to slowly worm their way into people using its social component. I admittedly am not sure why i…

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

Anonymous Youtube comments suck, but anonymity enables people to express unpopular opinions. The real problem is tyranny of the majority. Attaching real names does absolutely nothing to solve the problem.

Google should be smart enough to build a proper moderation system and retain anonymity.

Re: Nonplussed

#89

Post by chetanahuja »

davidgerard wrote: post #78
pcurve wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook was already doing a good job driving its own users away. All Google had to do was go under the Facebook tree, and pick up dropped users off the ground. It really didn't need to go climbing up the tree to pick them off the branches. As they're climbing the ladder, their own users are falling out of the baskets. Corny analogy aside, they're not even doing a good job integrating mail, youtube, google, google+.…

All we wanted from G+ was "Facebook, but not Facebook". That's it. That's all. They managed even to fuck that up.

This is google's own version of "the burning platform" (that is, the open web, in some of the more paranoid exec's vision). They are doing everything they can think of to fence off their own portion of the web before it's too late. Every product division has been (or had been) instructed to come up with a plan to integrate somehow with G+. This current youtube disaster is one of the results.

Re: Nonplussed

#90

Post by rogerbinns »

blt wrote: post #76
rogerbinns wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do both Google Code and Github. GC feels unmaintained these days, and there is no option for paid/private repositories. GC is also removing their download service - Github did the same but then later provided "releases" functionality. Github's issue tracker is terrible (try to prioritise things) while GC is a lot better. The one thing GC does really well is they let you have multiple repositories per project. This…

Out of curiosity, why would you prefer having multiple repos over a few top-level directories in one repo?

Because they are completely unrelated code bases sharing nothing. With subversion you could check out subtrees but that isn't practical with git.

For my personal projects a common pattern is a repo for the source and a repo for generated documentation.

For work projects we have an Android client (in Java), iOS client (in objective C), 3 different server components that share no code (Python), various analysis tools (Python), a client customisation layer (mini-Python), our website etc.

If all those were in one large repository it would be a huge sprawling mess. Also remember that branches are repository global. There would also be constant updates because other parts have changed, nothing to do with the component you are working on.

Post reply on HN