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

Dear Googles: Stop asking

plus.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 261 posts

Re: Dear Googles: Stop asking

#191

Post by gaius »

davidgerard wrote: post #125
greenyoda wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I remember correctly, AltaVista had a pretty sophisticated advanced search mode where you could string together search terms with Boolean operators (and/or/not). And I'm sure that AltaVista had some kind of metric of "site quality" before PageRank came along. For example, you could judge how "important" a site is by how often people click on a search result to go there, or how big they are (number of URLs from tha…

I vaguely recall something like a Boolean search functionality on AV, yeah. I think HotBot had one too, though they were using some other sucky algorithmic innovation that didn't actually crack the search problem. I don't think SEO really started happening until Google outlined the basic idea of PageRank - until there was something to plausibly target. At which point 1999-2000 were the years of hideous link farms. I…

No, it was happening way before Google, every page's meta tags would have "anna kournikova nekkid", even if you were selling lawnmowers.

I was an avid user of AltaVista back in the day but what killed it, and why I jumped on Google as soon as it was available was back then, it was simply less polluted.

Re: Dear Googles: Stop asking

#192

Post by ancarda »

StavrosK wrote: post #185
ancarda wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never considered that. That's actually a really good idea, especially as reliability will be higher. My connection rarely drops and I have a static IPv6 too so DNS may be far easier to configure. Edit: An idea to ease transition would be to setup the vacation responder in gmail to remind your contacts about your new address.

You mean if you're using a Gmail address? If you have your own domain, you can just redirect it. Would anyone be interested in me doing a writeup of this? It sounds like maybe it should be put out there.

Yeah, your mail would be going to your@name.tld and your old address (assuming it's gmail or something?) would use a vacation responder. I'm against forwarding mail as people will continue using my old address. Put your foot down and tell people to use your new address.

Else you'll never be able to close your google account.

+1 for a write up. Last time I tried making a mail server I got it to send mail but it couldn't receive any.

Re: Dear Googles: Stop asking

#193

Post by rjd »

PeterisP wrote: post #169
rjd wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because a common tactic kids are using ATM is a simple snatch and grab, right out of peoples hands. Heaps easier than taking a laptop as you might be standing in a crowd, they can approach you with speed, shunt you off balance and are gone. Phone doesn't lock while they run with it as they are touching the screen, they get away from the user and disable the security features. You are compromised, phone is compromised…

If your phone gets stolen, then you block your phone number with the carrier, and the thief can't get your SMS - so 2-factor security still works and protects you.

True, I think most snatch and grabs are sold quick for cash and not identity theft anyway.

But in a worst case scenario how quick could someone determined actually compromise you? minutes? less time than you'd wait on hold during work hours, let alone waiting till the next day?

Re: Dear Googles: Stop asking

#194

Post by pearjuice »

Dear Google,

Thank you for all the free services you have delivered over the years. Please do not listen to all those complaining about stuff they get for free. As free as they were to sign up, they also have a choice to opt-out at any moment.

They blindly agreed to the Terms of Service which warned them, yet now complain as if they are entitled to anything.

Look at them and laugh

Re: Dear Googles: Stop asking

#195

Post by znowi »

I wish they were as innovative in their marketing practice as in apps. They seem to replicate whatever Facebook is doing to milk more users for more data. And something Facebook doesn't have to do - frantically coerce people to join Google+ on a massive scale.

I think it's a result of a lesson learned with Buzz. There was a lot of media hype about it, but very little push to the masses (compared to Google+). And, rightly so, it died off. Cause on its own merit, it kind of sucked and got no traction, despite the formidable Google force behind it.

With Google+ - the last hope of the Empire in social media battle - everything goes.

Re: Dear Googles: Stop asking

#196

Post by adventured »

buro9 wrote: post #34

Does Google believe that if they just push a little harder and finish the job, that somehow the people so alienated will be won over? Or is the pursuit of profit far more important than the perception of the brand overall? Right now, and for the last year, the brand is being severely tarnished in all of the networks I have, tech and real-life. I don't see them winning on any front. A Pyrrhic victory.

I've been loyal to Google's products, across the board, for over a decade.

They push another inch forward in terms of trying to force me to cross-link products or use something I don't want to, and I'm going to abandon their entire product suite, permanently.

I'm just one consumer, but that's how I'm going to vote, with my feet heading out the door. I don't like being abused in exchange for my decade of loyalty. Fortunately it's really trivial to switch off of Google for about 95% of what I use them for.

Re: Dear Googles: Stop asking

#197

Post by oceanplexian »

johnchristopher wrote: post #103
MayanAstronaut wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no idea why people talk about huge corporations like they have hive mind and are in total unity? Google is now a mega-corp, comprised of thousands competing for finite success outcomes (raises & promos). It is also data driven hence they look at metrics that are considered success like registers over abandonments. Brand tarnish is a long term outcome, therefore it can not be seen in typical a/b testing cycles.…

> I have no idea why people talk about huge corporations like they have hive mind and are in total unity ? Because despite being a mega-corp, comprised of thousands [...], it's still called and named `Google`, singular. They naturally map it to one entity ; not because they are stupid but because the entity is interacting with them solely through that one identity and they don't have incentives to care for the inner…

They don't care about abandonment because anyone can game A/B testing.

Users are easily persuaded. A majority of users will give in just so the damn thing shuts up. They probably use the metrics to hand out bonuses or engage in pointless contests leading to gamification.

It doesn't take a village to make a Picasso, and any attempts to try are going to result in failure. Google needs leadership.

Re: Dear Googles: Stop asking

#198

Post by marshray »

sitharus wrote: post #139
pessimizer wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Google really was the first search engine that was any bloody good at all. This is not even vaguely true. Google's algorithm was a bit better, their page was cleaner, and they weren't trying to push you into other services or wall you into any weirdness. If google had pulled the shit they pull now back then, I never would have switched to it. I switched to google because they convinced me that their simple, honest s…

The algorithm was better, but it wasn't revolutionary. The main point was it specifically ignored the page titles and meta tags that got all the keyword stuffing at the time. The biggest advantage Google had was their listings were all search results, whereas most competitors had paid listings included in the results, but at the top of course.

It was revolutionary better. Non-techie friends were saying to me out of the blue "have you tried Google?"

But that was, you know, over 15 years ago.

Re: Dear Googles: Stop asking

#199

Post by eonil »

conradev wrote: post #156

Facebook does the exact same thing. They want your interests so that they can show you ads.

We're not taking about Facebook.

And Facebook does same thing doesn't justify anything. It just means they're same. Also Facebook has a lot better configurable personal policy.

Anyway, that's awesome finally we have two options. If we can make them compete, we will get the service in cheaper price - with less personal information. Currently Facebook looks obvious winner in this field, because users don't even realize they're offering stuffs to Facebook, and Google has big resist.

Re: Dear Googles: Stop asking

#200

Post by alt_f4 »

davidgerard wrote: post #161
alextingle wrote: post #159

Relevant: http://toys.usvsth3m.com/google-plus-simulator/

I posted that link to G+. One person claimed it must be a disgruntled YouTuber, another seriously claimed b3ta must be Microsoft shills. I despair.

So, you are surprised about a negative reaction on the social network for (former) Google employees?
Post reply on HN