271–280 of 284 posts
As such, I've deleted my old Google + profile and started over with a new one. I enjoy sharing on the internet, but too many fragments tied together paints a picture of me I don't want to share.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do you access this feature?
The 'People' section in Settings. There's also a button with your profile name on it at the top right in newer versions of Chrome.
Though not the end of G+, hopefully it will be the end of G+ as we know it. From day one G+ should have simply been a social mesh between the many (very) popular Google properties like YouTube, Play, Maps, etc. Making it a standalone application was their fatal mistake, and here's hoping Bradley can lead them towards becoming a social utility instead of a social platform.
social mesh between the many (very) popular Google properties like YouTube, Play, Maps Genuine question: what do the videos I view, the apps I install on my phone, and the locations I search for have in common? And what's "social" about any of those?
I find it incredibly amusing and also very frustrating that all the top comments to this article are simply G+ re-shares that add absolutely no value to the comments section and simply more garbage the reader has to sift through in order to view legit comments. >>"Google has been doing some rethinking" thanks I already read that >>"#googleplusupdate #youtube " thank you that was valuable >>[another summary of the art…
Tumblr has very much the same program regarding reshares. Although I'm not sure if Tumblr even wants to foster discussion on their site--people do it any way, of course, quoting each other, but most Tumblr themes make these kind of discussions look awkward and hard to follow. Nested quotes get thinner and thinner, until you have just one word per line, sticking halfway out the container.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The reply thing really gets me - reddit and HN threads are really easy to follow. Why is that so hard to do?
I find them really hard to follow. Threaded commenting isn't so fun when you can't collapse a single comment's thread. Instead, if I want to know who is being replied to, I need to place my finger on the screen and scroll up, seeing on who's comment it lands. That tells me which comment the current one is replying to. 4chan (well, imagboards in general) have a nice system where you can reply to multiple people at onc…
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/hn-utility-su...
I agree that having some sort of easy way to quick-view the parent of a post would also be useful.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Facebook has, and has long had, a real name policy. If you want a reason why Facebook succeeded and G+ didn't, you'll need something that's actually different between them.
When I joined facebook, you had to use your university email address. There was zero expectation of not being linked to your identity. Perhaps Facebook broadened after that, but the Facebook culture was already established that you expect to see real people you know there. Google instead tried to shoehorn existing users with a different culture. Perhaps they could have created a separate service with different expect…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've spent a fair bit of time reflecting on it. I don't think it would work if resurrected: 1. Usenet was small . Somewhere between 50k and 500k users, based on my own and Gene Spafford's guestimates. More solid numbers appreciated (~1988-1992 or so). 2. It was selective . You had to be a student at a research university, or work for a tech company, or have government access, or be able to gain access to systems prov…
Point 2 was only true before 1993. After that, everybody could get on usenet. And did. The eternal september drove the quality down quite a bit.
"Classical Usenet" was what came before, for the most part.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe that's part of the reason I can never figure out what's going on when I follow someone's link to a conversation on Twitter.
Twitter, I'll never understand... I have a theory you need the brain to be wired differently.
1) It's fully public, and everything you're a fan of uses it.
This makes it fantastic for building a feed of stuff you follow in tiny, tidy, bite-sized messages where one overactive wall-of-text can't slow you down as you drink from the firehose of info.
2) It came out of SMS. That means it keeps the limits of SMS, like short messages and usernames and whatnot. Imho they should break out of this box a bit - move tags and people out of the message body and swap names into the UI.
I've been confused about Google+ for the longest time, wondering what reason there was for Google+ to exist in the first place, other than the (perceived) low cost of getting users (via marketing on their search page). What new value does Google+ add? Does anybody sign up for Google+ for reasons other than 1) Google Hangouts, or 2) accident? How is Google+ "quickly becoming a place where people engage..." and yet I d…
Believe it or not, there's a lot of activity in my feed on Google+. Am I hanging out with all the wrong people? I don't watch big Bang Theory and I don't know who does but it's been on for 7 seasons and their cast is the highest paid on TV.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If by "before" you mean 2008, then yes, arguably. Starting around 2009 I've started using various browser extensions to hide the comments, and I've never been happier.
I don't understand. Can't you just... not read them?