Google is making a huge and annoying mistake • Hacker News Board

Re: Google is making a huge and annoying mistake

#121

Post by waterlesscloud » Wed, May 02, 2012, 5:35 PM UTC

jonnathanson wrote: post #119

waterlesscloud wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven't seen a convincing argument that Google needs social. I know they believe it, I just haven't seen anything that made a compelling case that it's actually true.

Advertising is the vast majority of Google's revenue. How vast? AdWords alone accounts for 97% of Google's earnings. The strategic vulnerability of that position cannot possibly be overstated. Along comes Facebook, which could (in theory, at least) roll out a perfectly competitive product to threaten AdWords. If social really does provide better context for advertising, and advertising within the world's prevailing s…

While that helps explain why Google's social efforts are weak, it doesn't make the case that social is something Google needs.

What Google needs, in this case, is more information on its users, which is not a particularly social thing to need.

Say Google is approaching social as an information gathering problem, and Facebook is approaching social as a users-interacting problem, then who will always win social under those conditions?

Re: Google is making a huge and annoying mistake

#122

Post by jsprinkles » Wed, May 02, 2012, 5:36 PM UTC

jgroome wrote: post #42

G+ is a joke. Nobody outside of the tech and geek industries either wants it or uses it. And yet they carry on doing everything they can just to herd people into creating G+ accounts. Hey, it might work. Got to get those numbers up, right? But they can't make me USE my G+ account.

I'm in the tech and geek industries and I used my G+ account for about ten minutes.

Re: Google is making a huge and annoying mistake

#123

Post by VikingCoder » Wed, May 02, 2012, 5:40 PM UTC

> It is bad for viewers, bad for video creators, and bad for YouTube’s ability to curate and tailor videos to potential viewers.

First, a question: any random person on the internet, without being logged in, used to be able to Thumb Up a YouTube video?

If that's true, then I bet it was very easy to spam. Giving it a Thumb Up, without being logged in, would also mean that none of your friends had any idea that you had given it a Thumb Up, and you could never again find a history of things you had Thumbed Up.

And now, to upvote, you need to be logged in...

What website, anywhere on the internet, allows you to upvote without being logged in? Not HackerNews. Not Reddit. Not Facebook.

By knowing who you Follow, Google and YouTube now have a much better way to find information that you care about. If I search on YouTube for "python", it has a chance to know that I mean the programming language, because of who I'm Following.

Also, every single +1 that you get on your YouTube videos now has a real person behind it. Every single +1 is now worth Gold. Every single +1 has a better chance to go viral, because the Followers of that person who clicked +1 have a chance to see it.

If I search on YouTube for something, and I see "Wil Wheaton +1d this," I'm MUCH more likely to want to check it out.

Re: Google is making a huge and annoying mistake

#124

Post by d503 » Wed, May 02, 2012, 5:41 PM UTC

moskie wrote: post #92

nextparadigms wrote: post #45

In the beginning people complained that Google has like a dozen different "Like" buttons on the Reader, Youtube and so on. Now they complain that they want to use just one everywhere? I think it's a great move. Personally, I even want them to integrate their G+ commenting system into all their services. It's one of the best commenting systems out there, and certainly much better than the Youtube one. It might even en…

But there's a third option, and it's the one Wheaton is complaining is no longer there. Instead of there being a way to "like" this thing on an external social network (like G+ or Facebook), what about just "liking" it on a system that exists only on the site itself (in this case, on YouTube)? Then after that, how about a system to Share the item? This doesn't really exist on the web, but the Sharing system on Androi…

Web Intents (which should be in Chrome soon, or maybe they're in already) should hopefully allow exactly that.

http://webintents.org/

Latest news seems to be on G+: https://plus.google.com/u/0/116171619992010691739/posts

Re: Google is making a huge and annoying mistake

#125

Post by VikingCoder » Wed, May 02, 2012, 5:44 PM UTC

moskie wrote: post #92

nextparadigms wrote: post #45

In the beginning people complained that Google has like a dozen different "Like" buttons on the Reader, Youtube and so on. Now they complain that they want to use just one everywhere? I think it's a great move. Personally, I even want them to integrate their G+ commenting system into all their services. It's one of the best commenting systems out there, and certainly much better than the Youtube one. It might even en…

But there's a third option, and it's the one Wheaton is complaining is no longer there. Instead of there being a way to "like" this thing on an external social network (like G+ or Facebook), what about just "liking" it on a system that exists only on the site itself (in this case, on YouTube)? Then after that, how about a system to Share the item? This doesn't really exist on the web, but the Sharing system on Androi…

If you're not logged in, then it's a completely meaningless "like." It can be easily spammed, you can't find it again just by knowing you liked it, your Followers have no idea you liked it.

It's about as valuable as those old CGI "000000017 people have viewed this page!"

And there's a great way to share the item - use the URL. Google is really aggressive about making sure that its web pages, even though they feel like rich internet applications, still allow linking.

Re: Google is making a huge and annoying mistake

#126

Post by leoh » Wed, May 02, 2012, 5:46 PM UTC

Is it me, or is this post exceedingly whiny?

Re: Google is making a huge and annoying mistake

#127

Post by [deleted] » Wed, May 02, 2012, 5:48 PM UTC

VikingCoder wrote: post #123

> It is bad for viewers, bad for video creators, and bad for YouTube’s ability to curate and tailor videos to potential viewers. First, a question: any random person on the internet, without being logged in, used to be able to Thumb Up a YouTube video? If that's true, then I bet it was very easy to spam. Giving it a Thumb Up, without being logged in, would also mean that none of your friends had any idea that you had…

[deleted]

Re: Google is making a huge and annoying mistake

#128

Post by libraryatnight » Wed, May 02, 2012, 5:48 PM UTC

huggyface wrote: post #16

libraryatnight wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's meant to be an in depth critique, it's his feedback as a user. He doesn't need to be a design expert or UX expert to know that as a user something is annoying. The real UX folks should be listening to users, they don't have to agree or implement everything said, but they should be listening. The point seems to be don't rob people of functionality they've come to expect just to push sign-ups.

I don't think it's meant to be an in depth critique, it's his feedback as a user. It sounds like it's more his feedback as a creator, worried about what the functionality will do to users. But, you know, those are the breaks when you sharecrop on someone else's land: they retain the right to change things for their own benefit. Still don't quite understand the complaint, though. You've long needed a Google account to…

When I read his blog post I assumed he has a YouTube account that is not linked to his Google account. You can unlink them[1]. It's also possible to have an account with Google without being on G+.

My understanding of his complaint is that he was signed in to youtube, which is why it's billed as an 'upgrade.' He should be able to easily use YouTube with a YouTube account. I think that's where the complaint comes in, it's not just calling the account something different, it's making things more difficult for those who might want to keep some things separate.

That doesn't make your points any less true, but I at least think I understand the complaint.

edit: also no worries on the downvote ;)

[1]http://support.google.com/youtube/bin/answer.py?hl=en&an...

Re: Google is making a huge and annoying mistake

#129

Post by jes5199 » Wed, May 02, 2012, 5:49 PM UTC

Youtube used to be a demilitarized zone in the social wars. Every social network uses Youtube as their default video provider, every cell phone OS has a Youtube app as the default video app.

Google saying that Youtube is now, fundamentally, a G+ territory means that social video is no longer something we can take for granted; expect Facebook and Apple to jump ship, and Youtube is left with, what, only the loyal G+ users?

I miss the days when Google, Apple, and Facebook cooperated rather than squabbled. The internet has gotten crappier lately.

Re: Google is making a huge and annoying mistake

#130

Post by jonnathanson » Wed, May 02, 2012, 5:49 PM UTC

waterlesscloud wrote: post #121

jonnathanson wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Advertising is the vast majority of Google's revenue. How vast? AdWords alone accounts for 97% of Google's earnings. The strategic vulnerability of that position cannot possibly be overstated. Along comes Facebook, which could (in theory, at least) roll out a perfectly competitive product to threaten AdWords. If social really does provide better context for advertising, and advertising within the world's prevailing s…

While that helps explain why Google's social efforts are weak, it doesn't make the case that social is something Google needs. What Google needs, in this case, is more information on its users, which is not a particularly social thing to need. Say Google is approaching social as an information gathering problem, and Facebook is approaching social as a users-interacting problem, then who will always win social under t…

"While that helps explain why Google's social efforts are weak, it doesn't make the case that social is something Google needs."

Actually, my intent was just the opposite: to explain why Google "needs" social (but not so much to explain why its efforts have been weak). That said, I think it does offer explanation for their weakness in social to date: they didn't really see it as a threat until it became one. It's very easy to see why Facebook's ad platform can be a threat to Google's ad platform in hindsight (i.e., right now), but it wasn't back when Facebook was first taking off. It's hard to blame Google for not seeing Facebook as an existential threat before it turned into one.

"Say Google is approaching social as an information gathering problem, and Facebook is approaching social as a users-interacting problem, then who will always win social under those conditions?"

For Google, it's not about winning social, per se; it's about winning advertising. Facebook is trying to win social. Google is trying to prevent social from devastating its ad platform, and at the moment, it seems to think that putting up a valiant fight to carve out a piece of social is the best solution to that problem. That's why Google thinks it "needs" social. It may or may not actually need to win social, but it needs to defend and improve its ad platform, and social is a big threat to that platform. Accordingly, I'd argue that Google's approach to social has been defensive, and not offensive. (Ironically, that may also explain its not being able to "get" social so far).