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

221–230 of 250 posts

Re: Nonplussed

#221

Post by coldpie »

chimeracoder wrote: post #2

I wonder how much engagement Google/Facebook/et. al. lose from people who are about to make a comment/post a status/etc., and then thing 'Hm, no - this is private now, but what about in a year when they automatically change my privacy settings without asking me?' Put another way, imagine I am a teenager or college student who uses Facebook. 1. Start to upload a photo from my phone of me and my friends doing shots 2.…

> 1. Start to upload a photo from my phone of me and my friends doing shots

Just don't do this. Seriously. Don't do it. I don't know why people keep putting self-damaging things on the Internet. If it's on the Internet, you should consider it as public. Full stop. There's so many avenues for things to get out into the public (leaked passwords, website glitches, human error in general), that unless you're extremely careful about the dissemination of that information (hint: don't be /in/ the picture in the first place, or you've already lost), the data is as good as public.

Really, what did you gain by putting that picture on the Internet, anyway?

Re: Nonplussed

#222

Post by coldpie »

jurassic wrote: post #85

> 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 b…

AdBlock plus, buddy :)

Sadly I haven't figured out a solution for mobile platforms yet. I just don't watch videos with ads in them on mobile.

Re: Nonplussed

#223

Post by computerbob »

coldpie wrote: post #221
chimeracoder wrote: post #2

I wonder how much engagement Google/Facebook/et. al. lose from people who are about to make a comment/post a status/etc., and then thing 'Hm, no - this is private now, but what about in a year when they automatically change my privacy settings without asking me?' Put another way, imagine I am a teenager or college student who uses Facebook. 1. Start to upload a photo from my phone of me and my friends doing shots 2.…

> 1. Start to upload a photo from my phone of me and my friends doing shots Just don't do this. Seriously. Don't do it. I don't know why people keep putting self-damaging things on the Internet. If it's on the Internet, you should consider it as public. Full stop. There's so many avenues for things to get out into the public (leaked passwords, website glitches, human error in general), that unless you're extremely ca…

[Really, what did you gain by putting that picture on the Internet, anyway?]

It is a memory. Doing shots isn't wrong or bad. Maybe doing 20 of them and then driving home from the bar is bad. Posting pictures is a way to relive a precious moment in time with others.

Re: Nonplussed

#224

Post by tiziano88 »

Hellenion wrote: post #212
tiziano88 wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

but then why do you "like" or "+1" the cat videos in the first place, if not to make it known to the world that you liked them?

I have liked a lot of things as thank-you or acknoledgement to the author. If I want to make something known, if I want to spread the word, I clicked the "share" button, that was its purpouse.

You can send a message to the author if you want to acknowledge something privately. The +1 button is there to make it publicly known that you endorse the content, that is its purpose.

Re: Nonplussed

#225

Post by RodericDay »

coldpie wrote: post #221
chimeracoder wrote: post #2

I wonder how much engagement Google/Facebook/et. al. lose from people who are about to make a comment/post a status/etc., and then thing 'Hm, no - this is private now, but what about in a year when they automatically change my privacy settings without asking me?' Put another way, imagine I am a teenager or college student who uses Facebook. 1. Start to upload a photo from my phone of me and my friends doing shots 2.…

> 1. Start to upload a photo from my phone of me and my friends doing shots Just don't do this. Seriously. Don't do it. I don't know why people keep putting self-damaging things on the Internet. If it's on the Internet, you should consider it as public. Full stop. There's so many avenues for things to get out into the public (leaked passwords, website glitches, human error in general), that unless you're extremely ca…

what's wrong with doing shots? you're acting as if it's universally unethical or something

what about this: someone is being odiously racist, so I write a brutal reply to shut em down. Should I also hesitate on doing this, thinking that some employer may infer my radical left politics from it and stop me from getting a job in the future?

All you need to know about common sense about what to upload online is that it changes, not only in time but from social scene to social scene.

Re: Nonplussed

#226

Post by tiziano88 »

lsc wrote: post #168
tiziano88 wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

but then why do you "like" or "+1" the cat videos in the first place, if not to make it known to the world that you liked them?

>but then why do you "like" or "+1" the cat videos in the first place, if not to make it known to the world that you liked them? My point is that I may have 'cat video friends' who, you know, are in to that sort of thing, with whom I may wish to share these sorts of things. My point is that while it's fine to have my cat video friends, I ought to have the option of not sharing my 'cat fancy' with other groups who may…

well then it looks like you are not looking for the +1 button, but for something more complicated than that, an ACL'd endorsement of sorts. Right now the closest thing to that is to just reshare the video to your 'cat video friends' circle :)

Re: Nonplussed

#227

Post by lmm »

fumar wrote: post #107
Havoc wrote: post #66

I've had it with the whole online social thing to be honest - it seems to lead to nothing but evil deceptive tactics like the dialog box in the article with only one option. The internet used to be fun...now I get the distinct impression that everyone is out to get me.

What can be done to reverse this trend? Or to create something altogether different from the current "internet"?

Start paying for what you want.

The whole point of app.net was to create a social-network-type thing that served its users, because they were the ones paying for it. But it seems that most people prefer free stuff to non-evil.

Re: Nonplussed

#228

Post by Zecc »

shawnz wrote: post #17
joelrunyon wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where is the proof that "real names = better quality." That argument gets paraded everywhere but I've yet to see an actual study or proof of this.

So does that mean Google should not even experiment with the idea, just because nobody else has published data about it yet? Why does there need to be "proof"? It is Google's choice, just like it is your choice to use Google products.

I don't remember ever choosing to use G+.

Re: Nonplussed

#229

Post by warcode »

MichaelGG wrote: post #104
venomsnake wrote: post #40

Google has really lost its way to do UX. Google plus and youtube are not the one ones. I have no permanent way to disable Youtube asking me to merge accounts except goat sacrifice and writing directly to Larry Page - "If I rejected you 25 time why do you think I will agree on the 26th" I had to use Google Maps yesterday - the mobile app. Few things of notice - scale was never given on screen. Also there was not a way…

It seems unlikely that this is by accident and that people at Google are not aware of how annoying it is. Perhaps, just perhaps, they've decided they will make more money by forcing people to use G+. I see plenty of comments on YouTube, still of YT quality, with "Real Names". It's not like there's really a useful alternative to YT for most people. Google gets nothing from people commenting anonymously on YT. Annoying…

This would be fine if they actually provided a "I never want to comment. Never link my G+ and Youtube Accounts." option. But they keep asking forever.

Re: Nonplussed

#230

Post by shawnz »

Zecc wrote: post #228
shawnz wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So does that mean Google should not even experiment with the idea, just because nobody else has published data about it yet? Why does there need to be "proof"? It is Google's choice, just like it is your choice to use Google products.

I don't remember ever choosing to use G+.

I never said anything about choosing to use G+. You choose to use comments on youtube, and one of the consequences of that choice is that you must have a G+ page.
Post reply on HN