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

241–250 of 250 posts

Re: Nonplussed

#241

Post by jmillikin »

lsc wrote: post #215
themacguffinman wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, the multiple identities thing you talked about is one of the new G+ features on YouTube. You can create a G+ Page, which is treated as a separate profile across YouTube and G+. This Page is internally linked to you (but no one can see the original owner) and you can switch in and out of it by clicking "Switch Accounts". Edit: forgot to mention, you have to explicitly connect the G+ Page to YouTube. https://…

huh. That is pretty cool. I mean, there's a lot of room here for 'human factors' kinds of screwups, but... that looks like they are heading in a reasonable direction.

Note, that functionality is exactly what the author of the article is objecting to.

Re: Nonplussed

#242

Post by MichaelGG »

improv32 wrote: post #204
MichaelGG wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The concept of Snapchat is useless - it's literally DRM. It will work well enough for some folks, but fundamentally it simply isn't technically possible. At least not without a "trusted computing" model with remote attestation and so on.

No, its fundamentally impossible: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analog_hole

You can prevent the actual bitstream from being copied with "secure" hardware, and most such hardware includes systems that verify output devices. Of course nothing stops you from taking a picture or video of the screen, but that's not making a digital copy. (Although, with a high resolution scanner, you could read every pixel and reverse the encoding and possibly end up with the same bit-by-bit value.)

Re: Nonplussed

#243

Post by interpol_p »

themacguffinman wrote: post #199
stephp wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 don't understand your example. Apparently the receptionist attends parties and drinks alcohol in her downtime, how is that an issue? That is not inappropriate at all.

I'd rather not have the people I deal with on a professional basis see pictures of me at a party drinking alcohol.

I don't care if it's perfectly legitimate and understandable behaviour, it's awkward.

Re: Nonplussed

#244

Post by fumar »

lmm wrote: post #227
fumar wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I paid for app.net for several months. But, all my friends are on twitter.

Re: Nonplussed

#246

Post by daliusd »

haberman wrote: post #232
daliusd wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main problem for me that in different circles I might have different persona (different name, different image, some parts of my identity not exposed - like my workplace). It is mask I wear is important not who I'm talking to.

G+ lets you control what circles can see your employment info: http://imgur.com/nuBP0Qz Personally I much prefer that G+ (and Facebook, for that matter) lets you interact with real people and not personas.

The problem is that in reality you have different faces: coworker, father, lover and etc. Neither of these are less real and many of them not necessary has real name, you can be "Your Name" (without surname) for your coworker, "Daddy" for your child and "Honey" for your lover.

I just try to explain why Google+ does not work for me at all.

Re: Nonplussed

#247

Post by ta_delited »

mkr-hn wrote: post #148
gcb1 wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

reddit is an echo chamber even worse than here. i dread depending on its platform for any content

Reddit is not a monolith. There are thousands of communities for every interest beyond the defaults.

I already left reddit a while ago following trend of wise people who did it before me because reddit got buried in stupid memes, cats pictures and copypasta. Comments lost insight and the hive mind took over.

Re: Nonplussed

#248

Post by ta_delited »

davidgerard wrote: post #94
chetanahuja wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The amazing thing was they managed to blow thirteen years' good will in about two months. All gone. When techies are seriously considering using Bing for search ... you know your brand's gone toxic. If they'd just backed off in the nymwars, WE'D ALL BE OVER THERE NOW. Fucksakes.

Sorry to disappoint but techies are long gone to duckduckgo.

I did use bing maps though as they are incredibly better than google maps.

Re: Nonplussed

#249

Post by VLM »

rsl7 wrote: post #196
VLM wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Experiences like this led me to leave Facebook" I would go on a tangent to this, that I never got any actionable information or other life improvement from facebook. I tried, really hard, for six months, to participate and get something out of it, but it was just a huge time waster so I wiped it. Although supposedly youtube is only (or mostly) used for trash talking comments on kitten videos, I have occasionally got…

I don't know what to do with your comment. I think every single person I know over age 50 on Facebook has gotten a lot out of it, for instance, if for no reason other than they used it to reconnect with old friends. But you didn't get anything out of it so you deleted it.. ok - is there some bigger point you're making? I'm missing it. It sort of sounds like another one of those "I'm 22 and don't understand why other…

"is there some bigger point you're making?"

Sorry for responding late. TLDR of my long post is its a privacy market. The trade happens when both sides think they're getting the better half of the deal at the same time. FB is a classic privacy market which I got almost nothing from, so I'm not willing to trade more than a microscopic amount of privacy for it, in fact I'm not willing to participate at all. On the other hand, I feel I get substantial "stuff" in exchange for giving up some privacy on youtube, there actually is some worthwhile stuff there, so I feel its a fair trade. This market making balance varies pretty widely across different people at different sites. I could have just as well used HN as my example of trading off privacy (however little) vs what I get out of it (which is a lot) but FB is the standard market player for privacy discussions, so...

On the bigger picture, I suspect those who run YT know what they're doing, and this is a reasoned decision. You must give up this much more privacy to trade, means they are hoping / expecting the value of whatever videos they're shipping will improve to make it worthwhile. Or they just can't monetize anonymous cute cat video comments anymore so abandon that market sector, which is frankly not much of a loss to humanity.

Re: Nonplussed

#250

Post by mistermann »

PaulHoule wrote: post #180
gcb1 wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

reddit is an echo chamber even worse than here. i dread depending on its platform for any content

More to the point, it's a nasty community. (Second in nastiness only to Wikipedia) The tone of reddit is set more by downvoting rather than upvoting. Any post on proggit about any language people actually use gets voted down by an army of bots written in languages that people don't use. Also, they're a bunch of communists because they'll vote you down if you drop any hint that (1) you're in it for the money or (2) yo…

You're describing particular subreddits, not reddit.
Post reply on HN