Moral of the story: Don't use google+.
Leastways: not with your real name.
Google+ invite lands man in jail
41–50 of 203 posts
Re: Google+ invite lands man in jail
#42Just opened up Google+ on a 15" Mac Book Pro in Chrome and all I see is whitespace and "You may know", "Interesting people and pages" and other useless crap, what I'm not seeing is my feed . Only around 10% of the screen space is used for things I care about, it really baffles me how Google thinks that this is a contender against Facebook. They should realise that spamming people won't make them like their horrible U…
Could you possibly exaggerate any more? 10%? Really? With the multi column newsfeed on Google+ it's just impossible that you see less content than on Facebook. And how does your comment have anything to do with the article?
> Could you possibly exaggerate any more? 10%? Really?
> With the multi column newsfeed on Google+ it's just impossible that you see less content than on Facebook.
Look at the screenshot I posted on the original content.
The point of my comment was that Google should focus on making their product actually usable instead of trying to carve out some market share by brute force.
Re: Google+ invite lands man in jail
#43[deleted]
Re: Google+ invite lands man in jail
#44Just opened up Google+ on a 15" Mac Book Pro in Chrome and all I see is whitespace and "You may know", "Interesting people and pages" and other useless crap, what I'm not seeing is my feed . Only around 10% of the screen space is used for things I care about, it really baffles me how Google thinks that this is a contender against Facebook. They should realise that spamming people won't make them like their horrible U…
Could you possibly exaggerate any more? 10%? Really? With the multi column newsfeed on Google+ it's just impossible that you see less content than on Facebook. And how does your comment have anything to do with the article?
One of the points of the article is that it's hard to tell and control what is happening on the Google+ interface and system.
Add A/B testing and rollout of new features, utter lack of accountability and bugs, and probably no one in the world can ACTUALLY TELL if the alleged abuser actually sent an invite.
Re: Google+ invite lands man in jail
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well I presume that as well; I hope someone here has experience with that and can tell how hard it is? Because I just had that 'wow!' experience ; it feels like they hand them out at the police station to anyone asking :) I know they are not, but some 'actual', non media enlarged information would be great!
I'm confused as to why you are under the impression that restraining orders are 'normal', or that they hand them out to anyone asking, based on a single data point of one person getting one restraining order?
That was my whole reason for asking; they seem common because of the media. Now that I see other comments here it seems really easy to get them which seems like something open to abuse. I am just surprised because they are so uncommon here.
Re: Google+ invite lands man in jail
#46Just opened up Google+ on a 15" Mac Book Pro in Chrome and all I see is whitespace and "You may know", "Interesting people and pages" and other useless crap, what I'm not seeing is my feed . Only around 10% of the screen space is used for things I care about, it really baffles me how Google thinks that this is a contender against Facebook. They should realise that spamming people won't make them like their horrible U…
That is beside the point. Also G+ isn't a 1:1 Facebook competitor.
The point is Google should make their product attractive instead of relying of just leveraging their existing power to promote it. It doesn't have to be exactly 1:1 for people to be expecting at least the same quality.
Re: Google+ invite lands man in jail
#47I wonder if restraining orders apply to third parties contacting on behalf of the restrained person? Suppose, it's violation only if it's proven that the person willingly made third party to make contact? (Otherwise it's nearly trivial to put anyone under a restraining order to courtroom, huh.)
Re: Google+ invite lands man in jail
#48The article focuses mainly on whether the man did indeed send the Google+ invitation to his former girlfriend. It seems to me that the actual troubling question is whether sending a Google+ invitation can be considered a violation of a restraining order. The bar is far too low when receiving a single inconsequential message that you have full ability to ignore can be considered a form of harassment.
I disagree. A restraining order is precisely meant to bar all forms of communication so that we don't need to decide on a case-by-case basis which communications violate the order, which would lead to highly unequal enforcement with some people being punished for things that others are not punished for.
I agree, but I don't find it obvious if following (adding to circles) someone on Google+ is a form of communication at all.
Re: Google+ invite lands man in jail
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is no "with the victim" here though. I mean, morally speaking, we are all with the victim - human decency alone demands that we have sympathy for their predicament, which is why we have things like restraining orders in the first place. But the enforcement of the order is done by the police and the state, and the state is in a position to imprison someone for an act which they did not commit, which seems to me…
I've edited my post. I side with the court (which is choosing to favour the person who asked for the restraining order). It's not been proven that Google did send an automated email. The only thing the court does know is that an email was sent, and it was "from" the person who is subject to the restraining order. If Google did send an automated email (which is unclear), then lawyers should be updating their advice to…
> If Google did send an automated email (which is unclear), then lawyers should be updating their advice to the subjects of restraining orders to ensure that their contact lists are purged appropriately.
so basically you are saying that when something in the law is not clear, it's the job of the lawyers to make it sure they give proper advice to the next person coming into that situation, while the unlucky first person just has to face consequences?
Re: Google+ invite lands man in jail
#50I have a friend who works the emergency telephone line and is getting increasingly frustrated with calls regarding Facebook. A typical call will have the caller complain that, "[person x] has written something horrible on my wall!" So he says, "hang on? They've written on your wall? So you're friends with them?! Just un-friend them!"
In fact in a recent review he was told off for groaning loudly on the telephone when someone mentioned Facebook.
However, you can see that if Google+ continues with it's desperate push for market share like this, there will be more and more instances like that in the article. People really won't know how to properly eliminate others from the online social lives, as easily as just "un-friending" them.