Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New Data: Google+ Public Posts Decrease by 41% Over Past Two Months

89n.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 92 posts

Re: New Data: Google+ Public Posts Decrease by 41% Over Past Two Months

#61

Post by 0x12 »

sixtofour wrote: post #58

In response to davidw, http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2999668 How I divested from Google services. Others please reply with their own tales. The first thing to realize is that, like most projects, you don't have to go from zero to 100% accomplishment in one step. Perfection never ships. My approach was to use the solutions that would get me off Google as quickly as possible, and then gradually search for better…

The process of getting rid of google is very much akin to the process of getting rid of closed source. You may lose some functionality or maybe some polish or convenience but on the whole it is definitely doable.

The hardest ones to get rid of imo are adsense, adwords and docs.

For everything else there are reasonable replacements.

Re: New Data: Google+ Public Posts Decrease by 41% Over Past Two Months

#62

Post by nextparadigms »

The problem is the majority of people using it now, are people who do not like social networking too much in general. But they were just excited about it in the beginning because it was made by Google. I am one of them.

But if Google+ wants to succeed they need to get a LOT of mainstream people on board, and get them all at once. They need to make them hear the name Google+ in all mainstream channels: TV, radio, magazines, from celebrities - EVERYWHERE. They really need to do a big advertising push, or something to get the attention of mainstream people. And they need to get a lot at once, so it doesn't feel deserted for each one of them.

Re: New Data: Google+ Public Posts Decrease by 41% Over Past Two Months

#63

Post by wccrawford »

tonfa wrote: post #51
wccrawford wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I already said it. Because if Facebook bans me, I only lose Facebook. If G+ bans me, I lose multiple services, including 1 that is integral to my online identity.

I thought it was clear that a G+ ban does not affect gmail/docs/calendar/etc.

It's far from clear. Everything I've seen says otherwise. Please provide a citation.

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/violetblue/google-plus-too-much-un...

Re: New Data: Google+ Public Posts Decrease by 41% Over Past Two Months

#64

Post by michaelochurch »

zmmmmm wrote: post #39
wccrawford wrote: post #9

I used the hell out of it. Every day. And then the Real Name debacle happened. And I thought, "There's no way Google would screw this up. They'll retract any day now." And here we are today. Early this week, I decided that was it. They obviously aren't going to see sense, and I can't risk losing my account. So I've stopped posting. I don't even check it, except when someone replies to something I've already posted. I…

I did the same thing. I can't even explain why but I lost all enthusiasm for it right at that point even though I was using my real name. The whole thing just seemed less interesting, less like a platform and more like a ploy, less new and more same-old-same-old. I think I also knew at that point that while conversation on G+ may be more civil it will be a lot less interesting. Certainly I was never going to discuss…

I think I also knew at that point that while conversation on G+ may be more civil it will be a lot less interesting.

Real Name policies don't necessarily make discussion more civil. Less of the low-grade trolling (throwaway posts lined with racial slurs) occurs, of course, but when people have reputations to defend the flamewars that do occur get a bit nastier and last a bit longer. Arguments that people would walk away from under anonymous conditions tend to spin out of control. There's an upper bound on the ugliness of an anonymous discussion that people break through when real identities come out.

Wikipedia has something like a Real Names policy: various by-laws that pertain to personal identity. This is because (a) decisions are made based on consensus rather than correctness, and "sock puppets" corrupt this process, (b) they have a hideously badly-conceived "3 revert rule" which is supposed to apply on a per-person basis (but actually means edit wars are won by the person who has taken the time to cultivate/level-grind convincing sock puppets), and (c) blocks and bans are supposed to apply to people, not accounts. What this means in practice is that an easy way to shut down an opponent is to accuse him of someone else's identity, and an easy way to grab power one hasn't earned is to cultivate sock puppets that look like other people (as pretty much all of Wikipedia's "admins" do). It's a revolting failure, and community problems are the major reason why Wikipedia is starting to decline.

Re: New Data: Google+ Public Posts Decrease by 41% Over Past Two Months

#65

Post by sixtofour »

andrewcooke wrote: post #50
davidw wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some postings on how people distribute their eggs and into what baskets would be interesting.

well, i decided to drop gmail because of this (at first i dropped search, but nothing else was as good at the time and search is pretty much critical for my work - and i still use disconnect, ghostery and adblock plugins, so my search and browsing in general are anonymous-ish). i looked around for a different provider. the best i found was http://www.runbox.com/ - it wasn't as good, but it was the closest (the main f…

Oh how I miss MH. :) I'd use it now, except I've really gotten used to html email.

Re: New Data: Google+ Public Posts Decrease by 41% Over Past Two Months

#66

Post by sixtofour »

wccrawford wrote: post #45
zmmmmm wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did the same thing. I can't even explain why but I lost all enthusiasm for it right at that point even though I was using my real name. The whole thing just seemed less interesting, less like a platform and more like a ploy, less new and more same-old-same-old. I think I also knew at that point that while conversation on G+ may be more civil it will be a lot less interesting. Certainly I was never going to discuss…

Is it harsh? I've found nothing that says you keep the rest of your account. "When you get your account suspended on Google Plus, you lose Google Reader, your Google Profile (it is deleted from Google search) and any Picasa photos and photo albums." - http://www.zdnet.com/blog/violetblue/google-plus-too-much-un...

Google's own statement on what happens is just barely vague enough that I consider it subject to change at yesterday's moment's notice.

Re: New Data: Google+ Public Posts Decrease by 41% Over Past Two Months

#67

Post by revorad »

tonfa wrote: post #55
revorad wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The crappy treatment given to Google Apps users makes me wonder if Google has some data suggesting that we are less likely to click on ads.

Or that the majority of Apps for your domain users are schools/companies/etc., combined with the fact that a social network for those users is harder to build (they have different requirement).

Yeah, companies that are paying customers, not just for the apps but for the ads themselves! Google should be copying Amazon and learn to care for customers, but instead they choose to imitate Facebook.

Re: New Data: Google+ Public Posts Decrease by 41% Over Past Two Months

#68

Post by danmaz74 »

You may like G+ or not, but these numbers are pretty much meaningless, and the title completely misleading.

Did they measure a 41% decrease of public posts? No! They measured a drop in public posts PER USER.

Moreover, this is only measured with users of manageflitter, which can hardly be considered a representative sample, so, where does all this excitement come from?

Re: New Data: Google+ Public Posts Decrease by 41% Over Past Two Months

#69

Post by iaskwhy »

sixtofour wrote: post #23
wccrawford wrote: post #9

I used the hell out of it. Every day. And then the Real Name debacle happened. And I thought, "There's no way Google would screw this up. They'll retract any day now." And here we are today. Early this week, I decided that was it. They obviously aren't going to see sense, and I can't risk losing my account. So I've stopped posting. I don't even check it, except when someone replies to something I've already posted. I…

"Say what you like about Facebook, but if they ban your account, you don't lose your email, documents, calendar, etc etc etc. You can't say that about Google." You can say that about Google if you move your services out. I did that. I saw it as a choice between Google's superior mail, calendar and docs, with risk of losing it all, against any number of good enough choices, with no Google risk at all. I used to rant a…

Changing your online life just to use Google+ is not worth it, is it?

Re: New Data: Google+ Public Posts Decrease by 41% Over Past Two Months

#70

Post by sixtofour »

j_col wrote: post #35
wccrawford wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How exactly do you do that? I don't see a way to just remove G+.

I did. You can remove your Google+ account but still keep all other services (I still use Adwords and Analytics).

If you're not going to completely leave, then I would recommend leaving your G+ account intact, and just don't use it anymore. Delete your posts and pictures if you like, but don't delete the account itself.

I believe I recall reading Google itself saying that if you delete your G+ account, that has the same effect as if Google had suspended your account (whatever that means from day to day).

So I believe, whether you self-terminate or suffer suspension) that you lose partial functionality on Picasa. You can still store photos, but anything related to sharing is dead. Don't know if that affects pictures on Blogger.

For Reader, I think you can still use it, but you can't share posts.

Or something.

Post reply on HN