4 ms·

> Google learnt from its mistakes with Google+ and is eager to not repeat them Google has learned nothing from their mistakes. As evidence their real name pol

> Google learnt from its mistakes with Google+ and is eager to not repeat them Google has learned nothing from their mistakes. As evidence their real name policy is still active. Contrast with Twitter where a lot of users have fake names. And yes, you can find hateful users on Twitter and I know of some folks that have been harassed, but the community I'm active in is very professional and civilized and the conversations have a much higher quality than what I've seen on Google+ or YouTube, even with their real names. Guess some people are assholes no matter what. Also the Google+ API is still read-only. Which means you can only use Google's official tools for posting content. There's no way for example to cross-post on both Twitter and Google+. Apps like TweetDeck aren't possible for Google+. Oh and Google Reader is still dead. > Google doesn't want to mess up identity again, so that wouldn't be an issue I'm sure they don't want to mess it up, but given that they are continuously messing up identity, I'm also sure that it will be an issue.

deepfriedbits 10y ago
> Also the Google+ API is still read-only. Which means you can only use Google's official tools for posting content. There's no way for example to cross-post on both Twitter and Google+. Apps like TweetDeck aren't possible for Google+. Is this true? Buffer allows you to cross-post to Facebook, Twitter and Google+.
- bad_user 10y ago
  I don't know what Buffer is, but if they can post to Google+ it only means they have a private deal with Google. The Google+ API is read-only, it says so in their own docs: https://developers.google.com/+/web/api/rest/ https://developers.google.com/+/web/api/rest/ And if you want a service that has integration with everything except for Google+, there's IFTTT.
  - kyloren 10y ago
    Correct me if I'm wrong but I think buffer can also post to Instagram
    - brianwawok 10y ago
      It could be doing the reverse of scraping no? Faking app requests
- tsycho 10y ago
  Google+ has a significantly more powerful API for its trusted partners, such as Hootsuite. And maybe Buffer, unless they are doing some headless browsing hacks. Their public API is read only for strategic reasons. Unless you have a clear business case or plan on how to monetize APIs, opening them up can actually backfire very easily. The biggest example of this is Twitter itself, which has been trying to lock down its APIs since they are basically losing both money and direct access to users through them. But closing them now is causing further hurt, on user trust and goodwill.
jldugger 10y ago
> As evidence their real name policy is still active. Contrast with Twitter where a lot of users have fake names. Now contrast Twitter's earnings per share with Facebook's, which does have a real name policy. This policy is 1 percent about harassment, and 99 percent about building an advertising market to sustain the thing once built. Same logic applies to the read-only APIs. Unless you know a way to embed ads into the APIs, apps like Tweetdeck directly reduce income. This is why Twitter tried to lock down and revoke API access. If anyone has been making mistakes here, it's been Twitter, who is now in such a poor financial position that, despite laying off a huge number of engineers, their best hope of avoiding Google Reader's fate is to be acquired.
- bad_user 10y ago
  Facebook's revenue has nothing to do with their real names policy. Unless you use those real names to tie them to a bank account or some other database, their value is zero. And I don't think Facebook is doing it, or sharing those names with advertisers, because they have other much more valuable signals and ads platforms in general don't actually want to share their data with advertisers, because that's their secret sauce, preferring to do the targeting by themselves. I've worked on an advertising platform. This idea that those real names have value is basically a myth. And speaking of Twitter's API, trying to revoke access is one of those decisions that irrevocably hurt them. The big reason for why Facebook succeeded while Google+ miserably failed is that Facebook is a platform.
bitmapbrother 10y ago
>Google has learned nothing from their mistakes. As evidence their real name policy is still active. No it's not. There's no requirement to use your real name in Google+ or YouTube. And if you don't like Google+ you can even delete it from your account. >Also the Google+ API is still read-only. Which means you can only use Google's official tools for posting content. So what? There's a good reason it's read only and that's to avoid the flood of spam that would flow in. >Oh and Google Reader is still dead. Yeah, like you ever used Google Reader. It was a seldomly used service that has now become the poster child for people looking to criticize all Google product announcements.
newscracker 10y ago
> As evidence their real name policy is still active. The real name policy was revoked a couple of years ago. [1] I can only find some help pages on how often one can change the name and what to do if one wants to use a "first name" alone (the answer is to use a "." in the last name field and it won't be shown anywhere). Where does Google or Google+ require real names and since when? Do you have links to a re-reversal of that policy? I searched again, but couldn't find any. [1]: https://plus.google.com/+googleplus/posts/V5XkYQYYJqy https://plus.google.com/+googleplus/posts/V5XkYQYYJqy

deepfriedbits 10y ago

> Also the Google+ API is still read-only. Which means you can only use Google's official tools for posting content. There's no way for example to cross-post on both Twitter and Google+. Apps like TweetDeck aren't possible for Google+. Is this true? Buffer allows you to cross-post to Facebook, Twitter and Google+.

bad_user 10y ago
I don't know what Buffer is, but if they can post to Google+ it only means they have a private deal with Google. The Google+ API is read-only, it says so in their own docs: https://developers.google.com/+/web/api/rest/ https://developers.google.com/+/web/api/rest/ And if you want a service that has integration with everything except for Google+, there's IFTTT.
- kyloren 10y ago
  Correct me if I'm wrong but I think buffer can also post to Instagram
  - brianwawok 10y ago
    It could be doing the reverse of scraping no? Faking app requests
tsycho 10y ago
Google+ has a significantly more powerful API for its trusted partners, such as Hootsuite. And maybe Buffer, unless they are doing some headless browsing hacks. Their public API is read only for strategic reasons. Unless you have a clear business case or plan on how to monetize APIs, opening them up can actually backfire very easily. The biggest example of this is Twitter itself, which has been trying to lock down its APIs since they are basically losing both money and direct access to users through them. But closing them now is causing further hurt, on user trust and goodwill.

jldugger 10y ago

> As evidence their real name policy is still active. Contrast with Twitter where a lot of users have fake names. Now contrast Twitter's earnings per share with Facebook's, which does have a real name policy. This policy is 1 percent about harassment, and 99 percent about building an advertising market to sustain the thing once built. Same logic applies to the read-only APIs. Unless you know a way to embed ads into the APIs, apps like Tweetdeck directly reduce income. This is why Twitter tried to lock down and revoke API access. If anyone has been making mistakes here, it's been Twitter, who is now in such a poor financial position that, despite laying off a huge number of engineers, their best hope of avoiding Google Reader's fate is to be acquired.

bad_user 10y ago
Facebook's revenue has nothing to do with their real names policy. Unless you use those real names to tie them to a bank account or some other database, their value is zero. And I don't think Facebook is doing it, or sharing those names with advertisers, because they have other much more valuable signals and ads platforms in general don't actually want to share their data with advertisers, because that's their secret sauce, preferring to do the targeting by themselves. I've worked on an advertising platform. This idea that those real names have value is basically a myth. And speaking of Twitter's API, trying to revoke access is one of those decisions that irrevocably hurt them. The big reason for why Facebook succeeded while Google+ miserably failed is that Facebook is a platform.

bitmapbrother 10y ago

>Google has learned nothing from their mistakes. As evidence their real name policy is still active. No it's not. There's no requirement to use your real name in Google+ or YouTube. And if you don't like Google+ you can even delete it from your account. >Also the Google+ API is still read-only. Which means you can only use Google's official tools for posting content. So what? There's a good reason it's read only and that's to avoid the flood of spam that would flow in. >Oh and Google Reader is still dead. Yeah, like you ever used Google Reader. It was a seldomly used service that has now become the poster child for people looking to criticize all Google product announcements.

newscracker 10y ago

> As evidence their real name policy is still active. The real name policy was revoked a couple of years ago. [1] I can only find some help pages on how often one can change the name and what to do if one wants to use a "first name" alone (the answer is to use a "." in the last name field and it won't be shown anywhere). Where does Google or Google+ require real names and since when? Do you have links to a re-reversal of that policy? I searched again, but couldn't find any. [1]: https://plus.google.com/+googleplus/posts/V5XkYQYYJqy https://plus.google.com/+googleplus/posts/V5XkYQYYJqy