3 ms·

> Towards the end it had a lot of advantages like one login account but still true pseudonymity How is that compatible with their enforced (and disastrous) rea

> Towards the end it had a lot of advantages like one login account but still true pseudonymity How is that compatible with their enforced (and disastrous) real name policy?

mulmen 6y ago
Privacy from other users, not privacy from big G. I don’t recall the specifics but I remember the whole thing being very confusing as a user. It was definitely when I started losing trust in Google because there was never a clear benefit to me as a user.
- CaptainZapp 6y ago
  Thanks for the clarification.
- eitland 6y ago
  > like one login account but still true pseudonymity wrt to other users Exactly. FWIW: That's what I tried to explain above: "like one login account but still true pseudonymity wrt to other users" > I don’t recall the specifics but I remember the whole thing being very confusing as a user. It was definitely when I started losing trust in Google because there was never a clear benefit to me as a user. On Google+ the social network it became really simple: You logged in using your main account. Then in the upper right corner of the desktop (and probably in the hamburger menu on mobile) you could choose which connected identity you would like to post as. Meaning one identity to answer serious questions about programming on the backend and another identity in a support group for front end developers etc ;-) Google of course knew but back then we trusted Google.
  - mulmen 6y ago
    Yeah, when you explain it that makes sense. But it was never clear to me how that related to circles or whatever. Also that identifies were even a thing. Plus even back then I didn’t trust Google to retain the functionality. How do I know they won’t merge those identities later to “streamline the experience” or something. I never used Google+ because it never made sense to me. There were probably a lot of great ideas that were just not obvious. In hindsight it really looks like Yahoo all over again.

> Towards the end it had a lot of advantages like one login account but still true pseudonymity How is that compatible with their enforced (and disastrous) real name policy?

mulmen 6y ago

Privacy from other users, not privacy from big G. I don’t recall the specifics but I remember the whole thing being very confusing as a user. It was definitely when I started losing trust in Google because there was never a clear benefit to me as a user.

CaptainZapp 6y ago
Thanks for the clarification.
eitland 6y ago
> like one login account but still true pseudonymity wrt to other users Exactly. FWIW: That's what I tried to explain above: "like one login account but still true pseudonymity wrt to other users" > I don’t recall the specifics but I remember the whole thing being very confusing as a user. It was definitely when I started losing trust in Google because there was never a clear benefit to me as a user. On Google+ the social network it became really simple: You logged in using your main account. Then in the upper right corner of the desktop (and probably in the hamburger menu on mobile) you could choose which connected identity you would like to post as. Meaning one identity to answer serious questions about programming on the backend and another identity in a support group for front end developers etc ;-) Google of course knew but back then we trusted Google.
- mulmen 6y ago
  Yeah, when you explain it that makes sense. But it was never clear to me how that related to circles or whatever. Also that identifies were even a thing. Plus even back then I didn’t trust Google to retain the functionality. How do I know they won’t merge those identities later to “streamline the experience” or something. I never used Google+ because it never made sense to me. There were probably a lot of great ideas that were just not obvious. In hindsight it really looks like Yahoo all over again.