4 ms·

Circles isn't really new. It's definitely implemented better (exposed and integrated), but it suffers from what I think is a serious weakness: hidden complexity

Circles isn't really new. It's definitely implemented better (exposed and integrated), but it suffers from what I think is a serious weakness: hidden complexity. When you think about it as a broadcast, it's very simple and straightforward, but when someone in one of your Circles starts commenting/talking back, it gets a lot more complicated. More thorough explanation here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2714333 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2714333

michaelchisari 15y ago
Appleseed has already addressed this. When you comment, a push notification is sent to the group defined the context. Actions are not broadcast, contexts are. IE, Alice posts a blog, which is available to Group A. Bob posts a comment to the blog, and members of Group A are notified (even if they're not on Bob's friends list). Chris, who is on Bob's friends list, but not a member of Group A, will not receive a notification.
- joebadmo 15y ago
  That's still potentially confusing, though. Bob has no idea who is part of Group A apart from himself. He could probably check, but there's a cognitive load/uncertainty there that equals friction to every secondary action (like a comment). So there's two problems: 1. Bob might comment on Alice's post thinking he's in his own social context, which is reinforced by the fact that on Google+, he's in his own UI and Alice's post shows up in his Circle; 2. Bob has to consciously check to see what the context is every time he wants to make a comment on Alice's post. My idea for a potential solution is "Places." Which is through the link I posted above.
  - esrauch 15y ago
    Google already has a product named Places (I think it's kind of like Yelp?), but I get your meaning.
  - michaelchisari 15y ago
    In Appleseed, you can set a Circle to be viewable by it's members, so it's similar in function to how you describe "Places".
    - joebadmo 15y ago
      It's the same in Google+, but you still have to consciously check. My point being that it's not really the functionality that matters per se, it's the metaphor. Having the explicit metaphor gives you an immediate understanding of how the information flows. Having an optional setting checked does not.

michaelchisari 15y ago

Appleseed has already addressed this. When you comment, a push notification is sent to the group defined the context. Actions are not broadcast, contexts are. IE, Alice posts a blog, which is available to Group A. Bob posts a comment to the blog, and members of Group A are notified (even if they're not on Bob's friends list). Chris, who is on Bob's friends list, but not a member of Group A, will not receive a notification.

joebadmo 15y ago
That's still potentially confusing, though. Bob has no idea who is part of Group A apart from himself. He could probably check, but there's a cognitive load/uncertainty there that equals friction to every secondary action (like a comment). So there's two problems: 1. Bob might comment on Alice's post thinking he's in his own social context, which is reinforced by the fact that on Google+, he's in his own UI and Alice's post shows up in his Circle; 2. Bob has to consciously check to see what the context is every time he wants to make a comment on Alice's post. My idea for a potential solution is "Places." Which is through the link I posted above.
- esrauch 15y ago
  Google already has a product named Places (I think it's kind of like Yelp?), but I get your meaning.
- michaelchisari 15y ago
  In Appleseed, you can set a Circle to be viewable by it's members, so it's similar in function to how you describe "Places".
  - joebadmo 15y ago
    It's the same in Google+, but you still have to consciously check. My point being that it's not really the functionality that matters per se, it's the metaphor. Having the explicit metaphor gives you an immediate understanding of how the information flows. Having an optional setting checked does not.