4 ms·
"He replied by saying that G+ was build primarily as an identity service" Which is becoming more and more obvious. However, it was sold to its users as a soci
by sixtofour 15y ago
"He replied by saying that G+ was build primarily as an identity service"
Which is becoming more and more obvious.
However, it was sold to its users as a social networking service.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- A-K 15y agoGood point. It seems rather unsettling and dishonest if this was the plan all along. I guess in the coming months we'll see how the service evolves (and users react).
- abraham 15y agoIf you read the announcement identity is very important in every aspect that was announced: http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2011/06/introducing-google-project-real-life.html http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2011/06/introducing-google-pr...
- sixtofour 15y agoOK, but most people are never going to see that. I didn't. Most people are going to wonder what google plus is, and end up here, where Google is actively telling potential users a particular story: https://plus.google.com/up/start/?continue=https://plus.google.com/&type=st&gpcaz=4807fced https://plus.google.com/up/start/?continue=https://plus.goog... Nowhere in there does it say it's an identity service. The closest it comes is to talk about putting different people in different circles. Nowhere does it say that services that worked perfectly well for you are at risk if you run afoul of the name issue.