4 ms·

How is that not isomorphic to Circles?

• slowpoke 15y ago
  It's not. You seem to have misread the article. moot's saying that it's important "who you share as" not "who you share with". G+ doesn't allow you to have multiple identities, it allows you to share in different contexts with the same identity - which is fundamentally different. Besides, it's a very bad idea to leave identity management in the hands of a third party anyways, and the last third party I'd trust with my identities are Google and Facebook. Call me paranoid all you want, but identities are something you manage yourself - nobody should be trusted doing it for you.
  • endtime 15y ago
    I didn't misread anything. What I'm saying is that sharing "as" a different aspect of myself is functionally equivalent to sharing with a different Circle, from a privacy perspective.