7 ms·

In the beginning people complained that Google has like a dozen different "Like" buttons on the Reader, Youtube and so on. Now they complain that they want to u

In the beginning people complained that Google has like a dozen different "Like" buttons on the Reader, Youtube and so on. Now they complain that they want to use just one everywhere? I think it's a great move. Personally, I even want them to integrate their G+ commenting system into all their services. It's one of the best commenting systems out there, and certainly much better than the Youtube one. It might even encourage better comments on Youtube.

leovinci 14y ago
in 2012 they will make fun of us for all the 'stupid like buttons', as we now make fun of those 'stupid javascript alerts' in the 90s.
SkyMarshal 14y ago
Agreed. Anedotal - I've been using Youtube since it was released, and I just found out a month or so ago that you don't have to dig through the annoyingly short paginated comments below videos to find replies to yours, there's a page in your dashboard that shows all that. I'm not a heavy Youtube user and don't care that much, but it was not intuitive or apparent. Further, I mostly like G+ (except for one complaint [1]), and I'm all for better integration of their properties with it. 1. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3828010 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3828010
- rhizome 14y ago
  Yeah, and there's a series of clicks you can use to get to the list of videos that you've favorited, but damned if I can ever remember what they are. Every time I want to find one of my favorites, it takes a maddening number of clicks to get to it.
m0nty 14y ago
> Now they complain that they want to use just one everywhere? It's almost like the Internet is lots of different people with wildly divergent opinions!
- nextparadigms 14y ago
  Google is one company. Would you want Apple to have 5 different payment systems, or Facebook to have 5 different Like buttons?
  - Anirak 14y ago
    I actually don't think I would care if Facebook had 5 different like buttons.
  - m0nty 14y ago
    I really don't care. I was just pointing out that the use of collective nouns can be misleading when you're talking about what "people" said and how "they" are being inconsistent. The rest of your point was well-made (not that I expect you to care about what I think; I'm just some random git off the Internet, after all).
macrael 14y ago
A friend of mine actually convinced me otherwise re: youtube comments. Because youtube comments are reverse threaded by time, so the newest comments are first, it encourages comments to be actual reactions to the video instead of just getting lost in replies to replies to replies.
- idleloops 14y ago
  That's a good thing. It's really easy to get lost in comments. In some ways it would be nice to hide all comments until you make one. Though you'll probably end up with a list of the same remarks. In some ways you have that already! (People don't seem to think for themselves any more...) I always fancied threaded comment systems, but they can spiral off topic. That's not in tiself a bad thing. Loads of comments can be hard to read, or rather take a long time to read. Perhaps a character limit - and a comment limit would make them more succinct and better all round. Wasn't the +1 just a shortcut for those that used to just cut and paste someone else's comment to signify that they were in agreement with what the other person said anyway? Perhaps I'm wrong and it means something different to other people. Part of me says do anything to make the YouTube comment system better. But I'm not sure if Google+ is the right way to go about it.
- DavidAbrams 14y ago
  YouTube comments (aside from being a cavalcade of human stupidity) don't even work right. Threads don't work, with replies appearing in random locations rather than indented under the originals (but sometimes they do inexplicably appear correctly). Page breaks are totally wrong, with the same comments appearing on the next page but many of them missing. Really, why even bother. YouTube is a failure of basic design and Google, with all their resources, hasn't been able to field a competent layout. That's pathetic.
pitchups 14y ago
It is a question of semantics and word choice really - pretty sure that if they had said "Login with your Google Account" instead of "Upgrade to Google+", the reaction would not have been as negative. All that the Upgrade to Google+ does is tie your Google account to Google+ - you don't have to follow anyone, post anything or fill out any details of you profile. So they could have just called it : We are tying / converting (not upgrading) your account to a Google+ account so you can Like the video.
- option_greek 14y ago
  I think most of the Google's PR debacles in past year have to do with poor wording and lack of proper information on privacy. When they omit things, people will assume the worst.
- sp332 14y ago
  In order to get a Google+ account, you have to give them a lot more information than you do to just get a normal Google account. And you have to use your real name or they'll disable you entire account - including email etc.
  - jmsduran 14y ago
    Even with those safeguards, it is still possible to create a phony/spam G+ account. Asking for more information doesn't solve the problem, it simply forces the user to fabricate more information in the beginning during the sign up process.
    - ebiester 14y ago
      The user, however, doesn't know the consequences of subverting the form.
      - waqf 14y ago
        If they're an accomplished spammer they won't hesitate to experiment. After which it's yet another hoop which obstructs only the bona fide users.
moskie 14y ago
But there's a third option, and it's the one Wheaton is complaining is no longer there. Instead of there being a way to "like" this thing on an external social network (like G+ or Facebook), what about just "liking" it on a system that exists only on the site itself (in this case, on YouTube)? Then after that, how about a system to Share the item? This doesn't really exist on the web, but the Sharing system on Android solves this problem well.
- d503 14y ago
  Web Intents (which should be in Chrome soon, or maybe they're in already) should hopefully allow exactly that. http://webintents.org/ http://webintents.org/ Latest news seems to be on G+: https://plus.google.com/u/0/116171619992010691739/posts https://plus.google.com/u/0/116171619992010691739/posts
  - groby_b 14y ago
    It's definitely in :) Grab a Canary build, start playing with it right now.
- VikingCoder 14y ago
  If you're not logged in, then it's a completely meaningless "like." It can be easily spammed, you can't find it again just by knowing you liked it, your Followers have no idea you liked it. It's about as valuable as those old CGI "000000017 people have viewed this page!" And there's a great way to share the item - use the URL. Google is really aggressive about making sure that its web pages, even though they feel like rich internet applications, still allow linking.
  - notatoad 14y ago
    i don't know where this misconception is coming from, but you could never like something on youtube without first logging in. you have always had to be logged in to your google account in order to give a thumbs up.
    - 14y ago
jmsduran 14y ago
> "It might even encourage better comments on Youtube." I don't think the move to G+ will affect Youtube comment quality at all.
- MaysonL 14y ago
  Just imagining what will happen when all the Youtube commenters start posting to G+ boggles the mind.
  - nuclear_eclipse 14y ago
    They might actually be able to compete with Facebook then...
DavidAbrams 14y ago
"In the beginning people complained that Google has like a dozen different "Like" buttons on the Reader, Youtube and so on" No, they didn't. Who in hell would complain about that? Who cares?
- fpgeek 14y ago
  I don't know about "Like" buttons, but I know more than a few people who complain about all of Google's messaging options (Google Talk, Google Voice, Huddle / Google+ Messaging, ...).

leovinci 14y ago

in 2012 they will make fun of us for all the 'stupid like buttons', as we now make fun of those 'stupid javascript alerts' in the 90s.

SkyMarshal 14y ago

Agreed. Anedotal - I've been using Youtube since it was released, and I just found out a month or so ago that you don't have to dig through the annoyingly short paginated comments below videos to find replies to yours, there's a page in your dashboard that shows all that. I'm not a heavy Youtube user and don't care that much, but it was not intuitive or apparent. Further, I mostly like G+ (except for one complaint [1]), and I'm all for better integration of their properties with it. 1. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3828010 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3828010

rhizome 14y ago
Yeah, and there's a series of clicks you can use to get to the list of videos that you've favorited, but damned if I can ever remember what they are. Every time I want to find one of my favorites, it takes a maddening number of clicks to get to it.

m0nty 14y ago

> Now they complain that they want to use just one everywhere? It's almost like the Internet is lots of different people with wildly divergent opinions!

nextparadigms 14y ago
Google is one company. Would you want Apple to have 5 different payment systems, or Facebook to have 5 different Like buttons?
- Anirak 14y ago
  I actually don't think I would care if Facebook had 5 different like buttons.
- m0nty 14y ago
  I really don't care. I was just pointing out that the use of collective nouns can be misleading when you're talking about what "people" said and how "they" are being inconsistent. The rest of your point was well-made (not that I expect you to care about what I think; I'm just some random git off the Internet, after all).

macrael 14y ago

A friend of mine actually convinced me otherwise re: youtube comments. Because youtube comments are reverse threaded by time, so the newest comments are first, it encourages comments to be actual reactions to the video instead of just getting lost in replies to replies to replies.

idleloops 14y ago
That's a good thing. It's really easy to get lost in comments. In some ways it would be nice to hide all comments until you make one. Though you'll probably end up with a list of the same remarks. In some ways you have that already! (People don't seem to think for themselves any more...) I always fancied threaded comment systems, but they can spiral off topic. That's not in tiself a bad thing. Loads of comments can be hard to read, or rather take a long time to read. Perhaps a character limit - and a comment limit would make them more succinct and better all round. Wasn't the +1 just a shortcut for those that used to just cut and paste someone else's comment to signify that they were in agreement with what the other person said anyway? Perhaps I'm wrong and it means something different to other people. Part of me says do anything to make the YouTube comment system better. But I'm not sure if Google+ is the right way to go about it.
DavidAbrams 14y ago
YouTube comments (aside from being a cavalcade of human stupidity) don't even work right. Threads don't work, with replies appearing in random locations rather than indented under the originals (but sometimes they do inexplicably appear correctly). Page breaks are totally wrong, with the same comments appearing on the next page but many of them missing. Really, why even bother. YouTube is a failure of basic design and Google, with all their resources, hasn't been able to field a competent layout. That's pathetic.

pitchups 14y ago

It is a question of semantics and word choice really - pretty sure that if they had said "Login with your Google Account" instead of "Upgrade to Google+", the reaction would not have been as negative. All that the Upgrade to Google+ does is tie your Google account to Google+ - you don't have to follow anyone, post anything or fill out any details of you profile. So they could have just called it : We are tying / converting (not upgrading) your account to a Google+ account so you can Like the video.

option_greek 14y ago
I think most of the Google's PR debacles in past year have to do with poor wording and lack of proper information on privacy. When they omit things, people will assume the worst.
sp332 14y ago
In order to get a Google+ account, you have to give them a lot more information than you do to just get a normal Google account. And you have to use your real name or they'll disable you entire account - including email etc.
- jmsduran 14y ago
  Even with those safeguards, it is still possible to create a phony/spam G+ account. Asking for more information doesn't solve the problem, it simply forces the user to fabricate more information in the beginning during the sign up process.
  - ebiester 14y ago
    The user, however, doesn't know the consequences of subverting the form.
    - waqf 14y ago
      If they're an accomplished spammer they won't hesitate to experiment. After which it's yet another hoop which obstructs only the bona fide users.

moskie 14y ago

But there's a third option, and it's the one Wheaton is complaining is no longer there. Instead of there being a way to "like" this thing on an external social network (like G+ or Facebook), what about just "liking" it on a system that exists only on the site itself (in this case, on YouTube)? Then after that, how about a system to Share the item? This doesn't really exist on the web, but the Sharing system on Android solves this problem well.

d503 14y ago
Web Intents (which should be in Chrome soon, or maybe they're in already) should hopefully allow exactly that. http://webintents.org/ http://webintents.org/ Latest news seems to be on G+: https://plus.google.com/u/0/116171619992010691739/posts https://plus.google.com/u/0/116171619992010691739/posts
- groby_b 14y ago
  It's definitely in :) Grab a Canary build, start playing with it right now.
VikingCoder 14y ago
If you're not logged in, then it's a completely meaningless "like." It can be easily spammed, you can't find it again just by knowing you liked it, your Followers have no idea you liked it. It's about as valuable as those old CGI "000000017 people have viewed this page!" And there's a great way to share the item - use the URL. Google is really aggressive about making sure that its web pages, even though they feel like rich internet applications, still allow linking.
- notatoad 14y ago
  i don't know where this misconception is coming from, but you could never like something on youtube without first logging in. you have always had to be logged in to your google account in order to give a thumbs up.
  - 14y ago

jmsduran 14y ago

> "It might even encourage better comments on Youtube." I don't think the move to G+ will affect Youtube comment quality at all.

MaysonL 14y ago
Just imagining what will happen when all the Youtube commenters start posting to G+ boggles the mind.
- nuclear_eclipse 14y ago
  They might actually be able to compete with Facebook then...

DavidAbrams 14y ago

"In the beginning people complained that Google has like a dozen different "Like" buttons on the Reader, Youtube and so on" No, they didn't. Who in hell would complain about that? Who cares?

fpgeek 14y ago
I don't know about "Like" buttons, but I know more than a few people who complain about all of Google's messaging options (Google Talk, Google Voice, Huddle / Google+ Messaging, ...).