6 ms·

Big difference between upvoting a video on YouTube for other people on YouTube and giving a +1 to a video that could possibly go on your Google+ wall (if that e

Big difference between upvoting a video on YouTube for other people on YouTube and giving a +1 to a video that could possibly go on your Google+ wall (if that even exists), influence your search results in ways you don't want, or show up awkwardly in other strange ways while using other Google products like Gmail. The real problem is the effects are unknown and upvoting is no longer a contained action with a specific social purpose. That little upvote is a commodity that Google will exploit however it can to "bring the social" or whatever they're calling it nowadays. I think users innately understand this and are shying away from Google+ because they can sniff where all this is heading - my boss reading that I "liked" a LOLcats video while at work or my wife seeing that I "plussed" a review of Avengers by a woman in lingerie or something. If users don't know what their actions will produce (especially socially) they are going to avoid it!

VikingCoder 15y ago
> giving a +1 to a video that could possibly go on your Google+ wall (if that even exists) It does not exist. You can specifically Share a video with Circles. > influence your search results in ways you don't want, In the upper right on your Search page, you can click "Hide personal results." > or show up awkwardly in other strange ways while using other Google products like Gmail [citation needed] > The real problem is the effects are unknown and upvoting is no longer a contained action with a specific social purpose. What if you want to share with your circles, what if you want things you've +1'd to influence your search results, what if you want to see better ads rather than crappy ads? > my boss reading that I "liked" a LOLcats video while at work Don't Share that with your boss. That's what Circles are for. > my wife seeing that I "plussed" a review of Avengers by a woman in lingerie or something +1's are inherently public. I can appreciate that you like to give feedback to content creators saying, "Hey, I liked this!" Google is tying the "I" in that sentence to your Google+ account. I think the days of "Anonymous Likes" are somewhat over... They were always susceptible to spamming, anyway. And they were never really as anonymous as we liked to think they were.
- acqq 15y ago
  Technically, "Anonymous Likes" aren't really susceptible to spamming, as through the years Google developed enormous infrastructure to avoid spamming in ad-clicks. The same technology can be easily used for "Anonymous Likes." The decision to eliminate "Anonymous Likes" is not a result of technical needs, it's a decision "from the above" to force a "more social" Google.
  - VikingCoder 15y ago
    > Technically, "Anonymous Likes" aren't really susceptible to spamming [Citation Needed] Should content show up higher in Google Search Results, if it is more Liked? By whatever system of Likes you care to design... I say "yes." That makes the "Anonymous Like" system a clear target for Search Engine Optimization. People have to pay for ads. If it turns out that the Conversion numbers for a set of search words are lousy, then advertisers will give up on those words, and the price on those words will plummet. It's to Google's advantage to find GOOD ads, that users actually WANT to see. It's good for advertisers to only have their ads up if users WANT to see them. And it's good for users to only see ads that they WANT to see. The economy on ad words helps solve those problems. For YouTube videos, Google knows how many people watch all the way through a video - which is one metric. They know how many times people start watching the video. They could know how many "Anonymous Likes" there are. And they can know how many +1s and Shares there are. The number of replays, too. How often people click on the video, when it shows up in search results. Given all of that data, I assert that it's possible that Anonymous Likes have no technical value. The task: given all of the metrics, predict the likelihood that User B will enjoy watching a video. I think it's possible that Google / YouTube have determined that the number of Anonymous Likes has no statistical correlation to the likelihood that User B will enjoy watching the video. I think it's possible that the number of Anonymous Likes should have no bearing on the Rank of a video in Search Results. Your assertion is that "The decision to eliminate 'Anonymous Likes' is not a result of technical needs". That's possible, but I think you're only speculating. Otherwise, [Citation Needed]. > it's a decision "from the above" to force a "more social" Google. If I'm correct, that Anonymous Likes have no statistical correlation to whether User B will enjoy the video, then don't you think it's possible that having Google+ users, who are signed in, be able to +1 and Share a video might actually create BETTER RESULTS for users? Not just "more social," but more "ME" based on things I've liked, and based somewhat on the things the people in my Circles have liked?

VikingCoder 15y ago

> giving a +1 to a video that could possibly go on your Google+ wall (if that even exists) It does not exist. You can specifically Share a video with Circles. > influence your search results in ways you don't want, In the upper right on your Search page, you can click "Hide personal results." > or show up awkwardly in other strange ways while using other Google products like Gmail [citation needed] > The real problem is the effects are unknown and upvoting is no longer a contained action with a specific social purpose. What if you want to share with your circles, what if you want things you've +1'd to influence your search results, what if you want to see better ads rather than crappy ads? > my boss reading that I "liked" a LOLcats video while at work Don't Share that with your boss. That's what Circles are for. > my wife seeing that I "plussed" a review of Avengers by a woman in lingerie or something +1's are inherently public. I can appreciate that you like to give feedback to content creators saying, "Hey, I liked this!" Google is tying the "I" in that sentence to your Google+ account. I think the days of "Anonymous Likes" are somewhat over... They were always susceptible to spamming, anyway. And they were never really as anonymous as we liked to think they were.

acqq 15y ago
Technically, "Anonymous Likes" aren't really susceptible to spamming, as through the years Google developed enormous infrastructure to avoid spamming in ad-clicks. The same technology can be easily used for "Anonymous Likes." The decision to eliminate "Anonymous Likes" is not a result of technical needs, it's a decision "from the above" to force a "more social" Google.
- VikingCoder 15y ago
  > Technically, "Anonymous Likes" aren't really susceptible to spamming [Citation Needed] Should content show up higher in Google Search Results, if it is more Liked? By whatever system of Likes you care to design... I say "yes." That makes the "Anonymous Like" system a clear target for Search Engine Optimization. People have to pay for ads. If it turns out that the Conversion numbers for a set of search words are lousy, then advertisers will give up on those words, and the price on those words will plummet. It's to Google's advantage to find GOOD ads, that users actually WANT to see. It's good for advertisers to only have their ads up if users WANT to see them. And it's good for users to only see ads that they WANT to see. The economy on ad words helps solve those problems. For YouTube videos, Google knows how many people watch all the way through a video - which is one metric. They know how many times people start watching the video. They could know how many "Anonymous Likes" there are. And they can know how many +1s and Shares there are. The number of replays, too. How often people click on the video, when it shows up in search results. Given all of that data, I assert that it's possible that Anonymous Likes have no technical value. The task: given all of the metrics, predict the likelihood that User B will enjoy watching a video. I think it's possible that Google / YouTube have determined that the number of Anonymous Likes has no statistical correlation to the likelihood that User B will enjoy watching the video. I think it's possible that the number of Anonymous Likes should have no bearing on the Rank of a video in Search Results. Your assertion is that "The decision to eliminate 'Anonymous Likes' is not a result of technical needs". That's possible, but I think you're only speculating. Otherwise, [Citation Needed]. > it's a decision "from the above" to force a "more social" Google. If I'm correct, that Anonymous Likes have no statistical correlation to whether User B will enjoy the video, then don't you think it's possible that having Google+ users, who are signed in, be able to +1 and Share a video might actually create BETTER RESULTS for users? Not just "more social," but more "ME" based on things I've liked, and based somewhat on the things the people in my Circles have liked?