11 ms·
If you use Google+, you could become an ad next month
- ToastyMallows 13y agoOpt out link for the lazy: https://plus.google.com/settings/endorsements https://plus.google.com/settings/endorsements
- camus 13y agoOr easier ,delete your Google+ Account. Today you have the choice to opt-out , tomorrow you might not. I hope people here will stop with the "Google+ > Facebook " propaganda, their goal are the same: data mining,tracking and selling ads. It's even more difficult to manage privacy on Google+ than on Facebook. I dont have anything against these services but there is a price to pay for "free" ones, and it will become more and more expensive.
- TheSisb2 13y agoLooks like an opt-IN link for me... Does that mean I'm already opted out somehow?
- speedyrev 13y agoJust make sure there is no check in the box.
- yohui 13y agoProbably this? https://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/terms/changes/ https://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/terms/changes/ > If you previously told Google that you did not want your +1’s to appear in ads, then of course we’ll continue to respect that choice as a part of this updated setting.
- spindritf 13y agoI seem to have opted my whole domain (Google Apps) out somehow > Based on your domain's current settings, your name and profile picture will not appear in shared endorsements paired with ads. If your domain administrator changes this in the future, your choice here will be honored. https://plus.google.com/settings/endorsements?hl=en https://plus.google.com/settings/endorsements?hl=en though I don't know exactly how. Anybody knows which domain-wide setting is responsible?
- reustle 13y agoMy domain is also set like that and it is a fairly fresh google apps account, so it's probably the default.
- rocky1138 13y agoWhy would someone write a review for something but then not expect to have that review used by the business to further their sales?
- kevinh 13y agoIt's generally not the review that's the problem, but tying it to a user's image and real name without their permission.
- russell_h 13y agoPresumably, if you wrote that review on Google+, those would appear by the review anyway?
- thezilch 13y agoWTF? What review system, exactly, doesn't link to the reviewer's profile -- permission implied by posting? It's not even a generalism; it's a fact, full stop.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- tensor 13y agoI seem to remember that some review system allowed the use of pseudonyms or anonymity. In fact, here is a random example from Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/gp/pdp/profile/AG48K5RA3M4FK/ref=cm_cr_pr_pdp http://www.amazon.com/gp/pdp/profile/AG48K5RA3M4FK/ref=cm_cr... Who is Joe? I have no idea. I still find Amazon reviews useful though. I've long refused to rate or comment on apps in the google Play store because of their real name policy. I would do so anonymously though. For me, it's simply that I don't feel comfortable with the world knowing so much personal information about me. What sorts of hobbies I have, restaurants I frequent, etc. It's really a massive privacy problem. So I no longer review products in Google's system.
- jonknee 13y agoIt's very much with their permission. They have even signed in just to be able to write the review with their real name and photo.
- herbig 13y agoSo if I've deleted the Google plus service from my Google account, I have nothing to worry about?
- zheng 13y agoI think so, following the opt-out link led me to sign up for a G+ account (I'm in the same boat where I have a Google account but no G+).
- geerlingguy 13y agoDisappointing. Facebook's decision to use people in their ads, and also automatically subscribe people to spam from Facebook Pages, has already made clicking the Like button a 'heavy' action—meaning I have to think about it before doing it, and most likely won't click nowadays. Google Plus is the same now. I used to consider handing out a quick +1 to any post I liked, or a cool site/service. But now, I have to think about whether I would be okay with my profile being associated with whatever that article/site/service is doing, and whatever they may do in the future. I've already opted out, but I've now lost my trust that clicking +1 is a lightweight/safe action. The only social button/action that seems safe anymore is the 'Tweet this' button... Hopefully Twitter doesn't screw that up.
- minikites 13y agoYou just have to worry about other people with Twitter: http://mashable.com/2013/10/11/new-york-comic-con-promotional-tweets/ http://mashable.com/2013/10/11/new-york-comic-con-promotiona...
- the_watcher 13y ago>>made clicking the Like button a 'heavy' action—meaning I have to think about it before doing it. I may be in the minority here, but I think that is a feature, not a bug. "Liking" something should be a heavy action that you think about. I remember when I started getting page-spam from weird pages I'd liked in the early days of Facebook and went back and cleaned up my likes, there were some things in there I didn't remember liking or ever want to like. Now, I really have to think about it, and it leads to my ads and page updates being much more relevant and interesting to me. Also, the Graph Search capabilities should also be encouraging people to think before they like. As an online marketer, I like it too, because it means my audience is marginally more likely to truly be interested in the targeting I choose.
- makomk 13y agoAt least on Facebook, there's no way to (for instance) list which bands and TV shows you like on your profile anymore without Liking their pages and all the potentially undesirable consequences that come with it. Facebook have systematically and intentionally replaced lighter-weight mechanisms with Likes.
- Alterlife 13y agoThis actually doesn't seem terrible to me: If I published a public review on a product, why should Google not auto-match this up to a search result? That's the logical next step. It's what I'd expect from Google. I don't see anything privacy breaking about it of it's own... As long as the review was public, ofcourse -- or only being shown to those it was published to. That said, I just went ahead and opted-out of it because I don't know if it means what I think it means... and I don't want Google publishing things that I didn't say.
- minikites 13y agoWhat if you publish a negative review of a restaurant? Now it's super easy for them to find you and possibly harass you. What if you're in a marginalized group? Now online harassment can move into real world harassment if you've reviewed local places you enjoy. Lots of people are harmed by a "real names" policy: http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Who_is_harmed_by_a_%22Real_Names%22_policy%3F http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Who_is_harmed_by_a_%22Rea...
- cloudwalking 13y agoWhy would Google show a negative review as an "endorsement"? If you rate a restaurant 1 out of 5 stars, Google isn't going to show "Cloudwalking rated this 1/5 stars!" in an ad.
- minikites 13y agoWho's to say they won't start doing that in the future, where a competitor could purchase the negative review? And, what about my second point, which applies to any kind of review?
- ihsw 13y agoBecause people form a stronger rapport with those who share negative experiences than positive experiences. Granted, trying to take advantage of this is walking a very narrow tightrope, however if executed well then it could be hugely profitable. Confirmation bias tells us that negative reviews will always be more numerous than positive reviews, however those people writing negative reviews will feel a stronger cohesion with each-other. As such, negative reviews will be more valuable to how people form first impressions.
- blueblob 13y agoDo you guys think I should remove my reviews of all of the adult toys that I own?
- diydsp 13y agolol speaking of this, one day I was looking for hotel reviews on the interwebs. At the top of the list were 4 and 5-star hotels. Toward the middle, 3-star ones I might consider, then down lower a bunch of sleazy-sounding ones with hourly rates implied. Some service, I doubt it was google, as this was about two months ago, was connecting facebook profiles to some of the reviews and it added something like this to the descriptions, "Jane Doe, a friend of $my_education_professor" stayed here and rated it good. I _really_ didn't need that mental image of $my_education_professor's friends enjoying themselves in sleazy-sounding hotels. I don't know that it reflects on him directly - it shouldn't, and I think more power to him, but damnit if that software didn't facilitate that image to be briefly projected on my brainpan. :) Next time I see him, I sure hope I don't get overcome with urges to ask, "SO HOW OFTEN DOES JANE DOE ENJOY THOSE SLEAZY HOTELS. DO YOU EVER GO THERE WITH HER?" icky, icky icky :) This is exactly why we shouldn't have software generating images of other's lives for us, false or otherwise.
- zobzu 13y agonah they've been very helpful ;-)
- benologist 13y agoSummary spam - http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/12/technology/google-sets-plan-to-sell-users-endorsements.html?_r=2& http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/12/technology/google-sets-pla...
- 001sky 13y agoDon't be evil Oh, wait its 2013... carry on
- sologoub 13y agoJust opted out and got this confirmation message: "Are you sure? When you disable this setting, your friends will be less likely to benefit from your recommendations." Seriously?
- wutbrodo 13y agoIs this not true...? Don't get me wrong: I've disabled this too, but it's with the full knowledge that my friends are potentially losing a useful surfacing of my relevant review at a time when they indicate they would be interested in that information.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- zgohr 13y agoThe concern, at least for me, is not that a "public" review being used in a "public" way, it's that these businesses are now paying Google for my review and I get no cut. When I wrote this review I didn't write it to help this business out, per se, I wrote it because I wanted to help potential consumers decide where to do business based on my experiences.
- grimtrigger 13y agoWhy did you put public in quotes?
- zgohr 13y agoEmphasis. A good number of those defending Google are saying they can do whatever they want with your reviews because they are public.
- sadawi 13y agoThat's the way it should be. Otherwise, you'd be incentivized to leave (dishonestly) positive reviews.
- zgohr 13y agoI never claimed there was a good solution, because the point you make is very valid.
- cgman 13y agoWhy has no1 mentioned how the ads will now take up EVEN MORE space? Another fail for publishers, a win for Google.
- magicalist 13y agoI am not really a fan of this (though it seems like not that different than what the review was meant for in the first place (unlike, say, construing a like on facebook as an endorsement of that thing), but complete lack of interest in associating myself with reviews of a company or product is why I don't write reviews with my G+ account in the first place), but I am a fan of publishing a diff of Terms of Service changes, especially with a nice plain-English summary at the top. Of course, without this coverage, I don't know how the vast majority of people would have come across this page[1]. I don't appear to have been notified in my gmail account. To be fair, though, I've grown to hate the near constant ToS change emails I get from paypal, so there's some balance to be struck there too). edit: actually, I take back my last point. I get a big blue bar on top of google.com notifying me of the change, and it's not even a "click here to see a ToS change" that I would never be interested in enough to click on, it's "Our new Terms of Service update how we display your information in content & ads." with a "Learn more" link. Still wouldn't want to be involved with the feature, but good for them for handling it like that. [1] http://www.google.com/policies/terms/changes/ http://www.google.com/policies/terms/changes/
- Lewisham 13y agoI just received a notification of that page in my G+ Notifications, so I think all G+ users will see it. It's also being pushed to Google.com as a banner, if I understand correctly. DISCLAIMER: I'm a Google employee, but I am not involved with any of these products.
- Ygg2 13y agoAm I the only one that sees the comedic potential in this? Rate something 5/5. For example for a review of a restauraunt say "5/5. Sure beats eating rats infected with syphilis." or "4/5. Tastes like leprosy! Smells like porn locker!" And I'm just being very bad here: http://www.amazon.com/Avoid-Huge-Ships-John-Trimmer/dp/0870334336 http://www.amazon.com/Avoid-Huge-Ships-John-Trimmer/dp/08703...
- hrjet 13y agoThis is exactly what I thought. How are they going to be sure that the review is actually honest and relevant. What if I say something contradictory in the review? Or post irrelevant stuff in it? The only way they could avoid such face-palms would be to do some sort of natural language analysis. Or have humans curate and cherry-pick the reviews. The latter one would be worrying indeed. People are already ruffled up about their emails being scanned automatically. If their G+ posts are going to be scanned and cherry-picked by humans, it's even more unsettling.
- code_duck 13y agoEmails are expected to be private. Publicly shared posts in a social network are expected to be public, so I would not be concerned that someone is reading them.
- hrjet 13y agoBut they are not just doing this for publicly shared posts. Even posts which are shared privately will appear besides the ad when a person whom you have shared the post with is viewing the ad. That by itself is not a problem. However, to curate the post, somebody from Google would have to read it. Else, they have really good natural language processors.
- PeterisP 13y agoCan I easily delete my Google+ account w/o hampering my Gmail/calendar/etc? I made it once but I see only drawbacks in having it. I'm already fed up with the repeated requests to merge my Youtube 'channel' (wtf? I don't have or want a channel, I've made <10 comments on youtube and that's it) with my Google+ pic/name, and I definitely don't ever want to do that - but there's a risk that at some time I'll accidentally misclick one of their prompts. [edit] For example, I'm worried about their warning on Google+ deletion page 'You won't be able to use the "Sign in with Google" button to log in to third-party apps.', since I have used google-signin in some apps (IIRC that was even before google+ was a thing), and that would mean these apps becoming inaccessible.
- nilkn 13y agoI agree with you that the increasing G+ integration into YouTube has been pretty annoying. I also gave up a while ago on writing anonymous reviews on Google without having to create a fake account (not saying it's not possible, but I couldn't figure it out and just gave up).
- kylek 13y agoThis a million times. I feel like I've been trying desperately hard to NOT let me youtube account 'merge' with a new 'channel' or with my main Google account. NO. NO. NO. I don't want to use my real name. I don't want a google+ account for my youtube name. I don't even want a channel. I just want to watch videos, and maybe [pseudo-]anonymously comment once in a blue moon. Am I really a minority user?
- acheron 13y ago
- nilkn 13y agoPeople are slowly leaving Facebook as they seek out more privacy control. Obviously Facebook still dominates the world of social networks, but there's a lot of friction involved in this aspect of it. So what does Google decide to do? They decide to follow in the footsteps of Facebook and replicate all the same privacy problems, so not only are people going to leave G+ due to changes like this, but people aren't even going to be compelled to sign up unless more or less forced to do so. This is not innovation. It's repeating the mistakes of others in exchange for a quick short-term profit.
- c0ur7n3y 13y ago"It's repeating the mistakes of others in exchange for a quick short-term profit." That's basically the definition of modern business.
- nilkn 13y agoGoogle started out by doing the opposite: looking at other search engines, seeing specifically where they fell short, and then correcting those faults. I don't think Google is evil for what they're doing with Google+. I think they're uninspired. They're not doing anything new, just repeating what others have done hoping to jump onto a bandwagon. Some minor Google+ tricks, like circles, are nice, but they don't address any of the reasons why someone might actually leave Facebook. This practice has often proven to make a quick buck, but has rarely proven to be sustainable.
- threeseed 13y ago> People are slowly leaving Facebook as they seek out more privacy control. No they aren't. This is just baseless nonsense.
- nilkn 13y agoYou probably read far too much into my statement and ignored the one following it as well. You probably also ignored the word "slowly." There was nothing sensationalist about what I wrote. People generally don't leave Facebook, but when they do, privacy concerns are one of the frequently voiced reasons.
- techaddict009 13y agohttps://plus.google.com/settings/endorsements?hl=en https://plus.google.com/settings/endorsements?hl=en visit here and disable it simple !
- macspoofing 13y agoShouldn't G+ users be paid for this?
- camus 13y agoWhy would Google pay them? they are using Google services for free... This scheme is how you pay for free services...
- belorn 13y agoThis will give everyone a useful tool to grief companies for using google ads. Just pick a obscene picture, and write obscene "review" for that product (maybe even rate it 5 stars to encourage google to use your review), and instant have the world see your profanity associated with that brand. Can't possible see how this couldn't backfire for google.
- haberman 13y agoSo you write a public review of a business, and then you're upset because Google shows people that review? I really don't get it. What if your review was the first search result instead? Isn't that the same thing? If I search for a product on Amazon, it shows me the number of stars for each product, and if I click on that it shows me excerpts of different people's reviews. How is that any different? http://imgur.com/7FC2jfx http://imgur.com/7FC2jfx
- ce4 13y agoI like Amazon's best rated 5 and 1 star review comparison. I don't mind when one of my ratings comes up at the top either. The most truth lies always in the honest "bad rating" reviews (well, almost always) that others found useful. I really hope that Google does not just please their advertising customers and only show praising reviews but also the critical ones too. Let's wait and see if it's awesome.
- illumen 13y agoWhen you can only +1 or like something, then the bad reviews do not exist. Advertisers win.
- jrockway 13y agoBut that's not what this is, it's reviews from Google+ Local.
- biggerwinky 13y agoTime to change my image to Goatse.
- SusanLTomlin 13y agomy neighbor's step-sister makes $67 hourly on the computer. She has been unemployed for nine months but last month her paycheck was $15744 just working on the computer for a few hours. try this site ====================================================== http://WWW.Works23.Com http://WWW.Works23.Com
- crazychrome 13y agocan someone create a f*ckgoogle.com so that i can +1?
- millstone 13y agoI attempted to understand what exactly this change means, but I could not. I then attempted to opt out, but I could not; I don't know if that means I am opted out or not. As a result I mistrust this change. I saw the banner on the top of the Search page, linking to the new ToS. Here is what it says: your friends, family and others may see your Profile name and photo, and content like the reviews you share or the ads you +1’d. This only happens when you take an action (things like +1’ing, commenting or following) – and the only people who see it are the people you’ve chosen to share that content with. I don't understand what this means. A possible reading is that if I comment in a blog, Google might take a snippet from my comment, associate it with the profile picture it chose for me (which is a nonsense screencap from a YouTube video I uploaded five years ago), and then show it to people it has determined to be my friends, perhaps in the way that Google Buzz determined that my Realtor was my friend. I don't know which pages this applies to: all of the Internet, Google properties, or Google+ pages only. Even if it's Google+, I fear that services like Blogger will get assimilated into Google+, and then my comments there will become fair game. I also don't know what "take an action" means. I fear that "take an action" includes "send an email" and that content from my messages will be showing up in the recipients' ads. I want to opt-out. I clicked on the "Shared Endorsement Settings", but instead of giving me a way to opt out, I am encouraged to "Join Google+" in which my real name will be used "across all Google products." I don't understand if this means I am already opted out because I don't have a Google+ account, or if I need to make such an account to opt-out. I am reminded of the noxious YouTube popup, where in order to watch that cat video I have to convince Google to not use my real name, in whatever unspecified way. Google's properties make me feel like I am Indiana Jones in the Name of God trap. I am forever one misclick away from irrevocably exposing my personal information.
- akurilin 13y agoCan someone tell me if it's possible to nuke a Google+ account and still keep all of the data in the other services, such as Picasa (now named Google Photos), Docs, Gmail etc? I really want to delete my G+ account, but I'm concerned it will inadvertently nuke something else I'm counting on.
- reedlaw 13y agoGo to https://www.google.com/settings/account https://www.google.com/settings/account and follow "Delete profile and remove related Google+ features." It will also delete your connected YouTube channel unless you disconnect it first and later re-enable it.
- maxk42 13y agoI'd be fine with this as long as it was opt-in rather than opt-out. Bad move, Google.
- nfm 13y agoThis appears to be opt-in for Google Apps accounts.
- crystaln 13y agoSo, the expectation when you write a positive review on a Google service is that the review will not be displayed as an endorsement of the product? Isn't that the entire point of writing the review?
- code_duck 13y agoI write reviews because I want other people to read my opinions. Front page placement on google seems like a great deal to me!
- acheron 13y agoHeadline should read "If you use Google+", yes? No other Google services are affected that I understand. Frankly, at this point if you use Google+ you deserve what you get.
- 10098 13y agoThe truth is the link to profile may only appear if you've written A PUBLICLY VISIBLE REVIEW of the business. If the author of this shitty article bothered even a little with some research, he'd find it out. But the truth doesn't make for a loud linkbaity title.
- csdreamer7 13y agoI had a Google+ account but then I deleted it. Now that link to opt out of the face endorsement is telling me I have to setup a G+ account to be able to set it.
- greglindahl 13y agoWhy, your friend John Doe searched for [jock itch] just last week! And he bought Gold Bond(tm)! The TOS says "Actions you take on Google". Heh.
- Zenst 13y agoCan imagine many people wiull get overly creative with there profile pictures. But in fairness the choice is by default disabled so you would have to enable it - as it stands today.
- richardw 13y agoI've always been the biggest Google fanboy but I've had it with their creep towards maximum value extraction while pruning useful services that don't support the stock price. Consider my opting out a tiny protest.
- mpg33 13y agoAre we getting a cut of the ad revenue if we are endorsing it? ;)
- Tloewald 13y agoIt would be fun to mess with Google's algoritms -- +1 this product is amazing -- the rats in my apartment are now twice as big, considerably more numerous, and openly aggressive.
- jinx_xnij 13y agoYou have to opt in, in order for Google to start using your name. If you do not want this to happen, you are all set. (That is, unless prior settings i had in google pre-selected the option to not let Google use my name in their ads)
- witty_username 13y agoexaggerated title IMO