5 ms·
This and TFA hit to the heart of the problem with Google+: Google has willfully refused to acknowledge or understand that singular humans have multiple personas
by saidajigumi 13y ago
This and TFA hit to the heart of the problem with Google+: Google has willfully refused to acknowledge or understand that singular humans have multiple personas, and that we do not and cannot allow those to mix. Your professional face is not the same as your close-family personal face is not the same as your secret webcomic artist handle is not ... you get the idea.
There are so many mundane variations on that theme, and then there are very serious ones: those seeking support for addiction, as survivors of abuse, or other situations that have social stigma or personal risk attached to them. Some needs are simply private in that way a vulnerable person needs secure anonymity lest the public light itself become a chilling effect, of which health concerns are a common example.
The architecture of Google+ is such that it is inherently inhuman in its disregard for privacy and for applying different "pen names" to the various situations of life.
- rodgerd 13y ago> Google has willfully refused to acknowledge or understand that singular humans have multiple personas, and that we do not and cannot allow those to mix. They may not acknowledge it, but they certainly understand it. The whole value proposition of Circles was initially that'd you'd only share what you want with who you want.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- saidajigumi 13y agoAgreed. When G+ first hit the scene, before Google's big push to own and publish the unified identity for every physical human, Circles looked like a promising experiment. A lot of people I know who were fed up with Facebook started exploring Google+ because of that. Then Google changed directions entirely (along with the big management shakeup that flipped Google from a bottom-up org to a top-down org) and those ideas were effectively killed. And every single person I knew who'd been toying with G+ dropped it like a hot potato.
- haberman 13y agoPlease explain how the idea of circles has been killed. I just went to the YouTube comment box, and right there is the control for what circles to publish to: http://imgur.com/3ZEB9Th http://imgur.com/3ZEB9Th
- daliusd 13y agoThe main problem for me that in different circles I might have different persona (different name, different image, some parts of my identity not exposed - like my workplace). It is mask I wear is important not who I'm talking to.
- haberman 13y agoG+ lets you control what circles can see your employment info: http://imgur.com/nuBP0Qz http://imgur.com/nuBP0Qz Personally I much prefer that G+ (and Facebook, for that matter) lets you interact with real people and not personas.
- daliusd 13y agoThe problem is that in reality you have different faces: coworker, father, lover and etc. Neither of these are less real and many of them not necessary has real name, you can be "Your Name" (without surname) for your coworker, "Daddy" for your child and "Honey" for your lover. I just try to explain why Google+ does not work for me at all.
- a3n 13y agoIronic, isn't it?
- themacguffinman 13y agoG+ and YouTube support multiple profiles. You can create a G+ Page, which is treated as a separate profile across YouTube and G+. This Page is internally linked to you (but no one can see the original owner) and you can switch in and out of it in G+. You can explicitly connect the G+ Page to YouTube, which provides you with a separate YouTube profile. https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/3479900 https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/3479900
- daliusd 13y agoThat introduces problem that I accidentally use wrong profile/identity (e.g. I'm in a hurry).