13 ms·

I guess Google couldn't resist tapping into one of their only successful social media (Youtube) to promote G+. Of course Youtube being right below 4chan's /b/ i

by simias 13y ago

I guess Google couldn't resist tapping into one of their only successful social media (Youtube) to promote G+. Of course Youtube being right below 4chan's /b/ in terms of online discussion it was a very risky decision. Google is very good at sorting the web and finding the interesting content. I think in the long run they might be able to do the same thing with comments and be able to extract the insightful content and weed out all the noise. If they manage to do that it could be a revolution: imagine a website like reddit where you could automatically hide all low-content submissions and comments based on your preferences. They're definitely not there though, so far this G+/Youtube integration is an unmitigated disaster. It even broke my Chrome plugin that removed all comments from Youtube videos. Life is suffering.

skizm 13y ago
Search "YouTube feather beta". It removes pretty much everything from YouTube except the video and is an official Google feature. I didn't even notice this g+ thing till reddit and HN started going off about it.
- markeganfuller 13y ago
  That is simply awesome, maybe there's some good left in Google after all.
- aroch 13y ago
  Feather doesn't have the "large" video size, only standard and fullscreen. Which makes it less than ideal
  - rohitv 13y ago
    I usually just zoom in to the page to make the video larger :/ Is that any different from selecting the large option ?
  - TheCraiggers 13y ago
    Maybe for you... but for me this is freakin awesome and I'm glad it was posted.
  - justadude 13y ago
    If you're using Chrome there is a great addon called Youtube Options which achieves something similar to what Youtube Feathers is trying to do (it has video sizing options too!)
- Spittie 13y ago
  Feater (https://www.youtube.com/feather_beta https://www.youtube.com/feather_beta) + ViewTube (https://userscripts.org/scripts/show/87011 https://userscripts.org/scripts/show/87011). That's how I use YouTube, and I couldn't be happier. I was hiding comments on YouTube before anyway.
aniket_ray 13y ago
>(Youtube) to promote G+ Google+ was never intended to be a product in itself. Google+ is Google's social layer. Providing social features to other Google products was always the plan for Google+.
- Pxtl 13y ago
  It sounds like Google+ is meant to be Google's answer to Disqus as much as its answer to Facebook. With that in mind, Youtube integration makes perfect sense. That said, it's obviously got a lot of warts, like promoting Plus power-users over the regular subscribers. Say what you want about Reddit, but at least the infamous karma-farmers get a lot of legitimate upvotes before they bubble to the top and don't pop in their^H^H^H^H^Hthere automatically on the strength of their reputations.
  - stcredzero 13y ago
    the infamous karma-farmers get a lot of legitimate upvotes before they bubble to the top and don't pop in their automatically on the strength of their reputations. This "popping-in" reminds me of Digg somehow.
- paganel 13y ago
  I may be wrong and I'm too lazy to search back in time, but as far as I remember they did mean to launch Google+ as a product in itself, at least that was the general vibe (both here on HN, and generally among people commenting on its launch). They made the switch to the "social layer"-thingie a bit later on, after they had probably realized Facebook was too ingrained already to be challenged head-on.
  - Shooti 13y ago
    They definitely intended it this way from the start: September 2011: "Until now, every single Google property acted like a separate company. Due to the way we grew, through various acquisitions and the fierce independence of each division within Google, each product sort of veered off in its own direction. That was dizzying. But Google+ is Google itself. We’re extending it across all that we do—search, ads, Chrome, Android, Maps, YouTube—so that each of those services contributes to our understanding of who you are." http://www.wired.com/magazine/2011/09/ff_google_horowitz/2/ http://www.wired.com/magazine/2011/09/ff_google_horowitz/2/ October 2011: "The strategy is revealed in the name," Gundotra agreed. "We chose the smallest modifier we could. Just a plus." But the shift it represents is not small. Plus is now a social layer built into all Google's Web products." http://readwrite.com/2011/10/19/sergey_brin_vic_gundotra_on_pseudonyms_apps_users http://readwrite.com/2011/10/19/sergey_brin_vic_gundotra_on_... March 2012: “This is just the next version of Google,” Mr. Gundotra said, noting that he sees Google Plus as a social blanket that envelopes the entire Google experience. “Everything is being upgraded. We already have users. We’re now upgrading them to what we consider Google 2.0.” http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/06/google-defending-google-plus-shares-usage-numbers/ http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/06/google-defending-go... Doesn't get any clearer than that. People just assumed it was spin at the time so focused on the FB-aspect of it. Instead turns out they actually meant every word, and things are finally on track as far as they're concerned. The only cure if you disagree with the vision is to stop using Google products altogether.
corresation 13y ago
I guess Google couldn't resist tapping into one of their only successful social media (Youtube) to promote G+. This is a common sentiment, but doesn't simple platform pragmatism make it obvious why they want to merge disparate identities and systems? Why should YouTube have an island comment system given that it's a Google property? Of course the replacement should be ready for prime time (it sounds like some basic features are missing right now, such as channel owner moderation), but the eventual move to that is something that under virtually any situation anyone would recommend. My Flickr account got turned into a Yahoo account. My Skype account is now a Live account or whatever. Of course these things come together, and I'm not quite sure why every narrative about things like this (not necessary your post) has to be "G+ needs to take on Facebook so this is how it's doing it", when the more obvious explanation of "Company homogenizes systems" fits so well. Further one annoying aspect of this whole drama is that to demonstrate that there is a problem, people become the problem. It seems like the vast majority of abuse in YouTube land right now are people desperately trying to demonstrate that the Google+ migration was a mistake (e.g. copy pasting tanks an other inanities). This demonstrates that people resist change more than any fault in the new platform.
- simias 13y ago
  It's true but until now it doesn't seem that google have been in much of a hurry to merge Youtube into their platform, at least brand-wise. They've acquired the site in 2006, less than two years after it was created. Go to youtube.com and search for the mention of Google anywhere. Can you find it? I couldn't. They could have merged Youtube and Google video early on but never did. They only gave an option to link your google and youtube accounts if memory serves. There's no link to youtube on the Google Search home page the way it has links to gmail and other services. It's always been an island so far so the fact that Google seems to have rushed a G+ integration into youtube says something IMO.
  - sesqu 13y ago
    > They could have merged Youtube and Google video early on but never did. They did, but not early on. It caused some drama when they announced Google Video was slated for decommission and all videos migrated to YouTube.
stcredzero 13y ago
I guess Google couldn't resist tapping into one of their only successful social media...so far this G+/Youtube integration is an unmitigated disaster. There's much made of how Apple isn't the Apple it used to be. What about Google? A guy I know through music commented that getting hired at Google was "a breeze." That contrasts with the being interviewed every which way I used to hear about.
moot 13y ago
> Of course Youtube being right below 4chan's /b/ in terms of online discussion it was a very risky decision. I've always taken pleasure in pointing out that 4chan doesn't have the worst comments, and that title belongs to YouTube. I'm glad the world agrees.
- devcpp 13y ago
  Agreed, there are relatively few idiots on /b/, most posts there just have a special kind of humor. Not for everyone, but certainly enjoyable for the people who can get used to this. Youtube, on the other hand, is simply plagued by stupid comments.
- nollidge 13y ago
  Local newspaper comments are worse than both of them combined.

by simias 13y ago

skizm 13y ago

Search "YouTube feather beta". It removes pretty much everything from YouTube except the video and is an official Google feature. I didn't even notice this g+ thing till reddit and HN started going off about it.

markeganfuller 13y ago
That is simply awesome, maybe there's some good left in Google after all.
aroch 13y ago
Feather doesn't have the "large" video size, only standard and fullscreen. Which makes it less than ideal
- rohitv 13y ago
  I usually just zoom in to the page to make the video larger :/ Is that any different from selecting the large option ?
- TheCraiggers 13y ago
  Maybe for you... but for me this is freakin awesome and I'm glad it was posted.
- justadude 13y ago
  If you're using Chrome there is a great addon called Youtube Options which achieves something similar to what Youtube Feathers is trying to do (it has video sizing options too!)
Spittie 13y ago
Feater (https://www.youtube.com/feather_beta https://www.youtube.com/feather_beta) + ViewTube (https://userscripts.org/scripts/show/87011 https://userscripts.org/scripts/show/87011). That's how I use YouTube, and I couldn't be happier. I was hiding comments on YouTube before anyway.

aniket_ray 13y ago

>(Youtube) to promote G+ Google+ was never intended to be a product in itself. Google+ is Google's social layer. Providing social features to other Google products was always the plan for Google+.

Pxtl 13y ago
It sounds like Google+ is meant to be Google's answer to Disqus as much as its answer to Facebook. With that in mind, Youtube integration makes perfect sense. That said, it's obviously got a lot of warts, like promoting Plus power-users over the regular subscribers. Say what you want about Reddit, but at least the infamous karma-farmers get a lot of legitimate upvotes before they bubble to the top and don't pop in their^H^H^H^H^Hthere automatically on the strength of their reputations.
- stcredzero 13y ago
  the infamous karma-farmers get a lot of legitimate upvotes before they bubble to the top and don't pop in their automatically on the strength of their reputations. This "popping-in" reminds me of Digg somehow.
paganel 13y ago
I may be wrong and I'm too lazy to search back in time, but as far as I remember they did mean to launch Google+ as a product in itself, at least that was the general vibe (both here on HN, and generally among people commenting on its launch). They made the switch to the "social layer"-thingie a bit later on, after they had probably realized Facebook was too ingrained already to be challenged head-on.
- Shooti 13y ago
  They definitely intended it this way from the start: September 2011: "Until now, every single Google property acted like a separate company. Due to the way we grew, through various acquisitions and the fierce independence of each division within Google, each product sort of veered off in its own direction. That was dizzying. But Google+ is Google itself. We’re extending it across all that we do—search, ads, Chrome, Android, Maps, YouTube—so that each of those services contributes to our understanding of who you are." http://www.wired.com/magazine/2011/09/ff_google_horowitz/2/ http://www.wired.com/magazine/2011/09/ff_google_horowitz/2/ October 2011: "The strategy is revealed in the name," Gundotra agreed. "We chose the smallest modifier we could. Just a plus." But the shift it represents is not small. Plus is now a social layer built into all Google's Web products." http://readwrite.com/2011/10/19/sergey_brin_vic_gundotra_on_pseudonyms_apps_users http://readwrite.com/2011/10/19/sergey_brin_vic_gundotra_on_... March 2012: “This is just the next version of Google,” Mr. Gundotra said, noting that he sees Google Plus as a social blanket that envelopes the entire Google experience. “Everything is being upgraded. We already have users. We’re now upgrading them to what we consider Google 2.0.” http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/06/google-defending-google-plus-shares-usage-numbers/ http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/06/google-defending-go... Doesn't get any clearer than that. People just assumed it was spin at the time so focused on the FB-aspect of it. Instead turns out they actually meant every word, and things are finally on track as far as they're concerned. The only cure if you disagree with the vision is to stop using Google products altogether.

corresation 13y ago

I guess Google couldn't resist tapping into one of their only successful social media (Youtube) to promote G+. This is a common sentiment, but doesn't simple platform pragmatism make it obvious why they want to merge disparate identities and systems? Why should YouTube have an island comment system given that it's a Google property? Of course the replacement should be ready for prime time (it sounds like some basic features are missing right now, such as channel owner moderation), but the eventual move to that is something that under virtually any situation anyone would recommend. My Flickr account got turned into a Yahoo account. My Skype account is now a Live account or whatever. Of course these things come together, and I'm not quite sure why every narrative about things like this (not necessary your post) has to be "G+ needs to take on Facebook so this is how it's doing it", when the more obvious explanation of "Company homogenizes systems" fits so well. Further one annoying aspect of this whole drama is that to demonstrate that there is a problem, people become the problem. It seems like the vast majority of abuse in YouTube land right now are people desperately trying to demonstrate that the Google+ migration was a mistake (e.g. copy pasting tanks an other inanities). This demonstrates that people resist change more than any fault in the new platform.

simias 13y ago
It's true but until now it doesn't seem that google have been in much of a hurry to merge Youtube into their platform, at least brand-wise. They've acquired the site in 2006, less than two years after it was created. Go to youtube.com and search for the mention of Google anywhere. Can you find it? I couldn't. They could have merged Youtube and Google video early on but never did. They only gave an option to link your google and youtube accounts if memory serves. There's no link to youtube on the Google Search home page the way it has links to gmail and other services. It's always been an island so far so the fact that Google seems to have rushed a G+ integration into youtube says something IMO.
- sesqu 13y ago
  > They could have merged Youtube and Google video early on but never did. They did, but not early on. It caused some drama when they announced Google Video was slated for decommission and all videos migrated to YouTube.

stcredzero 13y ago

I guess Google couldn't resist tapping into one of their only successful social media...so far this G+/Youtube integration is an unmitigated disaster. There's much made of how Apple isn't the Apple it used to be. What about Google? A guy I know through music commented that getting hired at Google was "a breeze." That contrasts with the being interviewed every which way I used to hear about.

moot 13y ago

> Of course Youtube being right below 4chan's /b/ in terms of online discussion it was a very risky decision. I've always taken pleasure in pointing out that 4chan doesn't have the worst comments, and that title belongs to YouTube. I'm glad the world agrees.

devcpp 13y ago
Agreed, there are relatively few idiots on /b/, most posts there just have a special kind of humor. Not for everyone, but certainly enjoyable for the people who can get used to this. Youtube, on the other hand, is simply plagued by stupid comments.
nollidge 13y ago
Local newspaper comments are worse than both of them combined.