Google Thread

[JMW IV]

http://arstechnica.com/web/news/2011/08/google-account-verification-begins-may-be-required-for-all.ars

that just too much.

no one should be forced to verify their names on a social network.

that is taking it too far.

[The Chief]

To be fair, I didn't see anything in the article that actually suggested that was imminent.  But on the other hand, with Google's track record shooting themselves in the foot on these things, I wouldn't be surprised either.

[houston-nat]

To be fair, I didn't see anything in the article that actually suggested that was imminent.  But on the other hand, with Google's track record shooting themselves in the foot on these things, I wouldn't be surprised either.

It was just idle speculation by the author at the end of the article. I'd say it is no more valid than a piece where somebody says "Given the Nationals' track record with Boras clients, signing Fielder will be their next move. All the sources deny it, but the possibility looms."

[The Chief]

Right, which is why I pointed it out.  But you have to admit that Google has done a bangup job of screwing this up so far.

[JMW IV]

Right, which is why I pointed it out.  But you have to admit that Google has done a bangup job of screwing this up so far.

I have to admit as such.

the majority of the content I see on G+ falls into the following categories:

1. Die-Hard Google Fanboys gushing over how awesome G+ is.
2. So-called Social Networking "experts" telling people how to use G+ "right" and/or discussing how to integrate G+ into your personal website.
3. Die-Hard Google Fanboys Bashing Facebook.
4. Pictures.
5. nagging about the Real Name Policy and talking about how *insert pseudonym* got banned from G+ for not using their real name.

[JMW IV]

this is what is really going on with Google's "Real Name Policy" (note: this is not a good, supportive google fanboy comment from me. merely an explanation).

http://kagan.mactane.org/blog/2011/08/19/google-doesnt-want-real-names-they-want-wasponyms/

Google+ Doesn’t Want “Real” Names. They Want WASPonyms.

Three pieces of news lately about Google+ make it clear that when Google claims they want you to use your “real” name, it’s a load of hooey. First off, a legally mononymous Australian journalist named Stilgherrian was told he couldn’t use that name — his actual, legal name — on Google+. He was not at all pleased, and has written one fairly professional complaint and one vitriolic and expletive-soaked rant about it (indeed, even the URL of the latter post could be considered NSFW).

Then Microsoft employee M3 Sweatt had his Google+ profile suspended. Unlike Stilgherrian, M3′s name is the one his parents gave him when he was born. His name also has the virtue of having a recognizable first name and last name. Nonetheless, Google+ says it doesn’t count.

Finally, the Internet personality who goes by the (non-legally-recognized) moniker Rainyday Superstar changed her Google+ profile to list her as “Rainy O’Leary”, and told Google very explicitly that this was not her real name. She also set every other field in her profile to say, “My name is Rainyday Superstar”.

Of course, Google reinstated her Google+ account. (She has since deleted it.)

Taken together, these three events make it very clear that Google doesn’t give a damn if you’re using your “real” name. They just want you to use a “normal-looking” name. Google wants you to use a WASPonym, a name that looks like it comes from middle-class, white-bread, suburban America.

This is just one of the reasons why I’ve been putting the “real” in “‘real’ names policy” in quotes all this time. There’s also the question of what makes a name “real” at all, but it seems pretty clear that by any sane standard, M3 Sweatt’s name qualifies. It’s the name his parents gave him at birth, and one that he feels a personal attachment to.

But it’s not a WASPonym, so Google says that if M3 wants to keep using G+, he’ll have to change his handle to a name that’s not his real name.

It’s not a “real” names policy at all. It’s a WASPonym policy.

I have no idea why they’re insisting on it, but it will do absolutely nothing to hold people accountable for their words or actions, or to stop spam, or any of the other things Google keeps claiming. All those excuses are a lie and a ruse.

There is no longer any sense in calling this policy “a ‘real’ names policy”; continuing to use that terms merely aids Google’s attempts to confuse the issue. It’s a WASPonym policy, and I will call it that from now on.

yeah, when you think about it like this, it is some real bullcrap on Google's part.

I mean, my G+ Profile says J. Madison.  J is obviously short for my first name, and Madison is not my last name. but I get no trouble from Google about it.

[JMW IV]

the more I read about this, the more disturbed I am.

and like I said, when G+ first launched, if they freak this up, then they may as well give up on Social, cause G+ is pretty much as good as google is capable of getting, in terms of social networks.

and it looks like they are freaking this up, because once again, there aren't "people" when it comes to Google. there is just Data.

for all their technical prowess and imagination, they simply don't understand people. and thats what Twitter and Facebook(and microsoft to an extent) have over Google.

[JMW IV]

apparently this person got their entire Google Account wiped out because of her issues with the Name Policy:

http://www.rainydaysuperstar.com/?p=225

thats freaking ridiculous, and the possibility of this happening for any reason has me considering alternatives to google.

[The Chief]

there aren't "people" when it comes to Google. there is just Data.

for all their technical prowess and imagination, they simply don't understand people.

lol, they are the Mike Rizzo of the internet.

[MarquisDeSade]

lol, they are the Mike Rizzo of the internet.

[Nathan]

lol, they are the Mike Rizzo of the internet.

[The Chief]

http://www.informationweek.com/news/security/privacy/231500512

"5 Reasons Google+'s Name Policy Fails"

Google's Policy Exposes Users To Potential Harassment And Persecution

Google's Policy Stifles The Free Exchange Of Ideas

Google's Policy Is Not Being Enforced Fairly

Google's Policy Denies Privacy

Google Supports Pseudonyms Elsewhere

^^ the highlights

[MarquisDeSade]

"5 Reasons Google+'s Name Policy Fails"

They can't sell you to lead generators without that information.

[The Chief]

I find it rather disconcerting when i see results in my google searches already showing up as viewed, and underneath "You've visited this page # times. Last visit: M/D/YY"

I mean I know they had all of that information before, but do they really need to rub it in my face?

[JMW IV]

http://www.rainydaysuperstar.com/?p=265

wow. wtf Google. wtf.

[MarquisDeSade]

http://www.rainydaysuperstar.com/?p=265

wow. wtf Google. wtf.

That person has the worst writing style ever. 

[JMW IV]

That person has the worst writing style ever. 

nevermind that. Google is apparently locking peoples phones with a "Join Google+" pop-up.

wonder if anyone else experienced this.

[MarquisDeSade]

nevermind that. Google is apparently locking peoples phones with a "Join Google+" pop-up.

wonder if anyone else experienced this.

I didn't get that far, fortunately.  I don't know but has there been anything positive come out of G+ so far or is it still looking like an F--?

[JMW IV]

lol. Google - "Don't like the name policy, don' use Google+. period."

http://plusweek.ly/eric-schmidt-if-you-dont-like-names-policy-dont-use-google/

they are really being stupid about how they are responding to this issue. It makes me seriously want to take them up on that "don't use it" offer.

[UMDNats]

I don't disagree with Schmidt, but man does Google just have terrible PR.

[JMW IV]

I don't disagree with Schmidt, but man does Google just have terrible PR.

I don't necessarily disagree either. But that is just not something they should be saying publicly, imo. Like you said, bad PR.

it makes them look bullheaded and obnoxious.

[houston-nat]

HOLY crap TODAY'S GOOGLE DOODLE

[JMW IV]

well, so much for Google+.

Facebook is implementing something called "Smart Lists", which from its detailed description, is basically Circles.

Circles is the advantage Google+ had over Facebook. now, that advantage is gone.

combined with the whole Nymwars/Real Name Policy fiasco, I'm pretty sure Google+ won't make it.

[houston-nat]

Tee hee... click this link, then wait 2-3 seconds. It's Google Gravity!

[houston-nat]

Tee hee... click this link, then wait 2-3 seconds. It's Google Gravity!

In case you haven't clicked, here's my search results as rendered in Google Gravity.