Google Plus Now Minus Chief Vic Gundotra 93
JG0LD (2616363) writes "Vic Gundotra, the man behind Google Plus and one of Google's most prominent executives, announced today that he will leave the company 'effective immediately.' Gundotra made the announcement, appropriately enough, in a lengthy Google Plus post, praising his co-workers and saying that he is 'excited about what's next.' However, he did not further outline his future plans, saying that 'this isn't the day to talk about that.'"
Google- (Score:5, Interesting)
Any chance this means Google is going to back-pedal on Google+ ?
I'd welcome Google splitting it's products such that you can subscribe to YouTube without also being signed up to Google+ and GMail and Maps and the kitchen sink. Or vice versa.
Re:Google- (Score:5, Insightful)
Or at least comply with EU privacy laws.
Re:Google- (Score:5, Funny)
How could you be any more private than by being the only user of Google+ ?
Re:Google- (Score:4, Funny)
How could you be any more private than by being the only user of Google+ ?
Being the first person to like Slashdot Beta.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Google- (Score:5, Informative)
You are incorrect.
You cannot comment on youtube without g+
You cannot, according to ToS, have a g+ profile without having your real name on it.
They already had single sign on using gprofile/gmail as the key. But they did not require a real name for that. Having a real name associated with the account is a no go for some people. I do not feel comfortable for people who follow my art blog having a way to go from my email to my real name. I'll choose to give it to those I am comfortable meeting in real life and no one else.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, another good one - if a site is using the oath2 API to pull your name and such.... you can't authenticate without joining Google+! Delete your "page" and you'll lose your oath access as well. See here [stackoverflow.com] for more information on this nice little fuck-you from Google.
Re: (Score:2)
Even if not currently enforced, this clause effectively renders Google+ unusable for any serious purpose.
Re:Google- (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't know, I think the same thing and I don't think it's about sticking it to the man, it's just that youtube and gmail/g+/etc are radically different things that should be separate. They will track me anyway, so let me have my video channel separate from a service I am not going to use and didn't ask for in the first place.
It annoys me that trying to comment on Youtube requires having extra sites whitelisted, there's a checkbox that is always enabled by default to post comment to G+, and alerts and notifications are usually not related to youtube itself.
So I don't think the parent post is anti-theman, I think it's just anti G+, which is a perfectly reasonable opinion. The ones that want G+ can just go there and use it, the rest shouldn't be forced to use it if they want to keep their Youtube channel up.
Re: (Score:2)
Imagine signing up at your local video store automatically signed you up to the social club, and anyone in the video store or in the town hall could see what videos you'd rented and what other social club members you hung out with.
Re:Google- (Score:5, Insightful)
How about a settings page?
I would like to be enrolled in the falling Google services:
Gmail
Google+
Youtube
Google Drive
Google Docs
Etc.
The problem with being universally logged into Google+ is that it introduces a LOT of other spying crap on other websites. Most people log in to Google+ so rarely that they don't even realize all that Midget porn they'd been thumbs upping is plastered all over a google website with their full name, email and phone number on it.
Re: (Score:2)
Most people log in to Google+ so rarely that they don't even realize all that Midget porn they'd been thumbs upping is plastered all over a google website with their full name, email and phone number on it.
On the plus side, it's a great way to find out how creepy all you friends and family are.
Re: (Score:2)
And ... G+ isn't required for any of the things you've listed so go delete your G+ profile and be happy.
That's not true. Sign up for one you sign up to all. And there's no such thing as delete. They might send you a message saying it's deleted. But then you can reactivate it, so it's gone nowhere.
Why?
Because at one time everybody loved Google. Increasing numbers are starting to hate them. And people hating you is not good business.
All you're saying is 'I don't like unified logins!
There would be nothing wrong with Google offering the option to link accounts. The problem is them forcing creation of accounts in services you don't want, using them to collect data, n
Re: (Score:2)
Much as Microsoft earned the hatred people had for them. With Microsoft now on the path back to being a well behaved company, Google is taking their place.
I was with you, right up until that bit. No way man. Microsoft was on the path to being a well behaved company, right up until Windows 8. Then they threw it all away again. It's obvious that they're tying to go the same way as Google; getting you to tie everything together using a common microsoft account, from your user account on your desktop/laptop, to your phone, your xbox, your search platform and mapping application .... pretty much every service they offer.
Sure you CAN create a Windows 8 user acc
Re: (Score:2)
Eventually clicked 'create account' and found the checkbox down the bottom saying "just don't, okay?"
Re: (Score:2)
OK, well I'll take your word on that one. I parted company with Microsoft's products more than a decade ago, and use a Mac now. So I don't know what they are up to at that level. My comment was just giving them credit for finally getting rid of Ballmer, and having a new CEO that seems willing to play better with others.
Re: (Score:2)
BTW, I note that my comment is +5 with 100% positive mods. Yours is -1 with 100% negative mods. And all the replies you have agree with me and not you.
Of course that's no absolute guarantee of who's right and who's wrong. Especially as it's opinion. But it does show that your feeling that it's just me being anti-theman, and not a widespread view is very wrong. Most people are pissed off with Google's enforced sign up to services you don't want.
Re: (Score:3)
Why?
Remember, you're the product in all those services, and by forcing G+ on you, Google's enhancing the product for sale.
About the only thing is that they can take back the whole "Steve Jobs said G+ was a joke" thing, but really, G+ is a great way to get back at Faceboo
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Any chance this means Google is going to back-pedal on Google+ ?
Yes: http://techcrunch.com/2014/04/... [techcrunch.com]
Re: (Score:2)
This site is reporting his leaving as meaning that forced integration of Google+ will end
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets... [arstechnica.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Great! I wonder how long before Google Glass gets killed off too.
Please... (Score:2)
Can it die now?
Re: (Score:2)
I am for fixing the problems with Google+ (such as the real name policy) not killing it.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah plenty of competition in the social media space is important but I can't get much use out of G+. It comes across as a clumsy answer to a question nobody was really asking.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah plenty of competition in the social media space is important but I can't get much use out of G+. It comes across as a clumsy answer to a question nobody was really asking.
Oh, it was an attempt at answering a question Google most certainly was asking - how can we get some of those Facebook ad billions and additional user tracking info.
Re:Please... (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't want all my gmail contacts getting notified through Google+ that watzinaneihm liked the latest pop video on youtube.
I don't think I do that many controversial things, but after what happened to the Mozilla CEO, I realize that what is acceptable in the future has no relation to how it is perceived today. I am not saying that donation to anti-gay-marriage was ever right, but I don't think doing what the president of the country was doing at that time was a fire-able offense either.
Re:Please... (Score:5, Informative)
one can create what is called a "Page" in google+ parlance.. and that page can be pseudonymous,.. you can be named anything you want under that page and use it on youtube, etc..
of course youll have to create it from a 'real name' google+ account, but unless you divulge it in public theres no way to know who it is behind the 'Page' account. .....your gmail contacts dont get notified if you like the latest pop video on youtube when using a google+ account...
on commenting for the *First Time* using an account on youtube which is tied to google+ the default option below the comment box is to 'make public' the comment, which sends it to your google+ feed, if you turn that option off it is sticky and will remain off in the future and that comment only lives within youtube.
while there are annoyances related to google+ ..most of the complaints just dont apply these days, it has changed quite a lot since it came out a few years ago... and for most of the complaints, there is a (mostly) reasonable solution.
the "i want to be totally anonymous" solution some people seem to look for doesnt really apply to the product.. pseudoanonymity is about as best as youll get
Re: (Score:2)
Yes - but we should not have to any of this.
All this was forced by the google+ BS, and should never have happened period.
Re: (Score:2)
Well I have a "page" already because I had a youtube account which had a different name and I got grandfathered in. So now everytime I even visit youtube, I get asked "do you want to browse as RealName or this nonRealName?" ",Are you sure you did not change your mind?". And everytime I try to comment on a video (usually trying to help with peoples tech annoyances) it asks me "Do you want to post it to your Google+"? .
This is a hundre
Re: (Score:1)
the "i want to be totally anonymous" solution some people seem to look for doesnt really apply to the product.
Then "the product" (Google Plus), in turn, doesn't apply to products like Search, Youtube, Gmail, Picasa, etc. . . . so keep it the FUCK away from them.
Re: (Score:2)
The only change I'm interested in Google+ implementing is the change to a deprecated/decomissioned status.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I don't want all my gmail contacts getting notified through Google+ that watzinaneihm liked the latest pop video on youtube.
So go to your preferences and turn it off. Or uncheck the 'also share on Google+' checkbox when posting.
Seriosly, This isn't hard.
Re:Please... (Score:5, Informative)
So go to your preferences and turn it off. Or uncheck the 'also share on Google+' checkbox when posting.
And relearn how to do that every time google changes anything. Possilby needing to learn new permissions models and settings and interfaces on Google's unpredictable schedule.
Take a look at Facebook's permissions settings history for an example.
Seriosly, This isn't hard.
It's harder than it needs to be.
Separate the accounts entirely that aren't linked to something with your real name eliminates unintended mistakes no matter what google does with the interface tomorrow.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
and whenever they've added any sort of setting, the default was quite restrictive.
Well good enough for me then, right? Nothing bad has happened so far, so nothing ever well.
Re: (Score:1)
Brendam was victim of a group of blackmailers who used a threat on the reputation of Mozilla as a mean to impose their views. Apparently you are one of these morons.
Re: (Score:2)
Um, the real name thing was resolved a long time ago, you can make pages with any names you want, I have several for different purposes and venues (such as one for my character in an MMO).
That is one great thing about G+ unlike Twitter or others, they actually listen to their users and design the system for users rather than solely their own whims/needs.
Re: (Score:2)
That is one great thing about G+ unlike Twitter or others, they actually listen to their users and design the system for users rather than solely their own whims/needs.
Really? Then why does it still exist?
Re: (Score:2)
Sarcasm aside, it's obviously beneficial to both parties, the sign of a good deal, users get a tool that offers the best aspects of email, Twitter, SMS, and Flickr/Pinterest all combined in an easier to use environment, without the liabilities of each of those; the provider gets slightly improved demographics to pay for it all, as well as other services they provide, and competitive market share to bolster their declining revenues.
Why should you care? (Score:1)
Serious question... why should you care?
Too many goofballs and fanboys around here want everything they don't like to die. Why?
I'm not even a GooglePlus user, I'm just looking for an honest answer as to why so many Slashdot users want to feed themselves into a monoculture. We've seen the bad that can come from it, tell me about what's so bad about an ecosystem that supports multiple platforms and multiple vendors.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The biggest reasons I hate it are 1) The "real name" policy and 2) The fact I'm basically forced to use it if I want to use any of the Goog's other services as a signed-in user (YouTube, gmail, etc.).
The fact that I think it's utterly pointless shite is besides the point - I think the same of Twitter but don't wish it death. I don't have any need or want to interact with it, therefore its existence doesn't bother me. The Goog on the other hand has other things unrelated to G+ which I /do/ wish to use, wi
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Please... (Score:4, Informative)
Oh come on... The fact that you don't like it, does not mean it does not fill its niche. I remember people saying the same about Facebook and Twitter. Some people like it, get over it.
I think google+ is pretty darn good as far as social networks go. It gets a lot of hate, but judging by what people say, a lot of that is from what it was in 2011, and concerns of anonymity. (The 'nag' screens feel like a different issue)
As for anonymity I am fine with not being anonymous to Google itself. I send email using Google Apps for Business account using my real name, they have my billing info and I don't mind sharing stuff I like to friends, family, and the public using my name on my public Google+ account. I did the on a personal website long before Google+ existed.
As for (pseudo)anonymity on Google+ I can choose how I share. I can choose whether or not to be BasementHacker20129 for my online profile using the "Pages" feature, sure, Google still knows that the name BasementHacker20129 that I used to reply a trollish comment about the Tea Party on youtube was sent by my Real Name.. but nobody else would. This seems reasonable to me, maybe not to others...
I happen to enjoy seeing Wil Wheaton posting about the stuff he is doing that week on my Google+ feed. I enjoy seeing the stuff Linus Torvalds posts on Google+. Those guys are pretty geeky. It is good enough for me, and them. It has no ads.
Sure, it wants to know your real name.. But I found, after poo-pooing it in 2011, that when I came back for a 2nd look in 2014 that it was actually pretty damned good.
Made the announcement in a Google+ post (Score:5, Funny)
I did a Slashdot submission on the problems (Score:3)
http://slashdot.org/submission... [slashdot.org]
That Title... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
What's so hard to understand about "Plus Now Minus"?
Oh wait...
Re: (Score:1)
That's simple operator overloading
What's Next (Score:3)
Not having to post this sort of thing in Google Plus.
If he did it using Google+... (Score:5, Funny)
Vive Vacation Vic! (Score:1, Troll)
G+ seemed a good idea at the very start. It seemed that you could fine-control the what, when, who and how of your information and I had no problems with Google pawing around in it for targetting ads.
It is now the most evil shit that you face daily. My daughter has removed every hidden tick from every hidden box she can find on G+, but every personal photo she takes on her Nexus 5 ends up straight away "shared". She has now stopped taking photos with it completely. Won't buy another. Iphone people don'
easy to fix, STFU (Score:1)
Seems to me if it is auto uploading pictures it has internet. Have you considered using this newfangled "search engine" at www.google.com to find out how to turn this off? https://support.google.com/plu... [google.com]
I dont use G+ or use a smartphone, but I found that in a few seconds. I'm 100% sure you took longer writing your post about how it sucks it does that than it took to find a solution.
Re:Vive Vacation Vic! (Score:5, Informative)
My daughter has removed every hidden tick from every hidden box she can find on G+, but every personal photo she takes on her Nexus 5 ends up straight away "shared".
Amusingly, this is a feature which defaults off. She asked for this. Now she can't figure out how to turn it off, and Google is the bad guy? Maybe the apple just doesn't fall far from the tree.
Re: (Score:1)
it defaults off, thats true. but they use a very sneaky message to get you to enable the auto upload thing as soon as you open the gallery. and you get a fucking notification on EVERY SINGLE PHOTO YOU EVER CLICK! you get 3 notifications actually. one on your phone, other on every single google webpage you visit (including chrome start tab), third as an email in your gmail inbox. and what does the notification say?
your photo is ready to be shared
it was ready to be shared the moment i took it, bitch! there's this neat android feature called
Re: (Score:2)
it defaults off, thats true. but they use a very sneaky message to get you to enable the auto upload thing as soon as you open the gallery.
There's nothing sneaky about a literally black and white inquiry as to whether you want every picture you take with your camera uploaded to Google. If you can't read, perhaps an Android phone is not for you.
Re: (Score:2)
it never says its uploading to google+. it just says "turn on auto upload? it will keep your pics safe blah blah" not one word about google+. i hate shills like you who are ready to accept anything google shits onto the device YOU paid for.
Re: Vive Vacation Vic! (Score:2)
Perhaps you should go and look at a nexus device and how it handles photos before making a fool out of yourself.
Re: (Score:2)
Oddly, I have two Nexus devices and I at least know how they handle photos — apparently better than you do, because I only have autoupload on one of them, and only by choice.
"Papa, why do they not love me?" (Score:3)
SFW observation on the difficulty with Google Plus. [pandawhale.com]
Good (Score:2)
This might be a step in the right direction. I can't even leave an app review on the Play Store unless I sign up for Google +. Kill it now.
G+ was killed by trying to force people to use it (Score:1)
So, he wasn't agressive enough when shoveling the G+ into everybodys throat? Now that the G+ policy killed user reviews on Google Play, will you try to force G+ for every Android user before they can use their phone? What about the google.com itself, why is that still available without submitting all the user details before searches happen?
I don't understand the name (Score:4, Funny)
Ingress (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I would recommend Mozstumbler [github.com] or openwlanmap [openwlanmap.org] instead. They do the same thing basically.
Google+ is a Winner (Score:2)
Now that social networks have supplanted personal webpages/blogs and small independent sites are dying from inactivity Google has less and less to crawl. They need G+ to power their mobile search (Google Now) and make their results personal, it might not make money on its own but they can't
Humans hide things from each other all the time (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm sorry, but G+ will fail because it doesn't reflect how humans interact with each other. We hide things from each other all the time. Human beings are multi-faceted creatures, and throughout our day we present different masks to different people.
None of this is true of course, but I'm simply illustrating that we tell white lies all the time. Everyone has something to hide. Putting everything under one unified identity, with the possibility of those that you deal with discovering previously unknown sides to you that you have been keeping secret from them is simply too big a risk to bear.
Re: (Score:3)
G+ is explicitly designed around this idea. That is the whole purpose of circles which is at the center of everything. You create a boss circle for those in your management-chain, a co-workers circle for the co-workers, a family circle for the wife, and a douche circle for all of the cute florists.
Re: (Score:3)
i think that a simple appraisal of most peoples opinions/fears/gripes of google+ shows that theyve never actually used it.
the circles thing was one of the big selling points going all the way back to 2011.. and probably covered here on /. ...now they allow you to create pseudonymous sub-accounts that cannot be tracked back to any real life identify ....and yet people are still crying from the rooftops 'OMG I CANT RISK PEOPLE KNOWING' ...well if you want yer head in the sand, ..theres that option too
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sorry, that wasn't possible when I joined G+. Back then they ban accounts with fake names
And setting one up doesn't sound so easy to me [mashable.com].
Google plus epic fail (Score:2)
I hope that with the defenestration of this bozo that the beginning of the end is soon to be in site. Quite simply if Google had listened to their customers over a single login it would have centered around GMail. That is the main service that makes sense to log into. Then if they wanted this goo