Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Google Businesses Privacy Youtube

Google Is Dropping Its Google+ Requirement Across All Products Including YouTube 172

Posted by samzenpus from the what's-in-a-name? dept.
An anonymous reader writes: After years of plugging Google+ into all of its services, today Google announced that your Google+ profile will no longer be your identity in all its products. The company says it will take a few months for all the changes to happen, but the first product to be uncoupled will be YouTube. Bradley Horowitz, Google's vice president of streams, photos, and sharing, says the changes are a response to user feedback: "We've also heard that it doesn't make sense for your Google+ profile to be your identity in all the other Google products you use."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Is Dropping Its Google+ Requirement Across All Products Including YouTube More

Google Is Dropping Its Google+ Requirement Across All Products Including YouTube

Comments Filter:

  • But... but? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Chris Katko ( 2923353 ) on Monday July 27, 2015 @01:36PM (#50191923)
    Who will I complain is evil and destroying the world, if they start doing things that aren't evil?

    • Personally I didn't mind this feature.

      I hate juggling accounts, I hope this doesn't mean I'll need a YouTube account AND a gmail account.

      • Exactly what I was thinking....

        I don't log in to many Google services other than gmail anyway though so I guess this doesn't affect me much.

        • Wait....!!

          Does this finally mean I'll be able to post replies to my own YouTube channel and other's videos?

          I have my account, that predates Google taking YouTube over. I've resisted all these years going to G+ or giving them more information....but for that, Ihad to give up being able to post comments and replies not only to other peoples' videos, but even to my own.

          This will be a welcome change if that works!!

          Now, if they'd also do away with trying to occasionally "verify" your account with a phone cal

          • Re: (Score:3)

            by Z00L00K ( 682162 )

            I have the same - an old account for my videos and I have tried to avoid the Google+ account as much as possible, so it's just good that it disappears. One headache less.

            Now if Facebook could disappear too.

            I don't have any problem with the account verification though - it's just a variant of the 2-factor authentication so don't complain too much, it may prevent you from getting your account hijacked.

            • I don't have any problem with the account verification though - it's just a variant of the 2-factor authentication so don't complain too much, it may prevent you from getting your account hijacked.

              On the other hand, if for some reason you phone number changes, bye-bye account.

              • Re: (Score:1)

                by ipb ( 569735 )

                On the other hand, if for some reason you phone number changes, bye-bye account.

                Get a Google Voice number

            • I don't have any problem with the account verification though - it's just a variant of the 2-factor authentication so don't complain too much, it may prevent you from getting your account hijacked.

              Well, I just would rather not give Google my cell phone number...

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by tattood ( 855883 )

              I don't have any problem with the account verification though - it's just a variant of the 2-factor authentication so don't complain too much, it may prevent you from getting your account hijacked.

              They do have a Google Authenticator app for your phone. When you log in from a new device it makes you enter a one-time PIN before you get logged in.

          • I have my account, that predates Google taking YouTube over. I've resisted all these years going to G+ or giving them more information....but for that, Ihad to give up being able to post comments and replies not only to other peoples' videos, but even to my own.

            You CAN post YouTube comments using the old pre google+ identity. You have to manually switch it to the old identity in settings. See that little icon with your name attached on the upper right of the YouTube main page? Click it and you can tell it to use the old identity. Every once in a while in the past they'd switch it back but they haven't done it in a while.

            But we shouldn't have had to do that.

        • Re: (Score:3)

          by allo ( 1728082 )

          Google+ != Google Account.

          For example i stopped writing reviews for android apps, when it was not possible with google account anymore (your appstore login anyway), but needed a google+ account.

      • Before the G+ integration, there was the option to sign in with a normal Google account. Presumably that will still work.
        • This post reminds me of how much confusion the YouTube login systems have caused. I've been using YouTube since 2006, so I think I now have: Two separate "YouTube accounts", a "Google account", and a "Google Plus account". I'm still not clear on the distinction between all of these, how they are linked (between themselves and between other Google services), etc.

          • Yeah, I totally recognize this.
            And I don't consider it worth my time and effort to try and figure it out either.

      • Re:But... but? (Score:5, Interesting)

        by JMJimmy ( 2036122 ) on Monday July 27, 2015 @02:21PM (#50192241)

        Personally I didn't mind this feature.

        I hate juggling accounts, I hope this doesn't mean I'll need a YouTube account AND a gmail account.

        Personally I prefer having separate accounts. It's too easy to track down information with linked accounts. People don't realize how much information is publicly available and what consequences that can have. Heck, even without linked accounts it's far too easy. I once tracked down someone, at their request, starting with only a username on a single forum. On that forum they'd mentioned their cats names in a single post. From that I was able to identify their postings as anonymous users, their real name, address, social media profiles, and so on. The scary part, it took me less than an hour to compile all the information. The only reason it took that long is because there was a lady in Florida with the same cat names which had to be teased out of the data. Another individual I tracked, I was able to identify where they lived, what they drove, how long they'd lived in their home, what they paid for it, what they pay in taxes, what instrument they played in a band, etc... so many details of their life just out in the open. I got all of that starting from a single tweet on an account they'd only sent 8 tweets from and deleted; it just happened to have been cached by Google.

        • So lesson learned; from now on I'm going to use an alias for my pets. ... Kidding aside, Google+ might be attached to doing real business, and then suddenly you might comment on a pet shaming video saying; "That is completely gay." Which can haunt you, and your gay cat forever.

        • The opposite of "online privacy," in many cases, is "personal brand value." I'm not sure that maximizing privacy online makes a lot of sense for most people.

          • The opposite of "online privacy," in many cases, is "personal brand value." I'm not sure that maximizing privacy online makes a lot of sense for most people.

            It's not so much privacy as anonymity. Knowing that I can walk away from a profile which is not my "personal brand" and have no impact on my life. Being able to interact with the freedom to not worry about consequences is what the internet provides for me - otherwise I must be restrained in what I say for fear of the impact, now or in the future.

            • Being able to interact with the freedom to not worry about consequences is what the internet provides for me - otherwise I must be restrained in what I say for fear of the impact, now or in the future.

              Fair enough. But this isn't the *intent* of most social media. You might behave responsibly in this situation but, in general, whenever this is allowed, it becomes a feeding frenzy for trolls. Facebook used to have a real names policy and still pretty much does for normal people. It's why all of the moms are on there an comfortable. Gaming sites (Steam, et cetera) don't have this and the environment is one of unrestrained teenagers. It's getting harder and harder to have a profile you can walk away fr

              • These profiles that you supposedly can't walk away from is the real danger for me. Trolls will always exist no matter what so that's a non-issue for me. The problem with not being able to walk away is not only expressing something but also simply being able to cut ties with a company. Wikipedia as an example, there is no possible way to cut ties with them, it's likely not legal but who's going to fight it? Steam, if you buy thousands of dollars worth of stuff off but need to walk away from them - you ca

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by vux984 ( 928602 )

            The opposite of "online privacy," in many cases, is "personal brand value." I'm not sure that maximizing privacy online makes a lot of sense for most people.

            Agreed. The trouble arises though when the personal brand and the person don't always mix.

            I had a young real estate mortgage broker once, who as part of her attempt to develop her personal brand and maintain contact with clients sent everyone in her contact list an invitation to follow her on her then new twitter feed.

            I never followed her, but I clicked on the link once some months later to review her tweets and see how it had worked out. Naturally it was a disaster.

            She started out with the odd tweet about

            • She should have had a personal Twitter handle and one for her business. Mixing the two together doesn't make much sense.

      • You can continue using it, I believe.

      • Why would you want your Google account and your Youtube account to be the same? Personally I don't want Google having a list of all the videos I've searched for.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      You mean "We have found a new way to track your every move, we don't need google+ anymore"

    • FP is from a G+ user!
    • Shush shush... It's OK
      Windows 10 is only days away and then everything will be the same again,
      and we will be able to whine well past Service Pack One!
    • google+ worked like this everyone was forced to sign in but not a soul used it.

  • Horray!

  • People use google+ ? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by plopez ( 54068 ) on Monday July 27, 2015 @01:43PM (#50191983) Journal

    I hadn't heard much of it lately.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by TyFoN ( 12980 )

      I'm actually using it every day both for family (I got them all there) and special interests of mine.

      99% of the stuff is privately shared though so I guess it looks dead from the outside (and non searchable).

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by GNious ( 953874 )

      I hadn't heard much of it lately.

      That is to say, you and your mom doesn't use it - good on you.

      ca 1-2 times a week, I'm linked something that involves Facebook, usually due to some B-list celebrity put up a video someone else thinks I should watch.
      Daily, I get several messages/posts via Google+, and have "hangouts" (usually just text) via it.

      Obviously, most people on the planet use Google+

  • End of Google+ (Score:5, Insightful)

    by johanw ( 1001493 ) on Monday July 27, 2015 @01:46PM (#50192007)

    Knowing Google, they will usually abort failed projects. They tried really hard with Google+ but it has failed almost as bad as windows phone so it's about time to abandon it.

    • That was my first thought as well. Once they've uncoupled everything from Google+, I expect (within the subsequent 6-12 months) we'll hear that Google+ has been EOLed.

      That's fine by me; but I imagine we'll see a lot of kvetching here on Slashdot.

      • Nah, most of the kvetching comes when they axe something that people like.

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by twokay ( 979515 )
          Yup, i bet flicking the switch on Reader again is a lot easier than decoupling Google+ from everything. Also please can i have the Listen Android app back to go with it. Thanks!

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Being able to gracefully retire bad projects is a talent surprisingly few companies have.

    • Knowing Google, they will usually abort failed projects. They tried really hard with Google+ but it has failed almost as bad as windows phone so it's about time to abandon it.

      Worldwide, Google+ is far from a failure. In fact, it has more users than Twitter. [statista.com]
      I think a lot of Slashdot readers' comments are biased by an amerocentric point of view.

      • It is about registered accounts, not users. And because Google tries to shoehorn a G+ registration into any Google service, they have far less users than accounts.

  • So the argument all along has been

    I don't want to have the same profile across all my google products but I want to login with the same profile across all the products

    Which, to put it bluntly, is fucking retarded.

    If you want different profiles, create different accounts. Your identity is your identity, its pretty stupid to use the same account across all the platforms but different names, the only person you're fooling is yourself, for everyone else we can still easily link your various google accounts to the same login, but hey, you go ahead and pretend because you can now use a different alias on youtube that no one can figure out who

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion

      • Paranoia aside, I agree I don't want things linked with new and "innovative" features that mainly enhance the mining capabilities of the provider.

  • Obligatory comic... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by dwheeler ( 321049 ) on Monday July 27, 2015 @01:49PM (#50192031) Homepage Journal
    Obligatory comic here: http://owlturd.com/post/730466... [owlturd.com]

  • Latitude! (Score:4)

    by roc97007 ( 608802 ) on Monday July 27, 2015 @01:58PM (#50192103) Journal

    Great. Now put Latitude back in Maps where it belongs!

  • One Facebook... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Dan East ( 318230 ) on Monday July 27, 2015 @01:58PM (#50192105) Journal

    One Facebook to rule them all. At least Google gave it a try. I guess the end Facebook's dominance will have to be a long, slow process of attrition like with MySpace. It has a critical mass of users that cannot be overcome with money or other Web presence, as proven by Google. It may also take the young generation growing through it - most people under 20 do not have much interest in Facebook at all. They have accounts of course, but very few are very active.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by rikxik ( 1337017 )

      > most people under 20 do not have much interest in Facebook at all. They have accounts of course, but very few are very active.

      That is true for mostly US/Europe - Asia is a clear exception where Facebook is still very much the medium of choice and snapchat etc haven't even come close to replacing it.

  • Thank-you.

  • This is a smart move for them (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ErichTheRed ( 39327 ) on Monday July 27, 2015 @02:53PM (#50192465)

    One problem with Google+ in my opinion was that G+ would be like Facebook if Facebook had perfect information on every one of your habits/actions/locations. When you have to use it to sign in to everything, it approaches the creepy line that a lot of people have.

    It's similar to how a lot of discussion forums, etc. encourage or force Facebook logins to post. You'd think that would keep people at bay, but all that vitriolic hatred you see on news forums, etc. is right there next to people's pictures and occupations -- "Joe User - 7th Grade Social Studies teacher at Somewhereville Middle School." I once thought, "No one could be that dumb, posting trash like that as a public figure with their real ID." Sure enough, go look for the person on LinkedIn, there he is with a matching picture, etc. People really have zero knowledge about how social media works, what the companies use the data for, or anything about online privacy.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by rwa2 ( 4391 ) *

      I don't know about you, but I kinda prefer having targeted advertising for stuff I'm actually interested in, as opposed to being bombarded with random ads for beer and diapers and feminine hygiene products that I get when I'm in a "fresh" browser or incognito mode. I'm also OK with using the random Google accounts I created to do online shopping... they're anonymous enough for me relative to the realname account that I only use for talking to the handful of actual people in a "social" context.

      • You think it's about targeted advertising selecting stuff you like? It's about targeted advertising knowing what kind of emotional appeals work best on you. It's about knowing enough about you that your drunken argument online goes viral and is the first thing everyone knew learns about you (as opposed to being pseudonymous and allowing you to walk away). It's about avoiding being tracked now because you can never get untracked.

      • I don't know about you, but I kinda prefer having targeted advertising for stuff I'm actually interested in

        Not me. Targeted advertising really pisses me off. Well, not the advertising -- all advertising is obnoxious, targeted or not -- but rather the spying that is required in order to do the targeted advertising.

    • I too think it's insane to link a "real" account to a forum for exchanging my "opinion."

      If Slashdot only allowed FaceBook logins, I'd either censor my opinions and keep it professional (which MIGHT be good for the quality and decorum of discussion) or I'd not use Slashdot.

      When FaceBook logins were required for Huffingtonpost.com and Digg.com -- I quickly left. It's one thing to voice a political opinion -- it's another thing to become permanently unemployable.

      More and more, I believe, companies will use soc

  • But I just linked my g+ to my Zune! (Score:5, Funny)

    by mekkab ( 133181 ) on Monday July 27, 2015 @02:55PM (#50192479) Homepage Journal
    How will my friends know what I'm listening to?!

    /Oh right, I don't have any friends. So no problem!

  • Presumably you'll still need a google+ id to log into google+

  • Not Needed anymore (Score:3)

    by Pepebuho ( 167300 ) on Monday July 27, 2015 @03:07PM (#50192559)

    It means that they no longer need to index and associate your use across platforms because they have already developed the capability to link you personally across all their different platforms through Super Cookies, Data Mining, etc. Google+ is now irrelevant and a good bone to throw to the privacy minding minions who will celebrate it as if it accomplished anything.

    JP

  • I refused to comment on YouTube because of the whole G+ thing, now I can go back to commenting on the many interesting YouTube videos I see :)

  • Quite a while ago, Google made the onerous and 100% unnecessary requirement that reviews of Google Play store apps *required* a Google+ account. I very begrudgingly created a Google+ account which I have everything turned off on because I do like to review apps, but hate everything to do with social media garbage.

    If they remove the Google+ requirement for Google Play app reviews, my Google+ account is gone. BTW, does this mean that the Google Play Games service doesn't need a Google+ account (unlikely I gue

  • Wonder how many people gave G+ an instant and permanent dismissal based on just that one overreach?

  • I clicked some stuff in a pretty deceptive box which kept coming up on Youtube about my name, not clearly outling what it was about to do (bind my gmail / google account to youtube)

    Problem is, uncoupling it (which I've always been able to do) COMPLETELY hides / "damages" my videos. You can no longer view them, they are bound to the G+ account now, NOT the original account.

    If I re-activate G+, bam the videos are back.
    This has, I admit, made me post significantly more carefully in youtube comments. That bei

  • ... how do i check if i'm on google+ and if i am (i never was intentionally but who knows what i clicked wrong) how can i remove myself from this abomination?

Slashdot Top Deals

"The vast majority of successful major crimes against property are perpetrated by individuals abusing positions of trust." -- Lawrence Dalzell

Close