Slashdot Mirror
Google Buzz — First Reactions
Google announced Buzz today, as we anticipated this morning. CNET has a workmanlike description of the social-networking service, which is integrated into gmail. CNET identifies a central obstacle Buzz will have to overcome to gain traction: "The problem, however, will be the increasing backlash Google is seeing from the general public over how much data the company already controls on their online habits." Buzz is being rolled out over the next few days so some people will see a Buzz folder in their gmail, but most won't yet (this Twitter post explains how Safari users can get an early glimpse). A blog posting up at O'Reilly Answers points out some of the distinguishing characteristics of Google Buzz — one interesting one being its ability to post an update either publicly or privately, at the user's option. This design choice places it between the public-by-default Twitter and the private-by-default Facebook. Lauren Weinstein sounds a note of caution about the inherent privacy risks of Google's method of filling out initial friend profiles by automatic friending.
With Facebook, yet again, "updating" their layout in such a way that they've made their site (again) less useful and more cluttered, now is the time for a big player to make a serious push for a replacement social network. Facebook has consistently managed to make their site less and less and less friendly and useful so much of what drew people to it is being eroded so if someone were to enter the market with a streamlined, elegant social networking tool that allowed people to easily stay in touch with their friends without useless crap getting in the way, they'd stand a very good chance of taking a bite out of Facebook.
And, for anyone (especially Facebook!) who thinks it's impossible to topple Facebook from their throne, just think back to MySpace. Everyone figured MySpace had the social networking website locked up and then this upstart came out with this streamlined and elegant tool for staying in touch with your friends and family. Now, Facebook is cluttered and bloated and becoming less and less useful - all traits that MySpace had shortly before the end began.
What will it take to steal people away from Facebook? Simple, initially - integration with Twitter and Facebook. If a new network can link into both of those sites and do it better than they do it themselves, people will switch because it's zero risk - you're not turning your back on your contacts on Twitter or Facebook - you're just using a different tool. And then, over time, people will talk more about "Buzz" (or whatever the network is to step up and do it) and less about "tweets" or "Facebook".
The time is now. I _really_ hope Google can do it with Buzz because I _REALLY_ loathe the new layout for Facebook. I hated the old new one but the new new one sucks hardcore.
"We're still rolling out Buzz to everyone, so if you don't see it in your Gmail account yet, check back soon."
The network is not to blame for the oxymoron.
I actually got Buzzed this afternoon. When I was logging into Gmail the splash screen came up and asked me to try it out. I have been futzing around with it today, but will probably switch it off.
Random thoughts on it;
Google seems desperate to get this out; I thought I had been logged out of Gmail when the Buzz splash screen came up as I tried to get to my Inbox. Going a little hard to the hoop, I think.
Along the same lines, it has a big colorful icon next it under Inbox on the left hand menu. Again, seems desperate.
It autofriends some subset of people you know (I think it's people on your Gchat list), which is kind of weird. I logged in and already had one friend following me. It asks to follow your friends as well.
The site ties into some other sites; Flickr, Picasa, and Twitter, I think (that was in the menu that automatically came up). It also lets you connect to Youtube, Google Reader, and Gchat statuses (it looks like when connected activity on those sites will show up on your "feed.")
The status screen screams Twitter and Facebook. I guess there aren't many ways to do 140 character status updates, but it really resembles those sites.
It took me a few minutes to figure how to switch it off; I thought it would be in settings or in Labs, but there's a small link near the bottom of its window and the inbox (where you can also shut off chat). Again, I am glad they have a shut off but hiding it down there seems a bit desperate.
Otherwise there doesn't seem to be much to it yet. I was hoping for some settings or preferences to futz around with (why do I immediately go into a new program's settings or preferences, and why does it always make me so happy?). I am switching it off I think; while I love Gmail, connected sites makes me wonder about how much information Google already has about me and since my Gmail is my general e-mail, I don't need it mixing with facebook-style status updates or anything, and I am creeped out that it uses my name (from Gmail settings, I assume). I realize those can be changed and if I am careful my e-mail and Buzz will never meet, but I'd really rather just not have them together right now.
"There is no time, sir, at which ties do not matter," Jeeves, (Jeeves and the Impending Doom)
The problem, however, will be the increasing backlash Google is seeing from the general public over how much data the company already controls on their online habits.
Doesn't seem like a problem for them so far. I'm fairly sure only a tiny percent of the people using social networking services really care about privacy. Even Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg came out and said Privacy is no longer a social norm. The real hurdle for Google Buzz is going to be migrating the massive social graph that exists on Facebook. The usefulness of these sites is mainly due to who is participating. I'm guessing that's why they injected Buzz directly into gmail.. where they already have a sizable dominance.
-metric
I don't use my Gmail account much. If this takes off I won't use it at all. I use Facebook occasionally, especially for playing Lexulous (scrabble clone) with my wife lately. I already find the regular changes to their interface and lack of actual content annoying. I don't need to know what animals in what pretend farm my acquaintances from highschool just "bought" in some pathetic online farming game. That is not the same as staying in touch. It has nothing to do with their real lives. Nor does keeping up with changes to Facebook's rules and interface. So I begrudgingly use one poor excuse for a social networking site. I do not need another 60 clones pretending they're the best thing since sliced bread. Every time I come off Facebook I'm convinced I can feel another part of my intellect melted away (and certainly another part of my life wasted).
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
(original here)
a lot of us aren't too terribly impressed with twitbook and whatever, and wouldn't really want anything like that to be integrated with our email accounts without our consent. it's good to know that google considered that.
The mobile version of Buzz is more interesting than the Gmail version. Check out the Gizmodo review.
Facebook, private by default? What is this nonsense!
The great thing about Gmail is that it is^H^Hwas a very usable email service that didn't try to tie you into a bajillion other parts of a website and other features you aren't really going to use.
But one of the nice things about Google's approach has been that they haven't changed the basic gmail interface much at all. They've added various features (some of which are actually very nice), but if you don't use them, they have little or no impact on the email functionality and interface.
Indeed, Gmail seems a bastion of stability and simplicity in a web where many sites seem completely out of control (FB, I'm looking at you...).
The same appears to be true of buzz: unless you use it, you won't notice it, or be affected by it.
The more stuff they add, the more likely I am to complain loudly about the death of Unix
That says more about you than it does about gmail...
We live, as we dream -- alone....
"as their CEO puts it - you don't want someone to know about you doing something, don't do it."
He said that while referring to people committing crimes. Having proof of it online. Then being shocked when police with warrants get it. Which btw is standard and LAW for all companies to comply with. Didn't even say anything about google itself. I could say that about computing generally and no one would disagree. Hell it applies beyond computing.
'If you don't want to get busted by cops it is probably a good idea to not leave a traceable trail. BTW, cops can get warrants to search your shit.' -- pretty fucking obvious.
It just occurred to me that if I create a google account from a normal computer I can use any name for myself that I choose. But a phone running android must use my real name (its in the contract for the phone) so android may be a way to associate made up identities with real identities.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
Wow, look at you. Roughin' it, all off the grid and shit.
All I can suggest is to watch "The Terminator" movies again.
Google's explicit goal is to collect all data possible and index it for the benefit of humankind. This includes artificial intelligence--indeed a senior director of Google is an acknowledged AI scientist. The application of AI to the corpus of all data possible is profound. The digitization of books, the collection of browing habits, the analysis of web sites, and the analysis of all GMail users' email data, compounded with myriad other data sources could provide an interesting advanced intelligence. Even if it's just a Deep Blue style of brute-force thinking, the corpus upon which this "hive mind" will draw is profound.
Google is the real Skynet.
Nobody knows what will happen, but it's going to be profoundly amazing.
Kriston
I have to disagree with you:
Google performs statistical NLP on your data, and automatically finds good ads, etc.
As per Google turning over your data to the government: we are probably close to total government access to everything we do, so I would chill out about stuff that we are helpless to do anything about (unless you are going to stop using the Internet).
When will you be ditching your TV?
Ironically, the word ironically is often used incorrectly.
Some things you just have to find out for yourself, I've been able to access it on my iPod, but not my PC
GENERATION O98346: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig and remove a random number from the generation. T
Google is the only search engine with the balls to refuse a government subpoena to turn over its search records. Not Microsoft, not Yahoo!, not AOL.
Well, I guess if you're going to use a social network, you might as well go with a company that has behaved fairly well compared to the others.
Facebook has shown itself to be a little too aggressive with peoples' data, going so far as to make it difficult to control your privacy settings.
It seems that the best we can do is trust a company until they have proven themselves untrustworthy. And, of course, it helps not to be stupid in the way you use these social networks.
If Google's social network does NOT have "games" and virtual hugs, I might take a look. Otherwise, I'd just rather be left alone than have a bunch of people I didn't much like from high school petitioning me to be their "friend", as if I'd ever forget the way they treated me way back then. Especially the cute redhead who decided that the greasy guido would be a better homecoming date than me, ended up getting pregnant before graduation and marrying him and now he's a fat loser and she's a middle-aged divorcee and suddenly remembers how much she always liked me. WELL, YOU BLEW YOUR CHANCE SWEETIE, BECAUSE NOW I'D BE MORE INTERESTED IN YOUR 19 YEAR-OLD DAUGHTER THAN YOUR FLABBY COUGAR ASS!!@
Excuse me, I got carried away there.
No, I don't think I'll try any more social networks.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Here you go:
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/3173
http://mrl.nyu.edu/~dhowe/TrackMeNot/
I don't actually use it, I just googled it.. oh the irony.
Except the 19 year old hottie of a daughter still won't choose the old loser over the attractive jerk guys in her community college.
Sure - maybe after she gets knocked up and the guy runs - you can swoop in and land yourself a semi-hot 22 year old milf or something.
But let's face it, the only reason you like the cute red-head was because she was cute. And there was probably even a fat ugly chick who had a crush on you - but you ignored her in exactly the same way the cute chick ignored you.
And now? You say you wouldn't be interested in the former cute girl because she's a fatty with children.
It's clear you aren't advocating any sort of meaningful change; you aren't saying, 'Hey - we should look at more important things than looks, because they are fleeting and these other traits are more likely to lead to a happy relationship'. You're just holding a grudge because you didn't end up on the good side of the genetic lotto that determines how physically attractive we are.