Slashdot Mirror
Google Is Introducing the +1 Button
An anonymous reader writes "It seems Google refuses to give up and is trying to push once again its way into the social space by introducing a new feature called +1, which basically has the same functionality as the Facebook 'Like' button (share recommended content with other people)."
I know everybody just has those times they wish that they could either just "Acknowledge" that they've read the comment and care, such as a friend getting sick or being dumped or getting into a car crash, or wish that they could state that they do not like a comment, maybe they could introduce a "Wrong" button also.
"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." [Thomas Jefferson]
What is the point of having a positive without a negative? Are they just trying to "keep things positive?" What if a Facebook page for the KKK had 300 likes? Isn't that be misleading when you can't compare it to anything?
For a site that claims to offer pure information technology and then spams you with popovers to subscribe. Junk website waste of bandwidth.
For the real source, try google themselves.
Slashdot needs Geekcode | Can anyone recommend any good SCIFI? My tastes: Foundation, Startide Rising, CITY, Ringworld,
Good one guys, but I saw that coming from a mile away! Oh wait...it's March 31st.
So, does this mean we'll get a chance to "+1" George W. Bush back up in searches for "miserable failure"? Anyone want to take any bets that the Republicans will attempt to "+1" Barack Obama up there with him? Before long, any search for the term will just be a list of politicians,. . .
I didn't see anything in the article, but how will they be able to keep someone from promoting their own service or website just to draw in consumers?
Loading...
Are you associated with the website?
Slashdot needs Geekcode | Can anyone recommend any good SCIFI? My tastes: Foundation, Startide Rising, CITY, Ringworld,
Obligatory.
93rd rule of Slashdot: No matter how obvious my sarcasm is, my comment will be taken seriously by someone.
Google knows that no matter how smart your page rank system is, it will be gamed to the level it becomes unusable. Obviously, the +1 button will also be gamed, but at least it is going to be a bit harder. Expect botnets to take care of this, though.
Clearly, social ranking is going to be more important than algorithmic ranking. Googles pigeons have their best times behind them.
My karma ran over your dogma
(Or down, if you prefer).
Their they're doing there hair.
I can't help but take your post as a direct challenge to participate in this conversation without rtfa.
Google is become evil!
Are you associated with the website?
Do you mean pureinfotech.com or google.com since it appears to be a very pro Google article.
And1
Set your phasers on "funky"!
It's basically like digg, or facebook like, or any other bumping, but, quite unlike everyone else, it's in your search results without the need to install a toolbar. It's also both social and global, so you have an incentive to link up with like-minded people, but you benefit from the preferences of the whole.
I'd certainly like a -1 facility, but I don't think that this is a small and/or stupid achievement.
On top of that, this gives Google absolutely awesome data to work with when it comes to refining search results and refining *ad* targeting.
A continuum would be even better:
+3 I want to have your baby! / +2 love / +1 like / 0 meh / -1 dislike / -2 hate / -3 GODWIN FTW / -4 Belongs on idle.slashdot.org
As stated IN THE ARTICLE, when you +1 something, only your contacts see it. So, if all your friends +1 something about the KKK, then you see it as highly ranked. But the rest of the world does not know how racists your friends are. When you +1 Obama = not a citizen, only your friends know see this and realize that they know a bunch of birther fools. Similarly, if you +1 GWB = failure, then only your friends see this and realize that they know you a bunch of commie fools.
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
In before scores of users fail to read article and consequently raise concerns that are addressed by said article...
I took your advice and rtfa, but didn't really find anything that's not in the article summary which said it's basically a Facebook style "like" button for Google. Admittedly I didn't watch the video, do we need to wtfv too?
Check out today's animated logo celebrating the 200th birthday of Robert Bunsen.
The idea was pioneered on K5 about 12 years ago...
Best Slashdot Co
Why can't Google understand that I simply do not want to broadcast my searches to the world? I have been trusting Google with that information. If they want to use my click-throughs as part of their search algorithms, that's fine. But why do they want me to attach my name to it? Google keeps trying to go social and that goes against all the trust we put in Google's privacy policies.
Maybe because I'm not on FB, don't have a Twitter account etc, but I cannot see the benefit from a Social point of view of this.
As a 'search ranking' type tool though - without the need for an account etc - I could see the benefit in people being able to give a +1 to say that it was a good result for their search parameters, but a system like that would just end up being hijacked by script kiddies pushing their web pages up the list one way or another.
Funny, I took the slashdot news article as a direct challenge to participate in the conversation without RTFA.
Thought it was mandatory!
---jstlook ---For that is the way of Elves, for they say both yes AND no, and mean every word of it. --- J.R.R.T.
If you need to have a video to adequately explain how a social media promoter operates, You Are Doing It Wrong (tm).
#define CLUE 0
While there is definitely a social aspect to this, the primary thrust behind this is SERP quality. Social Media is a great way to determine which sites are relevant, and which sites are spammy. This is about increasing the relevancy of search results... not a redo of Buzz.
lowmileageengines.com
Google, it is simple, to compete with facebook make your google profile have fucking friends! Let Gprofile users add other users, just giving us a pseudo facebook page does not cut it!
Visit my Forums?
Anybody already has the button's image URI already? My Adblock filter list says it's eagerly awaiting a regex for this one...
This is the 21st century. We can't afford to offend anyone.
SIG FAULT: Post index out of bounds.
n/t
I'll wait for the Google memo.
Thanks anyway for your irrational optimism.
Yours In Osh,
K. Trout
while(true)
{
$('.plus_one_button').click();
}
or the like?
... it appears to be a very pro Google article.
Well their single quoted source was the Official Google Blog, so their bound to 'like' it.
I like this comment
I thought Google's algorithms were supposed to decide which results were the best and put those at the top. I thought the "+1" was supposed to be a link to a site from another authoritative site. Is this an admission that this mechanism doesn't work? That it's been hopelessly gamed by spammers?
Who is going to bother, after going to a site from Google and finding it useful, to return to the search result page in order to click the "+1" button?
Also, why is Google still using Flash simply to serve up a movie? I thought they were interested in pushing HTML5.
whose bound?
Google Reader has following buttons after each post: Add star, Like, Share, Share with Note, Email
Finally I can also have the "+1" button!
I swear none of the buttons could be stacked, they really must be separate.
I think that you mean "so they are bound to +1 it"
. . . the "Hell, YES!" button.
"I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
If we developed the ultimate taxonomic system for all reactions to things on the internet... it might be epic, but nobody would ever use it.
"Thumbs Up / Down" is appropriate when you are okay with a learning curve and you can afford to get more data for your ranking (StackOverflow, Slashdot).
"Like", on the other hand is appropriate for high volume sites (Digg, Hacker News), and social sites. It has a far wider (non-jerk) range of applications, even if it doesn't cover your friend's car crash. In those situations where "Like" isn't appropriate, you'll just have to comment instead -- as you should be doing anyway. "Hey, I cared enough to spend half a second pressing a button!" just doesn't cut it.
Google has the most usage and the least average commitment of any of the examples here, so they probably can't afford even the slight complication of "Thumbs Up / Down". They probably won't even show the aggregate of "+1" votes; it'll just figure as a signal into result rankings.
(TIME's ongoing "best feed" twitter showdown is an interesting example. It uses both, but only calculates ranking by "+1" votes. It currently shows Sarah Palin at position 23 of 140, while she only has a 0.14 approval ratio. That is the largest disparity between position and approval in the poll, which tracks Palin's record perfectly.)
This would be extremely useful in increasing the quality of search results if people could '+1' search results anonymously. Instead, Google's using this EXACTLY like the "Like" button on Facebook, which relies on having friends on Google already to be useful.
I think it's the right idea, but wrong implementation. Then again, I'm not a creative.
The article does not refer to any concerns. I think that was a generic "helpful frist psot" trying to garner karma instead of scorn.
Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
Man, I just can't stand posts titled like yours. If you're going to suggest they RTFA first, in the title, it should also contain something regarding the fact that the article probably covers their concerns.
Google changed its logo to an unreadable collection of chemisty glassware glyphs to honor a guy who invented a liquid candle, but they never once changed it in February to honor Black History Month?
What. The. Fuck?
I'm going to picture Lex Luthor screaming that every time I press this +1 button now.
What do I know, I'm just an idiot, right?
+1 good idea
Great idea, but the astroturfers and SEO sharks will have a heyday with this....
At least Google had the decency to Labs-launch it rather than blow every trumpet... http://www.cmswire.com/cms/web-engagement/googles-1-makes-searching-more-social-010713.php
If he's the Walrus then can I be a penguin please?
They really ought too. We know where +1 came from.
slashdot moderation.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
From Google, a tad early.
.......have already been mentioned previously but I cannot be bothered to read all the responses. Pushnote already does the same for websites.
Totally stupid. Search results should be based on relevence and not popularity. With today's mobilization of large groups of voters the results are going to totally gamed by those who have networks.
I am usually a backer of the Open Source jazz, but at times the FSF sounds like a
complete looner. They want that sites release the JavaScript code as free software.
WTF. There excuse is to make that code more secure. Bullshit. The many eyes
thing only goes so far, and never mind that a security issue can be a result of
shifty JavaScript, a shifty browser, or a shifty JavaScript interpreter (one can build
WebKit with several different JavaScript interpreters). Oh well, I guess they want
all source code on a machine to be open source... never mind that such code
can be buggy an insecure anyways if no one cares (which is usually read paid)
to deal with it. Here is a riddle: Why is the Linux kernel in use, in production
and, well working, where as HURD is none of those? Answer: commercial interest.
People are getting paid to do it. Back the the JavaScript: those websites that
make heavy use of JavaScript, it is in their business interest to keep it good,
I cannot see making the code open source really helping.
But still, if one wants to look at the JavaScript code, it is transmitted to
a browser as plain text anyways, as is all the html code.. it's only Java crap
that is not transmitted in plain text.
Google Is Introducing the +1 Button
from Slashdot: News for nerds, stuff that matters by CmdrTaco
19 people liked this
Haven't they had this functionality in Reader for a while now?
+1 doesn't appear in a stream of any kind: it's just reflected in search results.
Put identity in the browser.
for the +1 operator: succ. It's unfortunate that we feel the need to verbize everything these days because I just wouldn't feel right succing people because they're succing me, in a sort of mutual succing arrangement, just so we feel better about ourselves.
+1 doesn't appear in a stream of any kind: it's just reflected in search results.
I'm not sure what you mean by "a stream of any kind", but all of your +1's are aggregated into your Google Profile.
+1 Internets for you, sir.
Have some chicken.
What if the majority doesn't share my interests? Will this feature make the search actually worse for me?
What does a +1 indicate?
It was news about a change that google will be making shortly. Who would you rather they cite, the Bing blog?
No, I was anticipating scores of users failing to understand what it actually is, and complaining that random people would be able to tamper with their search results, which is not at all how it works.
If someone wants to go view your Google profile, then sure they can find them. The +1s don't go into Buzz or Reader at this point, though they might later. I was just pointing out a philosophical difference. Facebook presents a stream of what your contacts liked in near real time. Google is just using this to make search results more relevant , possibly months or years after the +1 was clicked. It's not part of a Twitter or Facebook replacement yet.
my speakers in my acer notebook are sort of low. will this make it go to 11?
Google will never grab any noticeable share of the social networking market until they stop insisting that those wanting to make use of those services also must use gmail for their email.
Sure, you can work around that with forwarding of emails from your gmail account, but it's an extra step and setting it up is something of a hassle.
197 ppl mistook the "+1" button for "-1"
What a ridiculous comment. If people gave up we'd still be using square wheels, Model Ts and crap software. Oh, bugger!
Think it through.
If you don't like something, don't give a +1 or a Like. In systems where there's like and dislike it quickly becomes a trolling ground where people try to be/do things that are disliked. IT REWARDS NEGATIVE BEHAVIOR. It also becomes like Digg where people go back and forth burying and raising stuff for whatever petty reason. Heck, look no further than /. for what happens when people can use voting systems to punish and silence. There's more abuse than proper use.
Utilizing the synergization of benchmark e-solutions to pre-workaround action items!
Why don't they use the unary increment operator? ;) (google's geek cred)--
This is the same as Netflix & Amazon, the +/- score (I hope they let us weed stuff out also) could be associated with search result strings and *voila* - Google has their improved search ranking algorithm. I hope.
Before spambots start taking advantage of it, it can at least be used to measure how many people like or were looking for certain sites. That way, the better quality results can go to the top of the results a bit more.
I am not devoid of humor.
The prove that +1 Google Button is Stolen as well Copied concept. http://tiny.cc/d6taz