Slashdot Mirror
Why You Shouldn't Write Off Google+ Just Yet
TheNextCorner writes "Cmdr Taco writes for The Washington Post on why you shouldn't write off Google+ just yet: "Google+ is technically better than its rivals in a number of key ways. The user interface is comfortable and friendly. It's easy to maintain circles of contacts, and to segregate what you share with each group. Discussions of small-to-medium sizes are manageable and readable — even in real time. Facebook wins when it comes to the open graph and app ecosystem, but a lot of people don't care about that stuff.""
I'd say it's made a pretty big splash for those of us who haven't "upgraded" our accounts to use Google+. If you're not a Plus member, many links and settings in Google services no longer work or take you to 404 pages. And some of the help docs have been re-written in such a way that they only apply to Plus users.
There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
NSFNet made up much of the Internet backbone for a while. Its AUP prohibited advertising. These were the days of the Internet Yellow Pages and David and Jerry's Guide to the World Wide Web on akebono. This ended on April 30, 1995, and at that point everything exploded - the Internet you see today has been built on advertising revenues.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
I use facebook,g+ and twitter, mostly for maintaining a presence rather than posting personal stuf. But I've discovered that google+ is quite good for sharing images with family and closer friends. The fact that you can can share things with people that doesn't have a g+ account just by their e-mail address means that I can show them whats happening in my life from a single place.
When asked why, the answer is almost always: "It's 2014".
With the Google Real Names policy, and always badgering you for your mobile phone number, apparently it is. Hence G+ being a desolate wasteground.
Phillip.
Property for sale in Nice, France
Facebook can spy on every website you ever visit that has a Facebook "like" button. They then sell the information about what you view online, combined with who you interact with on facebook, who lists you as a relative on Facebook, who names you in photos... and YOUR IMAGE if someone tags you in a Facebook photo using their face recognition software.
Which they package and sell.
Happy privacy.
This space available.
Betamax was technically better than VHS. Brunel's wide gauge railway system was technically better than the standard gauge. We all know what became of them. It's the scale of adoption that counts. A squillion people are now in the habit of living their lives through Facebook. They're not going to simultaneously migrate to G+ because of a few bells and whistles no matter how good they are. Sorry Google, you missed the boat on this one.
Drill baby drill - on Mars
Do you have a browser cache? Because if so, companies can spy on you using e-tags. Hulu was discovered doing it, and others probably are too. No cookies/scripts necessary, just base html.
Yes all that can happen if you don't handle your cookies properly.
You seem to have missed the last ten years worth of advances in systemic internet tracking systems.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
> Does anyone know the Ip range of the like button so i can drop it in IPtables?
There are half-a-dozen ranges, depending where on the planet you are. The following blocks all of Facebook that I know of (LIKE and facebook.com and various foreign versions). Here are the ranges in both CIDR and traditional formats.
66.220.144.0/20
66.220.144.0 - 66.220.159.255
69.63.176.0/20
69.63.176.0 - 69.63.191.255
69.171.224.0/19
69.171.224.0 - 69.171.255.255
74.119.76.0/22
74.119.76.0 - 74.119.79.255
173.252.64.0/18
173.252.64.0 - 173.252.127.255
204.15.20.0/22
204.15.20.0 - 204.15.23.255
I'm not repeating myself
I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user