
Larry Page On Google+: Over 10 Million Users, 1 Billion Items Shared - ssclafani
http://techcrunch.com/2011/07/14/larry-page-on-google-over-10-million-users-1-billion-items-shared/
======
andrewcooke
look at the comments on
[https://plus.google.com/106189723444098348646/posts/dRtqKJCb...](https://plus.google.com/106189723444098348646/posts/dRtqKJCbpZ7?hl=en)
(larry page's original post). why do people do this? i'm assuming they're
random people on the internet. why do they feel the need to publicly associate
themselves with a huge company's quarterly results? is it something like
wanting to be seen with the cool kids at school? it goes on and on - pages and
pages of "google!!!11!!". their own fragment of the american dream? or maybe
people within google jockeying for visibility? perhaps people comment
ironically - a bit like photobombing?

i suppose you could respond with "andrew, why do _you_ post on hn asking q
like this?". and i guess there's some kind of cachet in not being in the
crowd. but i really do find it odd. i can only imagine myself making a comment
like that if i was in some kind of super-happy-smashed situation like a great
party. the context just doesn't fit. are those people really all "hey, yeah"
in their real lives at this moment? weird, man.

also, is g+ going to implement vanity urls?

~~~
jrockway
Humans are hard-coded to form tribes. Remember high school? Google vs. Apple
and Google vs. Facebook is like Chess vs. Football. Everyone takes sides, and
everyone identifies with the side they took.

The only way to avoid this is to be very introspective and realize that taking
sides is not worth being proud of: anyone can take sides, and anyone can
switch sides with no effort or intelligence required. I try to do this; I like
Google+ better than Facebook, so I simply use Google+ and remind my friends
that they should try it. But if they want to use Facebook; fine... get my
updates from somewhere else.

Similarly, there are things I'm fanboy-ish about, but these are usually things
that I've invested intellectual effort into: Perl, Linux, Emacs, Free
software. I get fanboyish about these topics because I've spend a good part of
each day trying to make these communities better than they already are. So of
course I want you to "make the jump"; that way, you can appreciate my work,
which will motivate me to do more.

This is tribalism too, but I hope it's a "higher level" form.

~~~
MikeCapone
Very insightful.

I'd also add that G+'s closed nature (invite only) has made the people who are
in (and I'm one of those) feel a bit like they're all part of the same little
family. Inhibitions are very low. This could change once the floodgates are
open.

~~~
jrockway
Yeah, I definitely get a bit of that "family feel" from Google+.

Back when Facebook was brand new, I remember not being able to join because my
school was not good enough. Then we were added to the good list, and it felt
like you had to join because you had earned the right to. Then they opened it
up to everyone and it just felt cheap.

------
WestCoastJustin
_"At 10 million users, the network has already accumulated 13 percent of
Facebook's 750 million users in two weeks"._

My math skills aren't what they used to be but 10m != 13% of 750m. 13% of
750,000,000 = 97,500,000. I think we're looking at ~1.3% ;)

~~~
nl
It's called eventual consistency :)

------
redthrowaway
I'm happy for Google and it's success, but everyone's measuring the wrong
statistics. Raw number of users isn't nearly as important as their
interconnectedness. Facebook started at one school, moved to three, etc. Each
new user was likely to encounter a number of people they knew using the
service, and there was an instant value proposition for them. I don't get that
sense from G+. Sure, there's millions of nerds on it, but I don't know many of
them. Currently I have 3 real life friends using it, and a few people from
school. The rest of my interaction with G+ consists of following people like
Matt Cutts and Guido van Rossum. Don't get me wrong, that's an awesome
feature, but I don't see it as being sufficient to bring the NORPs on board. I
wouldn't be surprised to see G+'s growth plateau after the early adopters have
all gotten their invites, until there's some value proposition for the current
facebook/twitter crowd.

On a tangentially related note, how awesome is it that there are 10 million
early adopters out there?

~~~
andrewjshults
While I've seen the usual batch of tech early adopters, I've also seen a large
number of high school and college friends that are not in tech who have
accounts and are using them. Granted, it's nowhere near the facebook level of
penetration but my actual interactions with friends on it have been of higher
quality (I barely use facebook so that may have a strongly confounding effect
on my results), largely because I can control who different types of content
goes to.

I think the pervasiveness of G+ is going to go a long way in continuing to
drive adoption and use. Facebook feels like a place I go to waste time, while
G+ is always there when I'm inside of anything google (and between gmail,
calendar and search that's at least once or twice an hour).

~~~
redthrowaway
That's my hope as well. I can see G+ actually being a productivity _enchancer_
, rather than destroyer like facebook.

YMMV on the non-geek uptake. I have family members in tech who are all over
facebook, twitter, linkedin, and whatnot who still haven't signed up for an
account on G+, so we'll see what happens in the coming weeks.

------
akshat
How does this number compare to that of Wave/Buzz? I would not be surprised if
Wave/Buzz garnered similar numbers when they were first released.

~~~
sahaj
Probably not. I use Buzz quite a bit and noticed that more of my contacts are
using G+ than they did Buzz.

------
tilt
" _users are sharing 1 billion items per day_ "

" _the network has already accumulated 13 percent of Facebook’s 750 million
users in two weeks_ "

Now, that's impressive

~~~
jcampbell1
Sharing a billion items per day is obviously false as it would imply 100 items
shared per user on average.

~~~
Shenglong
Unless they're counting everyone you're sharing to as a different "share"?

~~~
jcampbell1
That must be how they are counting it. If larry page shares or +1's 10 things,
then it would count as 1M shares.

------
ippisl
I think hangout use statistics would be really interesting. anybody got any
idea/estimate about those ?

------
hook
Key difference: Facebook has 750 million _active users_. Google+ has 10
million _users_.

~~~
jojopotato
Funnily enough, _all_ users on G+ could be considered 30 day actives and
probably most of them 7 day actives by virtue of the fact that the service is
so young :)

~~~
ugh
That’s not only funny, that’s also why said difference is currently
meaningless. The ten million users are also active users. The interesting
question will be whether they will still be in a month (or, alternatively,
whether Google+ gains so many new users that a few million lost active users
don’t matter).

~~~
levesque
I wouldn't call Facebook's 750 million users active users either.

~~~
flyt
They are. Facebook is absolutely telling the truth about this metric. 750
million active users in the last 30 days, 50% of that daily and 80% of 750mil
weekly.

~~~
code_duck
That does not mean 750 million individual humans, guaranteed.

~~~
WalterGR
Why not? Do you have insight into how Facebook calculates that number?

~~~
code_duck
Are you serious?

~~~
WalterGR
MSN Messenger has >300 million users. QQ has _three times_ that. Why do you
find it so inconceivable that Facebook has 750 million active users?

I don't have time for the Socratic method.

~~~
code_duck
Okay, I'll spell it out for you in capital letters:

NUMBER OF USER ACCOUNTS IS NOT THE SAME THING AS NUMBER OF INDIVIDUAL PERSONS.
THE NUMBER OF USER ACCOUNTS IS ALWAYS HIGHER THAN NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS.

Did that help?

