
It’s official: Google+ will be connected to everything - zoowar
http://gigaom.com/2011/09/30/its-official-google-will-be-connected-to-everything/
======
danmaz74
From a privacy point of view, Google was already perfectly able to connect the
dots of what all its users did on its services long before Plus: single sign-
on was perfectly sufficient to do that. Having plus doesn't make it any easier
or more difficult. So, technically, Google could already have collected all
those data and sold them to the advertisers before plus.

What I hope that Google will guarantee, related to G+, is a complete control
over which of those dots can become public; if G+ is an identity service
(whatever that might mean) I want to have control over what I show of my
identity and to whom. Something where I'm willing to cut some more slack to
Google than to Facebook, given their track records, but not so much more.

~~~
joe_the_user
I was willing to cut Google slack than other companies. But they exhausted
that slack supply when they cut-off their own ex-employees for using well-
established pseudonyms.

The concept of an "identity server" is unacceptable for any idea of freedom. I
might hate the US government but I do hypothetically have some democratic
rights in exchange for the DMV being the current "identity server" in this
region. For any private entity to say "you must give me your stuff and I hope
to keep it secret" without me having any leverage over them is ... (excuse my
repeating)... unacceptable.

~~~
fl3tch
The DMV database is not publicly searchable by the whole world. That's an
important distinction.

Remember those dystopian visions of the future where microchips would be
inserted under people's skin so they could be tracked? That future is here, no
forced microchipping required. People are volunteering for it in droves as
they buy smart phones (and use social networks).

I don't understand why people get so upset over things like National ID cards,
and then turn right around and give all their private info to Google and
Facebook.

You already have a national ID number. Several, actually. They are your cell
phone number, your Facebook account number, and your Gmail address, among
others.

~~~
jackpirate
_I don't understand why people get so upset over things like National ID
cards, and then turn right around and give all their private info to Google
and Facebook._

I don't think those are the same people. The internet is a big place, after
all...

~~~
electromagnetic
Given the population sizes on Google and Facebook, and the sheer number of
people in the UK who have been objecting the National ID card schemes, then a
very significant portion of the latter's population is on social media.

------
eliasmacpherson
I don't think it's just google+. I noticed my gmail account logging me into
youtube yesterday. I've avoided opening a google+ account so as to avoid that
kind of thing from happening, I have remained logged out of my gmail account
since.

~~~
pontiacred
I was a but creeped out when they automatically logged me in to youtube. After
I found out there was no way to log out of youtube without logging out of
Google Reader and Gmail, I am checking my RSS feeds and email a lot less.
There should be an option to opt out, it's ridiculous.

~~~
pestaa
Last time I checked, there was a way to unlink your Youtube account from the
Google one, so it may worth a check, but no guarantees here as Google changed
a lot on this front lately.

~~~
bhrgunatha
<http://www.youtube.com/my_account_unlink> I unlinked mine a long time ago -
so I'm not sure if this still works.

~~~
Wilya
Just tried it, and you can indeed unlink the accounts. But you can't login
with just a youtube account. You need a Google account.

Still useful to relink to a throwaway account instead of the main gmail
account. But I'm not sure the multiple account will let you stay logged in
correctly..

~~~
pestaa
I'm logged in to 3 different Google accounts all the time.

------
Joeboy
I signed up at <http://diasp.org> for a Diaspora account a couple of weeks
ago. It's noticeably not quite finished but it seems to work well enough. It
now has enough of my friends on it that it's worth going there now and again.
Diaspora often seems to attract bad vibes on HN but I'm hoping it'll take off.

------
darasen
I am certain the next step will be when they use Google+ "likes" (or whatever)
to determine page rank. I, for one, find it troubling how much Google can
dictate the success of a web based business.

------
avallark
I think its time to de-couple ourselves from providers like Google, facebook,
twitter. I for one am not very comfortable in getting into a 1984 situation!

------
ashrust
This is the next logical step. Most people are already performing social and
stream worthy actions all over google properties, it makes sense for them to
provide users with a public forum for their display.

Although I'm still not sure google has easy route to mass collection of the
holy grail of social content: photos.

~~~
rmrm
if you have an android phone and g+, all your photos are automatically
uploaded into picasa and available for easy sharing g+

~~~
StavrosK
Only if you enable Instant Upload.

------
naner
This is creepy not because I think Google is malicious, but because they
aren't smart enough to handle privacy well.

Also this:

[http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/30/us-internet-
securi...](http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/30/us-internet-security-
idUSTRE78T2GY20110930)

------
csmt
I started keeping separate browsers for my gmail,FB accounts and the rest of
the web.

I signed up on Gmail to use the email, not for my identity management/profile
for other things (say ad targeting). Google should let us choose disconnect
our gmail, google+, youtube accounts.

------
superuser2
>"and the things that I give a +1 to are affecting my search as well."

What did the author think that button was for?

------
binaryorganic
Except my Apps account.

------
DanielRibeiro
Well, I can imagine google linking +1 with _likes_ on Youtube, like/share/star
On google reader, star on google groups and so on.

If so, it will also make google plus a lot more useful, as your interactions
on Google+ already affect, in a positive way IMHO, your Google search results.

The privacy implications are enormous though.

------
yalogin
Google, from another view, is trying to standardize on one id(google+) across
all it's systems. It makes their data mining results better hence better
targeted ads. Wonder when they will announce that Buzz is dead

~~~
pestaa
I wondered about the same thing, but seeing Buzz incorporated into G+, I
jumped to the conclusion it won't be deprecated soon.

------
markkat
I'm a fan of G+. However, I wrote a post about this about three months ago
(<http://hubski.com/pub?id=2069>), and I still feel the same way.

IMHO, this is not only going to change the nature of Google, but in the end,
it will change their definition of innovation. -When every product is wrapped
in social, it changes what every product can be.

------
wnight
My gmail account isn't under my real name. I imagine Google will kill it at
some point despite me having signed up before G+.

It's funny, I thought G+ could be the social network to replace FB and now it
looks like I'll probably leave Google to avoid it. Weird.

~~~
jamesaguilar
> I imagine Google will kill it at some point

This seems fantastically unlikely (one might say FUD-ish) given their numerous
public statements to the contrary, e.g. in this article:
[http://www.zdnet.com/blog/networking/google-revises-
google-r...](http://www.zdnet.com/blog/networking/google-revises-google-real-
name-management-policy/1278)

~~~
tybris
My uncle's Google account was just shut down after they asked his age (for
"personalization") and he filled in 1-1-2000, which is under 18. He had to
send them a copy of his passport to reopen the account.

~~~
magicalist
it's more likely because it's under 13, which will get you kicked from a lot
of services.

~~~
gurkendoktor
Then they should make a checkbox for that instead of requiring the exact
birthdate.

~~~
jonknee
Luckily Google has attorneys that they get legal advice from, not hackers:

<http://www.ftc.gov/privacy/coppafaqs.shtm>

"Ask age information in a neutral manner at the point where you invite
visitors to provide personal information or to create their log-in user ID. In
designing a neutral age-screening mechanism, you might consider:

\- Making sure the data entry point allows users to enter their age
accurately. An example of a neutral age-screen would be a system that allows a
user to freely enter month, day, and year of birth. A site that includes a
drop-down menu that only permits users to enter birth years making them 13 or
older, would not be considered a neutral age-screening mechanism since
children cannot enter their correct age on that site.

\- Not encouraging children to falsify their age information, for example, by
stating that visitors under 13 cannot participate on your website or should
ask their parents before participating. In addition, a site that does not ask
for neutral date of birth information but rather simply includes a check box
stating “I am over 12 years old” would not be considered a neutral age-
screening mechanism.

\- In addition, we recommend using a temporary or a permanent cookie to
prevent children from back-buttoning to enter a different age."

~~~
wnight
How horrible. When asking an adult for proof of date-of-birth we clearly say
"Because you can't come in and buy beer until you're 21". But kids don't get
that respect.

There's no worse way to handle this. It teaches kids to lie and there's no
reason a less-than-13yo shouldn't have access to email anyways. Yes, it is the
law, but it's just wrong.

~~~
jonknee
That's a terrible comparison. People have to show a government ID to buy
alcohol, stating your age on a website is much less of a verification. Plus,
there are few kids out there who haven't had the idea to lie about being 21--
it's just much more difficult than giving a different birth date to a website.

~~~
wnight
> People have to show a government ID to buy alcohol, stating your age on a
> website is much less of a verification.

And yet it's worth enough that it's a law that you must attempt to trick the
children.

> Plus, there are few kids out there who haven't had the idea to lie about
> being 21

Of course not. Because it's not a secret restriction. So anyone any everyone
can dream of bypassing it. And it's easy - you can get a drunk to buy booze
for you anywhere.

But instead of tricking people we still say it outright. We know some will be
driven to crime but it's worth it that the law-abiding get to choose their
path.

Lying makes the law just an annoying obstacle to be bypassed instead of a
healthy warning and in doing so starts to erode any trust its victims might
have had in a just and reasonable government.

------
shithead
_Google+ is Google itself._

Hey, Larry Page, read my lips:

    
    
        DO NOT WANT!
    

No one wants Big Brother watching their every move, forcing a single ID on
mail, maps, search, videos, blogs, etc.

Asses may well just have signed the Google death warrant.

~~~
rmrm
most normal people that use a google account already have a single account
they use for gmail, google maps, google search, youtube, etc.

They have long had account integration across properties.

What they have never had was very much of a functional integration across
properties.

~~~
eliasmacpherson
I disagree, I'd wager most people that use a google account already use it
only for gmail, as there's little interest in logging in to their other
services.

~~~
rmrm
my point is that most people dont create a different google account for each
google service they use. They use one account, for however many google
services they do use.

my sister uses her account for gmail and picasa and for uploading to youtube.

my dad uses his account for gmail, picasa, and android market.

my mom uses just gmail

as, or if, people add Google services, they use their one account. The only
normal person use case for creating more accounts is for having two accounts
with _one_ service, i.e. 2 gmails, 2 picasas, 2 youtubes, etc.

~~~
jamesbritt
_my point is that most people dont create a different google account for each
google service they use. They use one account, for however many google
services they do use._

Not me. (Anecdata, selection bias and all that.)

I _used_ to be able to bounce between youtube and gmail with different
accounts, in the same browser session. Then one day I was greeted with the
Universal Google Session. Now I need to use different browsers.

However, given Google's direction, I'm looking to replace my Google services
usage with non-Google alternatives, so this will be a short-lived problem for
me.

~~~
asto
No point using separate IDs for different services. Google will still tie them
together. Here's a little story (that might scare you).

A few months ago, my brother bought an android phone. He synced contacts with
his gmail account. And when I looked at my info on his contact list, I saw
that gmail had associated my name with a couple of accounts I had made as a
kid and haven't used in half a decade. How they did that, I don't know.

In any case, that aside, I really don't mind that they are profiling me as
long as the intent remains good. I like it that the ads are tailored for me. I
like that youtube suggests videos that I might be interested in. I like it
that I don't have to sign in over and over again to login to different
services. These are all features to me and a majority of the internet using
public.

If you don't want to be profiled you should consider pooling money and
creating your own email service with like-minded people, use
diaspora/anonymous boards for networking etc. Avoiding google is do-able. It
just requires more resources.

I find that most people who are complaining are neither willing to give up a
bit of privacy nor are they willing to pay more or work harder to protect
their privacy. You can't eat your cake and have it too!

~~~
jamesbritt
_If you don't want to be profiled you should consider pooling money and
creating your own email service with like-minded people, use
diaspora/anonymous boards for networking etc. Avoiding google is do-able. It
just requires more resources._

Absolutely. I may go back to running my own mail server, or keep sing Google
for apps while dropping YouTube in favor of Vimeo, and moving to Diaspora and
skipping g+.

 _I find that most people who are complaining are neither willing to give up a
bit of privacy nor are they willing to pay more or work harder to protect
their privacy. You can't eat your cake and have it too!_

Yes; for example I noticed that some Occupy<CityOrPlace> groups are on the one
the hand complaining about companies violating privacy and using personal data
for economic fodder while at the same time happily using Facebook to as their
"homepage".

At some point principles have to trump convenience.

------
RyanKearney
Except Google Apps.

