

Google+ is good, but don't switch [from Facebook] to it - jiaaro
http://jiaaro.com/google-plus-is-good-but-dont-switch-to-it

======
ajross
The argument seems to be that competition is good and will force facebook to
be better. But using the competing service will give Google too much power, so
don't do that.

Cognitive dissonance if I ever saw it. How can one mind hold both those
arguments at the same time without redefining "competition"?

------
hsmyers
Interesting take---not at all what I expected from the title. The notion seems
to be to preserve competition rather than running from one side of the boat to
the other. I'm not sure that 2 makes for sufficient competition, but it
certainly beats one.

~~~
r00fus
> I'm not sure that 2 makes for sufficient competition, but it certainly beats
> one.

This is a very interesting point.

Competition only benefits consumers when there is sufficient choice to subvert
collusion. Given the examples of US politics, US car manufacturers and the
like, I would surmise that this likely requires more than 3 relatively equal
competitive actors to be meaningful.

------
wccrawford
I have yet to see a post that tells me what sites to use and what sites not to
use that actually had a good reason. This one is no different.

