Heads up: Google+ changes things

This is a heads-up for all fans of this blog. You probably want to get on Google+ ASAP, because in the future some content I would have shipped as short posts here will be Google+ shared text instead.

Essay-length stuff will remain here with pointers from Google+ updates. Likely I will lock comments on the Google+ updates.

UPDATE: Follow me here. Also, since there seems to be some confusion on this score, let me emphasize that I will continue to use this blog for essay-length content.

85 thoughts on “Heads up: Google+ changes things

  1. Where do you stand on control of content? Of being able to export data? I’m on G+ and I love it, but I’m not yet aware of any export tools.

    Is the ability to move simple text content simply not that important any more?

  2. This definitely makes g+ more interesting. Will have to see how it goes once the invites catch up :)

  3. Don’t you consider it kind of unfair to do this while Google+ is still invite only? Only allowing people who’ve received invitations to be allowed to comment. Also keep in mind you’re adding an extra layer of work for the occasional commentator, which may reduce input from internet lurkers.

    By the way @Michael Mol, the http://www.dataliberation.org/ should allow this sooner rather than later methinks (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QP4NI5o-WUw) so I don’t think THAT at least is a problem.

  4. How do you suggest we go about getting on Google+ ASAP?

    Every time I look at the damned site, it tells me they’re over capacity and I can’t get on just now.

  5. Oh sorry on a second read I see you’re locking the comments on Google+, not this blog. Fair enough then. My point is moot.

  6. esr, I’ve been following your writings since probably 1996, but this is the first time I’ve ever commented.

    I’m gonna second “Anonymous” and say that I find it disappointing (and more than a little out of character) that an open-source guru such as yourself would put any of your content behind a proprietary registration wall, especially when it’s invite-only, and most especially when the terms of service explicitly give Google basically complete (though non-exclusive) rights to that content. I’m referring to section 11.1 of the Google Terms of Service.

    Why?

  7. > Don’t you consider it kind of unfair to do this while Google+ is still invite only?

    You must be at least this l33t to even see the contents of this blog.

    Frankly, I don’t blame ESR. WordPress is riddled with holes, and A&D has been taken down several times in the past couple years. Why not just let Google take care of it (in exchange for serving up some ads.)

    The android app for plus is out, and that will make posting easier (except for, as ESR points out, “essay length” stuff.

    Moreover, there is some damned embarrassing stuff in the archive, better to let it rot a while, then bury it.

    What will be lost is anonymous commentary. (Whoosh! (I know!! Right??)) ’cause Google don’t like dem ‘nymous a-holes.

  8. @The Monster:

    Are you trying to manually sign up by going to google or are you trying to activate an invitation? My wife and I both successfully activated invitations from my daughter this evening at times that were two hours apart. I think things must be easing up a bit. If you need an invitation, I think that may have eased up too — at least I have a button that says I can send one at the moment.

  9. I tried to manually sign up on Google, and was still told that I needed to wait. Clearly it’s not quite ready to go live.

  10. “Oops… you need a Google Profile to use this feature. Google Profiles is not available for your organisation.”

    If it gets bad enough, I may just register a fresh google account just for socialising, but, really…not quite ready to go live is an apt description.

  11. @Jeremiah Shepherd:

    There are two “Eric Raymond” on Google+. Select the one with correct photo ;-)

  12. @Jakub:

    There are three, actually, but as you state, the photo tells all.

  13. >a proprietary registration wall, especially when it’s invite-only, and most especially when the terms of service explicitly give Google basically complete (though non-exclusive) rights to that content.

    I’m confused. Where’s the “proprietary registration wall”? Anyone can sign up for free, and the export tools to let you download your content off the service already exist.

    Invite-only will pass in a few weeks, I’m sure.

    About the terms of service, I don’t really care where or how Google reuses the short-form stuff I’m going to post there. Here is one example.. And here is another. I can barely even imagine a re-use that would offend me, and if Google were to invent one I have a pretty good bully pulpit for putting pressure on them about it.

  14. Until Google works out that I want English content, because my browser (using the Accept Lang HTTP header thingy) specifically asks for English, despite that I’m in a French language country/region, they can get fucked.

    Well, actually, they can get fucked regardless, as I don’t trust them as far as I can kick ‘em. I use their search because it seems to be better than the alternates. But everything else …

  15. Patrick Maupin Says: “If you need an invitation, I think that may have eased up too — at least I have a button that says I can send one at the moment.”

    You’re welcome to test that button on me. Really. I don’t mind.

  16. This is a heads-up for all fans of this blog. You probably want to get on Google+ ASAP, because in the future some content I would have shipped as short posts here will be Google+ shared text instead.

    Essay-length stuff will remain here with pointers from Google+ updates. Likely I will lock comments on the Google+ updates.

    That’s exactly what I found happened to my blog after I started using identi.ca: blog-posts now tend to be things that took at least a day to write; often they’re repurposed e-mail messages the I later realised might be appreciated by a wider audience, and they now often spool for a week or more before actually hitting the blog. `stuff that requires a medium amount of thought to write’ now tends to either be promoted up to the `essay’ bin or demoted down to the `status-update’ bin, and that mid-ground of `short, quick blog-updates’ has basically disappeared.

    And, on the `I’m already using StatusNet’ note…: does Google+ use OStatus, or is it otherwise compatible with the other federated social sites like Tumblr and all of the StatusNet installs? If not, is there some way that you can syndicate your posts to your identi.ca account or something?

  17. @Patrick

    Manually. I am insufficiently 1337 to have an invitation. And even if I had one, it wouldn’t affect my position on this, which is that until it’s as easy to access G+ as A&D, it’s a bit premature to be saying “ASAP”.

  18. @Michael Hipp:

    Are you the michaelhipp.com Michael Hipp, or one of the other 27 Michael Hipps in the country?

    @The Monster:

    I understand the sentiment. Right now you have to be a cool kid, shamelessly beg, or just sit miserably in the corner until someone takes pity on you.

  19. @esr:

    >I’m confused. Where’s the “proprietary registration wall”?

    Apologies, bad word use on my part. I used “proprietary” to mean “controlled by big corporation I don’t trust”, not “costs money”. My objection was to having to supply my information to Google just to follow your content, which your post implies is necessary. But I went to the link in your update and saw the content without a Google+ account. Unless there’s “premium content” that I can’t see, this moots my objection.

  20. I also suspect that esr *wants* Google+ to succeed, because what’s good for Google is bad for Facebook and Microsoft. I’m glad he’s throwing his hat in that ring, as have I and others.

  21. Patrick Maupin Says: “Are you the michaelhipp.com Michael Hipp, or one of the other 27 Michael Hipps in the country?”

    Only 27? I’m michael AT hipp.com or hippmr AT gmail.com .

  22. @Michael Hipp:

    Invite sent. Will be interesting to see how hard it is for you to get in.

  23. If I ever achieve sufficient 1337ness, I look forward to tweeting links to G+ content, @ddressed to the people who keep sending out links to their FB junk.

    Now that I know that anyone can read G+ content that is designated as world-visible, there would be no cause for the sort of complaint I offer those people about their FB crap.

  24. Patrick Maupin Says: “Invite sent. Will be interesting to see how hard it is for you to get in.”

    Thank you! Clicked on the “Learn more” link in the email and I’m in. So the stuff about “exceeded our capacity” on the homepage is apparently just to scare off the riff-raff.

  25. @Michael Hipp
    > So the stuff about “exceeded our capacity” on the homepage is apparently just to scare off the riff-raff.

    That’s good to know; the various notes from people saying ‘you only need a gmail account now’ had me scratching my head. Now to find someone willing to toss an invite…

  26. Unfortunately Google+ is still off-limits for anyone using Google Apps. Since Google Apps is just about the best solution for personal domain email (or small organizations) this closes Google+ off from a large chunk of potential first adopters, just like what happened with Google Buzz.

  27. jsk Says: “Now to find someone willing to toss an invite…”

    It appears I have an invite button that has thus far gone unused.

  28. @Michael:
    > It appears I have an invite button that has thus far gone unused.

    Well, if you feel like using said invite and pointing it @ kutani at projeckutani.com, or kkutani at gmail.com, I’d certainly be grateful. : )

  29. jsk Says:
    pointing it @ kutani at projeckutani.com, or kkutani at gmail.com, I’d certainly be grateful. : )

    Enroute.

  30. > Enroute.

    Much obliged. I actually hit up the plus.google page about 20 seconds before my phone beeped with the e-mail; I wasn’t sure if the invite had arrived or if it had just magically decided to add the join button. : )

    Lots of interesting stuff here…

  31. Nice that I can read Google+ posts on my 10 years old web browser, even if I can’t use Google+ in unsupported browser.

  32. If anyone else wants to test out their invite button, sending one to richclement at gmail.com would be appreciated.

  33. > If anyone else wants to test out their invite button, sending one to richclement at gmail.com would be appreciated.

    Done.

  34. So if I’m reading this correctly, the people who make the heaviest use of google’s services are forbidden to use this one?

  35. And if anyone else wants to test out their invite button, sending one to tomdegisi at gmail.com would also be appreciated.

    Yours,
    Tom

  36. > So if I’m reading this correctly, the people who make the heaviest use of google’s services are forbidden to use this one?

    “Forbidden” might be slightly too strong a term. If you look at the comments on that blog post, apparently there are workarounds, but apparently they are not pretty.

  37. @Patrick
    Can we agree this is true?

    The people who make the heaviest use of google’s services are forbidden to use this one and those other services at the same time.

  38. Can we agree this is true?

    The people who make the heaviest use of google’s services are forbidden to use this one and those other services at the same time.

    Yes. At least in a seamless fashion. The multiple signon capability appears to be a very poor workaround by most accounts.

    I could be way too optimistic, but I still think this is a poor initial design decision that will be fixed fairly quickly. I doubt it was on purpose and suspect that there were some huge “oh shits” inside google when the implications were realized after the first roll-out. I think google fully intended to block organizations, but not heavy-hitter individuals. Now they’re stuck until they are either ready to let the organizations in, or can somehow distinguish between them.

  39. Over 10 million users, and google is lying through their teeth, claiming a small group of testers only…………….

  40. If anyone’s invite finger is itching, I’d be much obliged (though no doubt unworthy):
    tm68802 AT gmailDOTcom

  41. Count me in for a “shamelessly beg”ging for an invite… Seriously though… One would be appreciated. Em is jsdorn at gmail.
    Thanks!

  42. @The Monster:

    Glad you got one. You didn’t exactly ask, but I searched your website for a couple of minutes and your email address didn’t jump out at me.

  43. My Invite button is still showing if anyone still needs an invitation.

  44. @Matthew:

    Invited, and added you to my “Random ESR Dudes” circle :-)

  45. @Tom:

    Done.

    @The Monster:

    But I don’t think they all are (armed, anyway) :-)

  46. @Tom DeGisi:

    I think they probably had to sign up with gmail addresses…

    When you’re on your g+ page, you can type names in the search box at the top. I think I figured out who Nancy is from the profile, but wasn’t quite sure (not enough bio info at the time, and haven’t checked back).

  47. I cannot follow Eric anymore without logging in on Gmail. At least on Android.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> <pre lang="" line="" escaped="" highlight="">