Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 19 submissions in the queue.

No More Google+, They Finally Got the Hint

posted by janrinok on Monday August 03 2015, @08:43AM   Printer-friendly
from the nonplussed dept.

SuperCharlie writes:

A sigh of relief has been heard across the Internet as behemoth Google has finally relented in it's ever intruding necessity to have a Google+ account from every service and function from signing up for Gmail to posting comments on YouTube.

From Slate to The Verge and everywhere in between there is dancing in the streets as Google finally got the message... no, not today Google, I don't want Plus. Plus will not be going away, it will become it's own property, left to stand on it's own, and unhooked from every Google service under the sun.

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
No More Google+, They Finally Got the Hint | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 63 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Monday August 03 2015, @12:54PM

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday August 03 2015, @12:54PM (#217378) Journal

    Mmmm-hmmmmm. So, if you were in a witness protection program or some such thing, you would find absolutely no potential value to having a social media account? Like, maybe just checking on the health and welfare of a friend or family member? Having an account is not the same as blabbing everything you know on social media. Well - for some of us, there's a difference, anyway.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   0  
       Flamebait=1, Insightful=1, Total=2
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  
    Total Score:   2  

  • (Score: 1) by miljo on Monday August 03 2015, @01:34PM

    by miljo (5757) on Monday August 03 2015, @01:34PM (#217391) Journal

    Like, maybe just checking on the health and welfare of a friend or family member?

    Because postal mail and POTS were discontinued when Facebook went public?

    --
    One should strive to achieve, not sit in bitter regret.

    • (Score: 2, Redundant) by Runaway1956 on Monday August 03 2015, @01:49PM

      by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday August 03 2015, @01:49PM (#217395) Journal

      Mail and POTS are more easily tapped than some anonymous person browsing around Facebook. If you're a criminal mastermind, you can easily have someone bug your target's mother's landline. Yes, OF COURSE it is illegal - but you can get it done. The mail is little more difficult, but you can have someone watch the home for incoming mail, and possibly sort through it. Or, you might even plant someone in the local post office.

      How are you going to trace someone browsing Facebook on an anonymous account? Especially if that anonymous account makes no posts to his mother's page, or to the pages of friends and relatives? He just lurks, watching.

  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 03 2015, @01:49PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 03 2015, @01:49PM (#217394)

    You might be surprised at what your metadata can reveal about you.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 03 2015, @02:08PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 03 2015, @02:08PM (#217398)

    Mmmm-hmmmmm. So, if you were in a witness protection program or some such thing, you would find absolutely no potential value to having a social media account?

    Part of the witness protection program is giving you a new identity, which especially means a new real name, complete with the papers proving that this new name is your real name. Of course you wouldn't use your original name on the social network, but the new real name.