Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Google Buzz — First Reactions

kdawson posted more than 4 years ago | from the what-it-is dept.

Google 310

Google announced Buzz today, as we anticipated this morning. CNET has a workmanlike description of the social-networking service, which is integrated into gmail. CNET identifies a central obstacle Buzz will have to overcome to gain traction: "The problem, however, will be the increasing backlash Google is seeing from the general public over how much data the company already controls on their online habits." Buzz is being rolled out over the next few days so some people will see a Buzz folder in their gmail, but most won't yet (this Twitter post explains how Safari users can get an early glimpse). A blog posting up at O'Reilly Answers points out some of the distinguishing characteristics of Google Buzz — one interesting one being its ability to post an update either publicly or privately, at the user's option. This design choice places it between the public-by-default Twitter and the private-by-default Facebook. Lauren Weinstein sounds a note of caution about the inherent privacy risks of Google's method of filling out initial friend profiles by automatic friending.

cancel ×

310 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Hmmm... (3, Interesting)

socceroos (1374367) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081378)

I went to buzz.google.com and signed up, but my Gmail account didn't change at all.

I'm willing to give GBuzz a go, but I don't think I'll ever see myself getting caught up in social media networks - especially with Google's recent views on privacy.

Re:Hmmm... (1)

Asdanf (1281936) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081412)

I went to buzz.google.com and signed up, but my Gmail account didn't change at all.

The button on that page just launches gmail. It does not opt you in.

Re:Hmmm... (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31081426)

"We're still rolling out Buzz to everyone, so if you don't see it in your Gmail account yet, check back soon."

Re:Hmmm... (2, Funny)

socceroos (1374367) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081510)

Ah yes, that bit of text right at the top of the page.......no one told me it was there.

Re:Hmmm... (4, Informative)

longhairedgnome (610579) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081996)

Some things you just have to find out for yourself, I've been able to access it on my iPod, but not my PC

Re:Hmmm... (2, Insightful)

psithurism (1642461) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082036)

I don't think I'll ever see myself getting caught up in social media networks - especially with Google's recent views on privacy.

Well if you use social networks like me, you have your boss, your parents and your grandma all friended: so the "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place," is already pre-enforced for you.

I will be happily handing google pictures of myself well-dressed along with flattery of my great family and coworkers.

Re:Hmmm... (4, Funny)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082210)

Well, I guess if you're going to use a social network, you might as well go with a company that has behaved fairly well compared to the others.

Facebook has shown itself to be a little too aggressive with peoples' data, going so far as to make it difficult to control your privacy settings.

It seems that the best we can do is trust a company until they have proven themselves untrustworthy. And, of course, it helps not to be stupid in the way you use these social networks.

If Google's social network does NOT have "games" and virtual hugs, I might take a look. Otherwise, I'd just rather be left alone than have a bunch of people I didn't much like from high school petitioning me to be their "friend", as if I'd ever forget the way they treated me way back then. Especially the cute redhead who decided that the greasy guido would be a better homecoming date than me, ended up getting pregnant before graduation and marrying him and now he's a fat loser and she's a middle-aged divorcee and suddenly remembers how much she always liked me. WELL, YOU BLEW YOUR CHANCE SWEETIE, BECAUSE NOW I'D BE MORE INTERESTED IN YOUR 19 YEAR-OLD DAUGHTER THAN YOUR FLABBY COUGAR ASS!!@

Excuse me, I got carried away there.

No, I don't think I'll try any more social networks.

Public vs private (2, Interesting)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081398)

The problem, however, will be the increasing backlash Google is seeing from the general public over how much data the company already controls on their online habits ." Buzz is being rolled out over the next few days so some people will see a Buzz folder in their gmail, but most won't yet (this Twitter post explains how Safari users can get an early glimpse). A blog posting up at O'Reilly Answers points out some of the distinguishing characteristics of Google Buzz -- one interesting one being its ability to post an update either pubilcly or privately, at the user's option.

And that's the problem when you give your data to the biggest data whore in the known universe. Even if you mark it private, you've still shared it with someone who believes that you have no right to privacy, and that if - as their CEO puts it - you don't want someone to know about you doing something, don't do it.

Re:Public vs private (1)

value_added (719364) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081640)

And that's the problem when you give your data to the biggest data whore in the known universe.

But you regularly suck on the teat of that giant whore, yes?

Re:Public vs private (2, Interesting)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081804)

And that's the problem when you give your data to the biggest data whore in the known universe.

But you regularly suck on the teat of that giant whore, yes?

One of my new years resolutions was to dump google. I removed them from the list of search engines in my browsers. I don't need gmail - I have 2 email accounts with my ISP and about a dozen others on my various domains, and I have a lot more storage space than google will ever give me. I've never used google docs. I don't want or need google gears. I switched away from openDNS. There are alternatives to google news, and google maps, and google whatever - there is not much they're doing that is unique. The only thing I'll check (through scroogle.org) is how they rank a site, vs the other search engines. If they were to disappear tomorrow, I wouldn't need to do even that.

I simply don't trust them - at this point, I'd even trust Microsoft more.

Re:Public vs private (5, Funny)

chewthreetimes (1740020) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081838)

Wow, look at you. Roughin' it, all off the grid and shit.

Re:Public vs private (1)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082190)

No - but I want to see a future where "cloud computing" means everyone connected to everyone else, sharing what they want without some jerk in between trying to intrude on your and my civil rights.

Re:Public vs private (4, Interesting)

MarkWatson (189759) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081876)

I have to disagree with you:

Google performs statistical NLP on your data, and automatically finds good ads, etc.

As per Google turning over your data to the government: we are probably close to total government access to everything we do, so I would chill out about stuff that we are helpless to do anything about (unless you are going to stop using the Internet).

Re:Public vs private (4, Funny)

That's Unpossible! (722232) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081944)

Re:Public vs private (0, Offtopic)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082156)

Don't laugh - I bought a 50" plasma TV and a nice surround-sound system last year ... I might watch it two or three times a month (and there's been at least one month I didn't turn it on at all).

Re:Public vs private (5, Interesting)

D H NG (779318) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082062)

Google is the only search engine with the balls to refuse a government subpoena to turn over its search records [pbs.org] . Not Microsoft, not Yahoo!, not AOL.

Re:Public vs private (1)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082172)

Old news - for years, they don't even need a warrant, just a "reasonable expectation" that the requesting agency "could" get one if they had to. It's right there in their privacy policy. No mention of needing a warrant.

Re:Public vs private (1)

D H NG (779318) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082244)

If that's the case, how does this make Google worse than any of the other search engines out there? How many search engines you know tells you up front what it knows about you [google.com] and allows you to edit it?

Re:Public vs private (1)

Weezul (52464) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081780)

I don't give google very much information but I'd trust google over facebook any day. Facebook must be shelved.

Re:Public vs private (5, Insightful)

Idiomatick (976696) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081784)

"as their CEO puts it - you don't want someone to know about you doing something, don't do it."
He said that while referring to people committing crimes. Having proof of it online. Then being shocked when police with warrants get it. Which btw is standard and LAW for all companies to comply with. Didn't even say anything about google itself. I could say that about computing generally and no one would disagree. Hell it applies beyond computing.

'If you don't want to get busted by cops it is probably a good idea to not leave a traceable trail. BTW, cops can get warrants to search your shit.' -- pretty fucking obvious.

Re:Public vs private (1, Troll)

Idiomatick (976696) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081904)

Bad form to double reply but you do realize they are competing against Facebook here! They sure as fuck are worse about privacy than Google has ever been. And twitter is purely about announcing things publicly to the universe. Not reallllly an issue here. And if you needed a reference: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LoWKGBloMsU [youtube.com] .. he basically says that privacy isn't what people want so we aren't giving it to them...

Re:Public vs private (0, Troll)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082118)

Read what he said - his exact words [theregister.co.uk] were "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place,", not "If you're committing a crime ...".

Think of all the personal things you do every day that are just nobody's business. Like what you watch on TV, or what you look at on the Internet, or who you had supper with, or your last meeting with your doctor or lawyer or clergycritter ...

Schmidt thinks that your data, in his hands, is HIS data.

Now's the Time (5, Insightful)

whisper_jeff (680366) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081420)

With Facebook, yet again, "updating" their layout in such a way that they've made their site (again) less useful and more cluttered, now is the time for a big player to make a serious push for a replacement social network. Facebook has consistently managed to make their site less and less and less friendly and useful so much of what drew people to it is being eroded so if someone were to enter the market with a streamlined, elegant social networking tool that allowed people to easily stay in touch with their friends without useless crap getting in the way, they'd stand a very good chance of taking a bite out of Facebook.

And, for anyone (especially Facebook!) who thinks it's impossible to topple Facebook from their throne, just think back to MySpace. Everyone figured MySpace had the social networking website locked up and then this upstart came out with this streamlined and elegant tool for staying in touch with your friends and family. Now, Facebook is cluttered and bloated and becoming less and less useful - all traits that MySpace had shortly before the end began.

What will it take to steal people away from Facebook? Simple, initially - integration with Twitter and Facebook. If a new network can link into both of those sites and do it better than they do it themselves, people will switch because it's zero risk - you're not turning your back on your contacts on Twitter or Facebook - you're just using a different tool. And then, over time, people will talk more about "Buzz" (or whatever the network is to step up and do it) and less about "tweets" or "Facebook".

The time is now. I _really_ hope Google can do it with Buzz because I _REALLY_ loathe the new layout for Facebook. I hated the old new one but the new new one sucks hardcore.

Re:Now's the Time (1)

ozdeadman (1656597) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081482)

I would have to agree with your sentiments. It seems that every few months Facebook feels the need to reinvent their layout, annoying and confusing many of the user. And the latest update is the worst yet, it really does suck. The news feed is no longer in correct chronological order and the requirement of going back to the homepage to access events etc instead of being able to access from every page on a little tool bar is retarded. Hell, why am i ranting about this stuff:(

Re:Now's the Time (1)

Again (1351325) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081504)

I actually appreciate the new new one. In the old new one I was not able to read my most recent notifications because the notification box would be larger than my window. I'm on a netbook so I'm getting used to having to deal with that kind of thing but I can't exactly hold down alt and drag the window to where I would be able to read it.

Re:Now's the Time (4, Insightful)

zigmeister (1281432) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081628)

I don't even mind the different layouts so much as opposed to one another. I just find it really annoying to have to relearn how to use a freaking website every three months when I've been on it for a couple years. Also, if slashdot nerds get annoyed with relearning the UI, how do you think Jane Smith feels? Extremely confused, especially given that they've been changing their privacy settings around too. Some people might just give up. I don't know.

Yep, Facebook is turning into another Myspace (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31081690)

People wouldn't be so excited over Buzz if Facebook wasn't turning their site/service into another Myspace mess that is just painful to use. Initial impression of Buzz is that it is very clean and pleasant to use compared to Facebook which just feels clunky for anything other than just casual status updates of friends.

Re:Yep, Facebook is turning into another Myspace (2, Funny)

freemantoy (1741448) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081766)

WTF Facebook definitely is irritatingly trying to monetize networking. Someone will come along that isn't the least bit interested in monetizing and attracting eyeshare. It won't be Goog either. Goog and Facebook should just get out of the way instead of sticking their face where they shouldn't. Like watching a DVD and someone sticks their butt on the side of the TV to get a few strokes. Look, I get more strokes so I win and can charge for it. Spare us.

Re:Yep, Facebook is turning into another Myspace (1)

witherstaff (713820) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082002)

Yeah I hate those companies that try to monetize their service to break even. It only took facebook to hit the 300 million mark to get into the black.

Reality check: more Farmville users than Twitter (2, Informative)

brokeninside (34168) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081740)

Seriously, more people play a crappy-assed, viral game on Facebook than use Twitter. Facebook could lose every single Twitter user on the planet not lose a tenth of its userbase.

This is not to say that some new site might not be able to come along and dethrone Facebook from being the top of the heap. It's just that Twitter integration isn't going to do it. Some company needs to come along and supply a better, easier to use platform for serving up crappy-assed, viral games.

Re:Reality check: more Farmville users than Twitte (1)

biryokumaru (822262) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082068)

That example is not really representative, as the twitter user base is about being read, not about posting. I would argue that there are likely significantly more people who follow twitter users than have actual accounts. It's just not a viable comparison.

Re:Now's the Time (4, Funny)

Eryq (313869) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081764)

You should definitely ask Facebook for your money back.

Re:Now's the Time (2, Interesting)

MrCrassic (994046) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081858)

I hear this claim made a lot, though I never see any warrants to back it up. Lots of people have expressed how Facebook is "so much harder to use," but never say where. Frankly, I think Facebook's layout is extremely clean for being as feature-rich as it is. Seriously, it takes me less than thirty seconds (not including any manual activity on my behalf) to post notes, pictures or (especially) status updates. On top of that, it's still incredibly fast and reliable, especially given its scale. (I've seen it have some downtime, but nowhere near MySpace levels.)

Facebook is going to need one really strong David to take it down, and I look very much forward to the one that does, since that only means it will be even more awesome.

Re:Now's the Time (4, Insightful)

srothroc (733160) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081878)

People have been complaining about Facebook's layout changes ever since it started, but it hasn't put a dent in its popularity at all. Personally, I think the new layout is better than the old one, anyway.

Re:Now's the Time (1)

biryokumaru (822262) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082076)

Wait, are you trying to tell me that no one uses LiveJournal anymore?

Re:Now's the Time (1)

Racing_Turtles (1063498) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082088)

Well.... I don't think the new layout's totally heinous, but I do take issue with some of the recent Facebook changes and other design elements. First and Worst: News Feed versus Live Feed... Ugh! We already had tools to hide anything we didn't want to see; Facebook's not at all disguised plan to reduce system load by limiting the amount of data to render by default sucks. .. there is literally no benefit and it requires additional steps to work around it. And it guesses badly "what I want to see". It also bothers me that when you back out of a page, say a photo album or someone's profile, you then return to the top of your prior page, not the actual location you jumped actually jumped off from... makes it a pain when you are going through "Older Posts" to catch up on a couple days' updates. Older Posts is buggy too, often slow and sometimes causes FB to freeze up. In general, though FB is remarkably fast for its dynamic nature, features, and bazillion active users, it is noticeably slower than it used to be.

Not enough gmail contacts (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31081424)

Although gmail is my primary email account, I just don't have enough gmail contacts for this to be useful...and I doubt the hoards of computer illiterate friends I've shown to post photo's on facebook will make the switch to Buzz.

Can't be worse than Yahoo's try at social media... (2, Funny)

gandhi_2 (1108023) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081430)

Yahoo tells me when anyone I ever knew in Yahoo-land makes a comment on any Yahoo-affiliated website...and conversely rats me out to them too.

When your sister-in-law gets notified about your post on "Who has the Biggest Flickr Rack"... you know web2.0 has problems.

Re:Can't be worse than Yahoo's try at social media (3, Funny)

osu-neko (2604) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081468)

When your sister-in-law gets notified about your post on "Who has the Biggest Flickr Rack"... you know web2.0 has problems.

Some might argue your sister-in-law has a right to know you've singled her out for having a big rack. ;)

buzz off (1, Insightful)

jeanph01 (700760) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081440)

Well I don't have it yet and do not want it. Is Google trying to answer a need I have or trying to stuff me with things I do not need ?

Re:buzz off (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081466)

You're not forced to use it. At best, it'll be sitting there in the list of folders in your GMail account, just like that chat window also does even if you don't use it. And I expect you can turn it off if you want, anyway.

Re:buzz off (1)

d3ac0n (715594) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081910)

I have it on my gmail.

Yes, you can turn it off. Just go to Settings -> Labels -> Buzz : Show | Hide and select hide. Bye bye Buzz.

I've kind of poked at it with a stick since Facebook's Fuckup with the new new (new?) UI changes.

Buzz feels a bit... unfinished to me. It's just one box to put status updates in, and not much else. The average Facebook user is going to find it wanting, even if they hate the new Facebook UI.

But it's a start. And if it's one thing Google has, it's time and money to burn. Facebook better watch out.

Re:buzz off (1)

localtoast (611553) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082078)

Buzz feels a bit... unfinished to me. It's just one box to put status updates in, and not much else.

Yup, it needs Farmville. Like anyone cares about what their friends are doing.

Privacy (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31081442)

Do people really trust Google less than Facebook?

Re:Privacy (1)

biryokumaru (822262) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082092)

I dunno, I don't think there was ever a time when you could log into any gmail account using the password "Chuck Norris [slashdot.org] ."

facebook is over (1, Funny)

Surt (22457) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081446)

They may as well accept defeat, they have no chance to survive with buzz in the market. The coolest people are already moving, and they will drag their friends, etc. Facebook probably has less than two years left to it at this point. Hope the founders got their money out.

Social Privacy ? (4, Funny)

Bob_Who (926234) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081456)

The network is not to blame for the oxymoron.

Got it this afternoon... (5, Informative)

dancingmad (128588) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081472)

I actually got Buzzed this afternoon. When I was logging into Gmail the splash screen came up and asked me to try it out. I have been futzing around with it today, but will probably switch it off.

Random thoughts on it;
Google seems desperate to get this out; I thought I had been logged out of Gmail when the Buzz splash screen came up as I tried to get to my Inbox. Going a little hard to the hoop, I think.

Along the same lines, it has a big colorful icon next it under Inbox on the left hand menu. Again, seems desperate.

It autofriends some subset of people you know (I think it's people on your Gchat list), which is kind of weird. I logged in and already had one friend following me. It asks to follow your friends as well.

The site ties into some other sites; Flickr, Picasa, and Twitter, I think (that was in the menu that automatically came up). It also lets you connect to Youtube, Google Reader, and Gchat statuses (it looks like when connected activity on those sites will show up on your "feed.")

The status screen screams Twitter and Facebook. I guess there aren't many ways to do 140 character status updates, but it really resembles those sites.

It took me a few minutes to figure how to switch it off; I thought it would be in settings or in Labs, but there's a small link near the bottom of its window and the inbox (where you can also shut off chat). Again, I am glad they have a shut off but hiding it down there seems a bit desperate.

Otherwise there doesn't seem to be much to it yet. I was hoping for some settings or preferences to futz around with (why do I immediately go into a new program's settings or preferences, and why does it always make me so happy?). I am switching it off I think; while I love Gmail, connected sites makes me wonder about how much information Google already has about me and since my Gmail is my general e-mail, I don't need it mixing with facebook-style status updates or anything, and I am creeped out that it uses my name (from Gmail settings, I assume). I realize those can be changed and if I am careful my e-mail and Buzz will never meet, but I'd really rather just not have them together right now.

Wow, You Sound Desperate To Spew FUD (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31081652)

What a pathetic and desperate karma whore.

Wait A Minute??? Icons...With Colour!?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31081750)

"Along the same lines, it has a big colorful icon next it under Inbox on the left hand menu. Again, seems desperate."

My god! Google actually made an icon...with COLOUR!?!

That really is a sure sign of desperation.

Re:Got it this afternoon... (1)

Idiomatick (976696) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081812)

The whoring the new product thing will fade pretty quick after word gets out about it.

switch it off? HOW (1)

drDugan (219551) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081900)

but will probably switch it off.

I've tried it this afternoon too. Not really interested in sharing more with yet another invasive, free "service" that I don't own or control, but I can not find any way to "switch it off". It appears Buzz will be a new fixture in the gmail interface. After looking at the help links, it does not appear possible to remove it. If anyone has a way to remove it, disable it - please reply.

Re:switch it off? HOW (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31081970)

On the bottom of your Gmail page, there is a link to turn off buzz, next to the turn on/off chat, older version, and basic HTML links.

Re:switch it off? HOW (1)

SnowZero (92219) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082174)

2-second method: drag the "buzz" link to the "more" link on the bottom of the left nav bar. In fact, that works for all of the folders and labels on the left nav bar.

4-second method that doesn't require dragging: Settings/Labels/Buzz [hide]

Do you actually use gmail much?

Re:Got it this afternoon... (1)

carlzum (832868) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082018)

I got it this afternoon too. It put a pie-chart icon to my gmail menu, added a few contacts to my "following" list, and connected me to Picasa and Google Reader, but not much else. I can post comments, links, and photos like Twitter, but I don't see Facebook features like polls, games, or quizzes. My initial impression is that it's simply a "me too" reaction to Twitter with nothing new to offer.

Privacy? (5, Insightful)

hitchhacker (122525) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081474)

The problem, however, will be the increasing backlash Google is seeing from the general public over how much data the company already controls on their online habits.

Doesn't seem like a problem for them so far. I'm fairly sure only a tiny percent of the people using social networking services really care about privacy. Even Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg came out and said Privacy is no longer a social norm [slashdot.org] . The real hurdle for Google Buzz is going to be migrating the massive social graph that exists on Facebook. The usefulness of these sites is mainly due to who is participating. I'm guessing that's why they injected Buzz directly into gmail.. where they already have a sizable dominance.

-metric

Re:Privacy? (4, Insightful)

dancingmad (128588) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081532)

I agree with you. As Facebook has been getting worse and worse about privacy (your data not being your own, Facebook staff having access to account, making it impossible to "hide" your account) I have pulled back. I had photos and I deleted them. I had information about me, that's gone. Basically right now all I have up on there is my name, cell phone number, and the schools I attended.

It's still too much information on a site which sees me as a commodity, but the real irony of the situation is, you need an account to control what other people put up of you as well (as much as you can, anyway).

The site itself has gotten worse too; this is the third big interface change I remember that happened today and it's even more confusing and obfuscated. The site regularly has errors when doing anything (for me anyway, under Safari), and it's chat is flakey as hell.

I put up as little information as possible, have as few friends as possible, and hide my account as much as possible. Buzz is just another sieve for that information to get out, so I am hoping not to use it, but as you say, if everyone else starts using it I might have to have another skeleton account there to manage my information and to keep in contact with others.

Re:Privacy? (3, Insightful)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081788)

> It's still too much information on a site which sees me as a commodity...

Any commercial site that you are not paying sees you as a commodity.

Re:Privacy? (1)

Racing_Turtles (1063498) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082230)

Any web site that generates revenues or reduces operational expenses for any business in the world sees you (you the user profile, you the visit, you the unique visitor, etc) as a commodity, even more so if you pay for it

Re:Privacy? (1)

Onthax (1322089) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082102)

the good news - Your off Facebook, nice!!! the bad news when the photos were added you agreed to let facebook keep them, even tho you have deleted them they are still on their site, you can still be tagged in them, all your history of events youve been to, what's been posted is still kept

Buzz off, I'm not interested in another one! (4, Insightful)

syousef (465911) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081484)

I don't use my Gmail account much. If this takes off I won't use it at all. I use Facebook occasionally, especially for playing Lexulous (scrabble clone) with my wife lately. I already find the regular changes to their interface and lack of actual content annoying. I don't need to know what animals in what pretend farm my acquaintances from highschool just "bought" in some pathetic online farming game. That is not the same as staying in touch. It has nothing to do with their real lives. Nor does keeping up with changes to Facebook's rules and interface. So I begrudgingly use one poor excuse for a social networking site. I do not need another 60 clones pretending they're the best thing since sliced bread. Every time I come off Facebook I'm convinced I can feel another part of my intellect melted away (and certainly another part of my life wasted).

Re:Buzz off, I'm not interested in another one! (2, Informative)

osu-neko (2604) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081538)

I use Facebook occasionally, especially for playing Lexulous (scrabble clone) with my wife lately.

I love Lexulous. However, I don't even have a Facebook account. It's not required.

Re:Buzz off, I'm not interested in another one! (1)

psithurism (1642461) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081852)

I already find the regular changes to their interface and lack of actual content annoying.

This is exactly what I hate about facebook, and is exactly what I hated about myspace before my friends and I made the leap to facebook to escape all that crap into facebook's nice unfeatured interface where you could find real information about people. Most of my friends are already on gmail, and I for one will be delighted to try out keeping in contact using a new interface without all the "features" that facebook has been adding to please the teenyboppers.

I don't need to know what animals in what pretend farm my acquaintances from highschool just "bought" in some pathetic online farming game. That is not the same as staying in touch. It has nothing to do with their real lives.

I hide farmville, astrograph, mobwars and what not, and hide statuses of most friends I don't hang out with. If you want to contact them in the future, you can still send them messages and check their profile info. Facebook has been trying (and doing rather well IMHO) to let you opt out of seeing all that crap your friends want to do.

I don't use my Gmail account much. If this takes off I won't use it at all

Chillax, you won't have to use buzz to use gmail. Its just a feature you can activate. Don't want it, don't activate it.

Re:Buzz off, I'm not interested in another one! (1)

LordLucless (582312) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081864)

Meh, it's what you make of it. I hate all those stupid app updates too, so I filter them out. My feed mostly consists of status updates, notes, photos and relationship changes - that is, things that I'm actually interested in. I only friend people that I want to keep track of. I don't join a hundred stupid groups. My Facebook feed is useful and not any more intellect-destroying than a blog-feed.

Re:Buzz off, I'm not interested in another one! (1)

PCM2 (4486) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081922)

I don't need to know what animals in what pretend farm my acquaintances from highschool just "bought" in some pathetic online farming game.

How come nobody seems to be able to figure out that if you just click the "Hide" button next to one of those updates you can opt to never hear anything about Farmville ever again, from anyone?

i was worried for a second... (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31081526)

...but it seems this is entirely optional:

If you disable Buzz via the link, then you are not part of the "buzz network."

In fact, even if you _don't_ disable Buzz, you're not part of the "buzz network" until you actually use it (e.g. add a comment, create a post).

(original here [google.com] )

a lot of us aren't too terribly impressed with twitbook and whatever, and wouldn't really want anything like that to be integrated with our email accounts without our consent. it's good to know that google considered that.

Losing Appeal (1)

coppro (1143801) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081548)

The great thing about Gmail is that it is^H^Hwas a very usable email service that didn't try to tie you into a bajillion other parts of a website and other features you aren't really going to use. The more stuff they add, the more likely I am to complain loudly about the death of Unix. If they go far enough (and they're close) I'll do something about it by switching to a more Unixy mail provider, like postfix. The loss of flexibility (nice easy access from anywhere; easy to set up filtering) will be repaid in my sanity.

Re:Losing Appeal (2, Informative)

Urza9814 (883915) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081620)

Um, you know you can use POP or IMAP with gmail extremely easily, right? I don't personally, their web interface is far more convenient (one less program to always be running), but really, just use POP or IMAP and your client of choice if the interface bothers you that much. That way you get all the great benefits of Gmail storage, you get the ability to access your mail from anywhere, and you still get the interface you want.

Wa just about to respond in kind... (1)

IANAAC (692242) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081752)

IMAP works nicely for me. I also use Google calendar. And I use them within Thunderbird, although I suppose you could use them within whatever your favorite client is.

No intrusiveness, no being tied into other serivces I don't want or need.

Re:Losing Appeal (4, Insightful)

macshit (157376) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081772)

The great thing about Gmail is that it is^H^Hwas a very usable email service that didn't try to tie you into a bajillion other parts of a website and other features you aren't really going to use.

But one of the nice things about Google's approach has been that they haven't changed the basic gmail interface much at all. They've added various features (some of which are actually very nice), but if you don't use them, they have little or no impact on the email functionality and interface.

Indeed, Gmail seems a bastion of stability and simplicity in a web where many sites seem completely out of control (FB, I'm looking at you...).

The same appears to be true of buzz: unless you use it, you won't notice it, or be affected by it.

The more stuff they add, the more likely I am to complain loudly about the death of Unix

That says more about you than it does about gmail...

Open protocol anybody? (1)

eparker05 (1738842) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081556)

The problem is that Gmail is a client for the open communication protocol known as e-mail. Many people use Gmail, but not everybody wants to. I doubt Yahoo mail, or AOL mail users are interested in dropping their mail service just to join Google's new social venture, or adding 'Buzz' to their list of things to check every day.

Google had a better idea with Wave: produce an open protocol that anybody could host. If Google did this from the get-go with 'Buzz', it would have a fighting chance. As it is, I doubt that it will ever reach wide adoption. Facebook is just too big to beat without an innovative product.

Re:Open protocol anybody? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31081684)

Re:Open protocol anybody? (1)

eparker05 (1738842) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081758)

I realize that there is an API, but that only means that Buzz is open to development of plugins/extensions and other web integration features.

The Buzz system is closed. The only provider of Buzz is currently Google. And they have not announced plans to open Buzz as a protocol as they did with Wave. This model is no different than Facebook or MySpace, and that is the central problem.

Re:Open protocol anybody? (1)

macshit (157376) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081830)

Google had a better idea with Wave: produce an open protocol that anybody could host. If Google did this from the get-go with 'Buzz', it would have a fighting chance.

Perhaps, but it's not at all clear. Technical issues are only one part of the problem. The other part is social, mindshare, etc, and it's very hard to dictate that. Gmail is already very popular; presumably Google is trying to leverage that popularity in their attempt to gain some traction against FB. They might succeed with that where earlier "technical" approaches failed.

I also hope they'll publish some protocols so that more people can play, but at least in the short run, the connection with success seems tenuous. In the long run, who knows, but at least Google's an awful lot more clueful about such things than the likes of FB; they may yet do the right thing...

It's just a telescope. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31081648)

Over time all this SNW will collapse into lense where you are just looking at yourself. Oh wait. . . nevermind.

Mobile version of Buzz (5, Informative)

valdean (819852) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081658)

The mobile version of Buzz is more interesting than the Gmail version. Check out the Gizmodo review [gizmodo.com] .

Re:Mobile version of Buzz (-1, Troll)

d3ac0n (715594) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082150)

Except that it only works on the iSnob and the Andreck phones. Don't have one of those, you can't use it.

Google needs to stop releasing Alpha products.

Screenshot (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31081674)

Wot? No Catch-22 characters in the screenshot!? Not-Taking-Self-Too-Seriously fail.

facebook private? (4, Insightful)

elfprince13 (1521333) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081688)

Facebook, private by default? What is this nonsense!

Re:facebook private? (1)

freemantoy (1741448) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081806)

Yeah, right, and I've got some igloos for sale.

Re:facebook private? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31081822)

Sustainable habitat is so gay.

Backlash? (1, Insightful)

Gudeldar (705128) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081706)

Where is this backlash that CNET is talking about? I've never heard any express any worries about Google having too much information about them outside of Slashdot and certain technology blogs. That represents a tiny fraction of the Internet, most people are happily handing over the every detail of their lives to Facebook, their search queries to Google, etc.

Most people just don't really care that much about Google, Facebook or Yahoo having information about them no matter how many +5 comments on Slashdot tell you otherwise.

Re:Backlash? (5, Interesting)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081802)

It just occurred to me that if I create a google account from a normal computer I can use any name for myself that I choose. But a phone running android must use my real name (its in the contract for the phone) so android may be a way to associate made up identities with real identities.

Re:Backlash? (2, Funny)

UrduBlake (1544847) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081868)

That's just paranoid. Google's pledged to do no evil. Besides, they've provided so many free cloud services, Gmail, Gmaps, Gtalk etc. Does an evil corporation provide free stuff? Unlikely isn't it. :)

Re:Backlash? (1)

psithurism (1642461) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081978)

Where is this backlash that CNET is talking about? I've never heard any express any worries about Google having too much information about them outside of Slashdot.

I do hear about this, but my friends are the type to read /..

There is a chain email going around my family (who aren't ./ types) about the google/nsa partnership. That issue seems to be on many news organizations minds as well: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1C1GGLS_enUS354US354&q=google+nsa&aq=f&aqi=&oq= [google.com]

You may be right about the lack of public concern; I'm not sure how we could get a survey of public opinion on this.

most people are happily handing over the every detail of their lives to Facebook

Many don't understand what they are doing; I had some non-tech-savy friends review my web-development-homework awhile back they were freaked out that I could log their IP addresses, swipe their clipboards and read their referrers. Some were ready to go to the google-opt-out-village after I explained that I wasn't hacking their computer and that's just what they send to every internet host.

The reason /.ers are freaked out is because we know about data mining and see the implications that are there. A little education about how all of their anonymous Google searches can be traced back to them and people _would_ backlash.

Not a threat for now... (2, Interesting)

MrCrassic (994046) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081832)

I feel that Buzz is a sign that the Google Mail team is losing touch. Most people, myself included, use Google Mail (or at least their web interface) to check and compose e-mail. That's it. With Buzz thrown in the mix, now people can check their email as well as follow the people they're emailing through pictures, videos, status updates, etc. All of these things are way outside the realm of emailing, which is, like regular mail, to simply correspond.. Thus, I don't really see this being a threat to Facebook at all because people go on Facebook precisely for these kinds of things. It's Facebook's walled garden paradigm that makes these interactions even feasible, since friends share this kind of information in real life as well.

Additionally, whatever happened with Wave? Wasn't that platform supposed to be the springboard for this "revolutionized email?"

Re:Not a threat for now... (1)

Bieeanda (961632) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081912)

Wave is a conferencing/collaboration tool, not an e-mail replacement. Like Orkut, Gmail jabber support, and Google's IMVU clone, it's basically died on the vine.

Each time they add something like this to Gmail, I get a little closer to just abandoning their web interface completely.

Re:Not a threat for now... (2, Interesting)

That's Unpossible! (722232) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081972)

I feel that Buzz is a sign that the Google Mail team is losing touch. Most people, myself included, use Google Mail for.....

Wow, you've queried other Gmail users? Please publish your findings!

With Buzz thrown in the mix, now people can check their email as well as follow the people they're emailing through pictures, videos, status updates, etc. All of these things are way outside the realm of emailing, which is, like regular mail, to simply correspond..

Get off your lawn, while we're at it, Mr. Annoying?

TURN IT OFF.

So you don't want to use it, jesus who gives a shit? Just turn it off.

In your opinion, the "Google Mail team" is losing touch by offering a new feature that lets people connect with each other more, in a way very similar to two other extremely popular ways to do the same... yeah, you're right, they're really out there in left field! What were those crazy loons thinking!

Additionally, whatever happened with Wave? Wasn't that platform supposed to be the springboard for this "revolutionized email?"

Oh, wait a second, suddenly you're interested in cutting edge ways to communicate with people? Weren't you just telling us one paragraph ago that Google Mail people are totally out of touch because you and every person you surveyed uses Gmail in one specific way and isn't interested in anything new? But now you're asking about Google Wave?

Google Wave is totally different from this product. They're still beta testing it. For someone that thinks like you do, imagine Google Wave as Google Docs, if the Google Docs team suddenly lost all touch with reality, and decided to add a new feature that let people communicate with each other in new ways.

Cry me a river!

Re:Not a threat for now... (2, Funny)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082034)

I feel that Buzz is a sign that the Google Mail team is losing touch. Most people, myself included, use Google Mail for.....

Wow, you've queried other Gmail users? Please publish your findings!

Ironically, Google Buzz would be an ideal way to do that.

Re:Not a threat for now... (1)

MrCrassic (994046) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082254)

I don't really like crying for trolls, honestly.

I'm not stupid. I know that it can be turned off, and I know that it's an innovative approach to how people interact. I respect that. However --- and you might want to hold on; this might blow you away --- I can make opinions, and my opinion on Buzz stands: it is not what email was intended for and is a bit out-of-focus.

Now, if you email others with the expectancy of receiving status updates on their lives, or more simply put, expect to have your email work like Facebook, then this product is right up your alley. I was actually very interested in Wave and did a good bit of research to start playing around with it; the reason why I made that comment was because I thought that Wave was going to kick off the new socially-aware collaboration platform that was really supposed to give Facebook a run for its money. While we're at it:

In your opinion, the "Google Mail team" is losing touch by offering a new feature that lets people connect with each other more, in a way very similar to two other extremely popular ways to do the same... yeah, you're right, they're really out there in left field! What were those crazy loons thinking!

This new feature makes it seem like they're either (a) providing something of a teaser until Wave matures enough to take off (which I think it will when its purpose becomes clearer to people) or (b) trying to unite social networking with daily email, which I feel are pretty mutually exclusive to each other. Finally,

Wow, you've queried other Gmail users? Please publish your findings!

You'd really have to be out of it to not know how most folks interact with their e-mail.

Watch The Terminator movies again (5, Interesting)

kriston (7886) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081842)

All I can suggest is to watch "The Terminator" movies again.
Google's explicit goal is to collect all data possible and index it for the benefit of humankind. This includes artificial intelligence--indeed a senior director of Google is an acknowledged AI scientist. The application of AI to the corpus of all data possible is profound. The digitization of books, the collection of browing habits, the analysis of web sites, and the analysis of all GMail users' email data, compounded with myriad other data sources could provide an interesting advanced intelligence. Even if it's just a Deep Blue style of brute-force thinking, the corpus upon which this "hive mind" will draw is profound.
Google is the real Skynet.
Nobody knows what will happen, but it's going to be profoundly amazing.

Re:Watch The Terminator movies again (1)

scdeimos (632778) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081874)

I expect we'll all be connected to the Google Hive mind and communicating with Google Talk long before we need to worry about the robots equipped with Google Buzz saws breaking out of the Google Labs.

Re:Watch The Terminator movies again (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31081964)

AT&T seemed evil until IBM took over.

IBM seemed evil until Microsoft took over.

Microsoft seemed evil until...

Re:Watch The Terminator movies again (1)

mdielmann (514750) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082262)

...so you're saying Google hasn't taken over yet? Or just that Apple will never be evil? ;-)

Early Glimpse (1)

Anthony Rosequist (1110043) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081892)

Buzz is being rolled out over the next few days so some people will see a Buzz folder in their gmail, but most won't yet (this Twitter post explains how Safari users can get an early glimpse).

If you can switch your user agent string to iPhone, you can get this to work in any browser, not just Safari. I just verified it in Firefox.

Buzz? (1)

dangitman (862676) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081968)

So, Jason Donovan is reading my email now? Will the 2.0 version be Buzz Quiz World? Why doesn't my toupee fit properly?

This is fantastic! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31082010)

Not a day goes by without at least a dozen Google stories. We only need a few more and we are on quota. Come on - you can always fall back on some "omgz android chrome is the best open source search engine that sticks it to M$" story if all else fails. It will be guaranteed to get the fanbois and google astroturfers out in force as usual.

Slashdot: "news for nerds, stuff about Google"

Beyond lame (2, Informative)

SleepyHappyDoc (813919) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082026)

I heard about it earlier today, and clicked it up on my iPhone to check it out. It asked me if it could use my current location, and I said OK, and immediately it brought up a location thousands of miles away from me, in another country. Since this wasn't right, i tapped it, scrolled down to the search function, and typed in my current location. Buzz had the audacity to tell me that the location I typed in didn't exist, because it was not near the location it had auto-detected. Well, no shit it was nowhere near what it detected...that's what I was trying to tell it! And it was trying to tell me that I didn't know what I was talking about. It's not like I am out in the middle of nowhere (my current location is near a medium-sized American city). Fail!

But (1)

slack_prad (942084) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082158)

where's the profile page? How do people know how cool I am etc etc., by looking at my profile page?

Eh, maybe (1)

ChinggisK (1133009) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082248)

Eh, I wouldn't mind trying it out. At one point I did use Facebook a good bit to keep up with friends, but lately I haven't been using it much with all the ridiculously annoying apps and such. Those and the fact that all the old farts in my family won't leave me alone (let me off your lawn?); sorry to any of you folks having your aunt friending you is a little creepy to me. Maybe this will become popular with us college kids again and we'll get back our own space for a while.

As far as privacy goes, sorry, but meh. I know that anything I put online is public and I treat it as such. I don't have a lot of information on my Facebook, there are a lot of pictures that friends put up but I tend not to do anything *too* terribly stupid so you won't find pictures of me wasted or stoned or anything that would jeopardize a job opportunity. I know I should be concerned about teh ebil googles tracking my browsing/emailing/etc habits but I figure we're all screwed anyway so there's not really much point in worrying.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>