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!

Spam Hits Google Buzz Already

CmdrTaco posted more than 4 years ago | from the that-didn't-take-long dept.

Google 135

ChiefMonkeyGrinder writes "Despite only being launched this week, spammers are already targeting Google Buzz, the search engine's social network." If my buzz box is any indicator, the spammers are pretty much the only people actually using Buzz, and until Facebook can integrate, I wonder if that will change. The Times also has a followup on Google's Apologies following various privacy bumbles throughout the launch of Buzz.

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

Facebook Will Not Acknowledge the New Guy (5, Interesting)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 4 years ago | (#31144496)

... until Facebook can integrate ...

The only way Facebook would integrate is if it didn't view Buzz as a competitor in anyway. But Buzz is a competitor already in some respects. The damned thing keeps asking me to integrate with my Picassa account. And it is already integrated with GMail and GChat. So you've got ad revenue, messaging and pictures ... now Buzz needs finer tuned privacy control and a developer platform to be a direct competitor with Facebook. That last one is a big sticky mess though and Facebook seems to have done as best as possible with it.

Hilarious that Google got bit on privacy concerns. Facebook learned the lengthy hard way on that one but it does give me hope that people are not entirely offering up their privacy to Google without batting an eye. Maybe the general public is not as doomed as we thought [slashdot.org] ?

Anyway, there is no way in hell Facebook would validate Buzz's existence by integrating with them. It would just give their users who already use GMail a chance to seamlessly transfer over to Buzz while keeping up with their archaic Facebook contacts. It would be potential suicide for Facebook to do such a thing if/when Google keeps up expanding Buzz.

Personally I think Buzz targets another market but losing any number of users to Buzz does not make sense in anyway ... devoting time and resources to that endeavor makes even less sense. Facebook will sacrifice interaction between it's large user base and the few Buzz-only people in the name of maintaining its superiority. Really it's sad because the user loses out of being able to transfer and interact with users on Buzz ... but when you're as big as Facebook, you just don't care about those kinds of integration competitor benefits and 'features.'

Re:Facebook Will Not Acknowledge the New Guy (0, Redundant)

Grizzley9 (1407005) | more than 4 years ago | (#31144984)

I'd be happy if Buzz just updated FB status then like the many other services that update all your social sites with one post. Integration would be great though as I'd never have to go to FB.com again.

Re:Facebook Will Not Acknowledge the New Guy (5, Funny)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145022)

Integration would be great though as I'd never have to go to FB.com again.

I can understand you hatin' on Facebook but what have you got against The American Farm Bureau Federation [fb.com] ?

Re:Facebook Will Not Acknowledge the New Guy (1)

CDS (143158) | more than 4 years ago | (#31146700)

it's due to all the farmville spam he's been getting...

Re:Facebook Will Not Acknowledge the New Guy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31145030)

Twitter can update both Facebook and Buzz, though it takes a long time (several hours) to update Buzz. Using Twitter and TwitPic allows me to use SMS and picture messages to update my status on all three services.

Re:Facebook Will Not Acknowledge the New Guy (5, Insightful)

hedwards (940851) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145038)

You already don't have to go there ever again. I've never been there and I'm still alive.

Re:Facebook Will Not Acknowledge the New Guy (2, Informative)

D Ninja (825055) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145272)

I know what you are hinting at with your answer (AKA "Don't use Facebook") but, the reality of the matter is that Facebook is used all the time with various groups, friends, etc that people are part of. Yeah, there is a high amount of noise, but it is *the* place for people to plan events, talk about life events, etc. While I wouldn't "die" without Facebook, my social life would most definitely suffer (and, yes, I mean a social life outside of Facebook - Facebook is a tool to help plan that). So, leaving Facebook is not necessarily an option.

To answer the GP post, I too would like to see Buzz integrate with Facebook - even if it is to see status and provide status updates.

Re:Facebook Will Not Acknowledge the New Guy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31145698)

My family and friends seem to get by with email and the telephone just fine.

Some of us are AC's because of the Facebooks and Google's of the world. We're doomed to failure, I know, but someday someone is going to have their life ruined by datamining, and we'll at least get to say "We told you so".

Re:Facebook Will Not Acknowledge the New Guy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31146228)

There are already google gadgets that interface with facebook. Gadgets can run in iGoogle, gmail, or the desktop. Since buzz runs in gmail.... It wouldn't be total integration, but it would be something.

Re:Facebook Will Not Acknowledge the New Guy (1)

Jawn98685 (687784) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145676)

You already don't have to go there ever again...

Yeah! So get off our lawns...
Someone, anyone, please try again to explain to me why the hell I want to share portions of my personal life on some "social networking" site, or more importantly, why I should think that anyone cares enough about such dreck to warrant even the meager resources required to host it?

Anyone?

Re:Facebook Will Not Acknowledge the New Guy (1)

LMacG (118321) | more than 4 years ago | (#31146174)

Apparently you don't want to do so. So don't.

Re:Facebook Will Not Acknowledge the New Guy (1)

Low Ranked Craig (1327799) | more than 4 years ago | (#31146438)

I used to think that way as well. There are a lot of people that go overboard and publish every detail of their life, which I think it stupid. Personally I have very little personal info on FB, and my birth date and city of residence are not correct (I mean, really, publishing your full name, birth date and the city where you live isn't exactly a good idea IMO, not that the info isn't out there, but still.)

I have over the last few months connected with some friends and relatives I haven't spoken to in years, for one reason or another, and I frequently use it to plan things with a group of friends.

I've actually found it to be a useful tool for maintain a real social life. You don't have to be an attention whore to use facebook.

Re:Facebook Will Not Acknowledge the New Guy (3, Interesting)

dswensen (252552) | more than 4 years ago | (#31146914)

"Someone please try again to explain to me"? Seriously?

People like to talk about themselves. On the Internet and in everyday life. This doesn't really require explanation, nor do I think you actually want one.

You want validation that you're a brave crusader holding your ground against the shallow, attention-whoring masses. Which is ironic, given that you apparently want someone to convince you in the hope that they'll earn your valuable approval (which you won't give -- your mind is clearly made up.)

As the poster above said, if you don't want to use it, don't. There's a lot of utility to social networking that has nothing to do with what you ate for breakfast, but like anything else, Sturgeon's Law applies. The good stuff is rarer than the dross but can be found with only a little effort.

Re:Facebook Will Not Acknowledge the New Guy (1)

Heed00 (1473203) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145886)

You already don't have to go there ever again. I've never been there and I'm still alive.

Correction: You've never been there so don't yet exist. Me neither. *poof*

Re:Facebook Will Not Acknowledge the New Guy (1)

Gleapsite (713682) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145250)

My twitter account updates my buzz feed via google's built in functionality.

It also updates my facebook status via the twitter app for facebook. (although @replies stay on twitter, which I like)

It also updates my away message for AIM/ICQ/MSN/Jabber/gtalk/FBChat/IRC via a twitter plugin for Adium (there's probably one out there for Pidgin too).

It also updates my personal website via a little php-rss script.

It also updates my myspace status via a myspace app for twitter. (although again, @replies stay on twitter)

I can post to twitter via the standard web interface, instant message, a tiny python script I wrote (useful for liveblogging robotics projects), my cellphone (via swift twit).

I can post pictures using twitpic, or songs using blip.fm.

This is my giant social networking machine. It's been working pretty well thus far, as new things come out, I integrate them. I have my public feed (twitter), private feed (facebook+privacy settings w/ friend groups), and super private feed (livejournal, which isn't connected to anything).

I really can't see any added value that buzz gives my machine, but I've integrated it anyway.

Re:Facebook Will Not Acknowledge the New Guy (1)

Eponymous Coward (6097) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145362)

private feed (facebook+privacy settings w/ friend groups)

My big problem with Facebook is that it seems very difficult to lock down. Even if you have your privacy settings cranked up, can't your data be "leaked" by friends who aren't so locked down? I'm specifically thinking about apps. Isn't it true that the default Facebook settings let app developers see everything the person running the app can see? So, even if you don't grant access to third parties, your friends may.

Some privacy group had a Facebook app that you could run and see just what information was being divulged and at the time, I thought it was pretty atrocious. Since then, it seems like Facebook has relaxed privacy even more.

Re:Facebook Will Not Acknowledge the New Guy (1)

Gleapsite (713682) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145422)

Yeah. I only have the twitter app installed on facebook because I'm old school like that. I don't *believe* that my friends apps can access my feed data, though I could be wrong.

And as far as them relaying/repeating info that I post... How is that different from a normal conversation with my friends?

I rarely post stuff to facebook that isn't public. When I do its usually locked down to a select group of friends and is about a party or something.

Re:Facebook Will Not Acknowledge the New Guy (2, Interesting)

0100010001010011 (652467) | more than 4 years ago | (#31146648)

It didn't used to be.

They seemed to have hit their peak of 'privacy' a while ago.

Back in the day, you only had blocking and limited profiles. But you could restrict all your data.

Then they added groups. Which was great. "Family", "Real Friends","Bar Associates", "Work" which was great. I could complain about work and exclude work. Add photo albums and not let X group see them.

The problem came with their latest update and the "Who can add you as a friend". Previously you could lock it down. Now it's either "Friends of Friends" or "Everybody".

At one point in my profile's history I wouldn't even show up to a friend of a friend. Now they can add me.

Re:Facebook Will Not Acknowledge the New Guy (2, Insightful)

geegel (1587009) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145540)

Dude, no offense, get a life.

Re:Facebook Will Not Acknowledge the New Guy (1)

Gleapsite (713682) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145988)

I have a life. I just have no time to deal with multiple websites.

In total that took me maybe 4 hours to set up spread across the launches of various platforms.

Re:Facebook Will Not Acknowledge the New Guy (1)

dzfoo (772245) | more than 4 years ago | (#31146210)

No, seriously, get a life outside the Web.

      -dZ.

Re:Facebook Will Not Acknowledge the New Guy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31146842)

Yeah, what's with all the hate? I could understand the reaction if this was posted on a site that's not about technology, but it's goddamn slashdot! Where are the "me too!" replies?

Re:Facebook Will Not Acknowledge the New Guy (3, Funny)

afabbro (33948) | more than 4 years ago | (#31146026)

This is my giant social networking machine.

"...but I still haven't kissed a girl.

Re:Facebook Will Not Acknowledge the New Guy (1)

Gleapsite (713682) | more than 4 years ago | (#31146186)

And my daughter was born via immaculate conception.

Re:Facebook Will Not Acknowledge the New Guy (1)

0100010001010011 (652467) | more than 4 years ago | (#31146658)

"...but I still haven't kissed a girl.

It might feel wrong, it might feel right.
You might like it, and the taste of her cherry chapstick.

Re:Facebook Will Not Acknowledge the New Guy (1)

Arthur Grumbine (1086397) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145572)

Hilarious that Google got bit on privacy concerns. Facebook learned the lengthy hard way on that one...

If by "learned the lengthy and hard way" you mean "has made a fortune off of, and has grown exponentially despite of, its continuously worsening lack of respect for user privacy" than I totally agree with you. Otherwise I don't think we're talking about the same Facebook.

Re:Facebook Will Not Acknowledge the New Guy (1)

StripedCow (776465) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145854)

They (google) can always copy facebook information by asking the user for their facebook login + password.

As fine tuned as you want (1)

SuperBanana (662181) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145942)

ow Buzz needs finer tuned privacy control

It's as fine-grained as you want it to be. Each Buzz can be published to any contact group you want, and you can select as many or as few as you want.

I'd never used groups in Gmail, but after spending about 20 minutes to sort my most common contacts into groups, I was able to publish Buzzes to specific groups of friends. For example, my friends really into cars probably are less interested in my posts about community group events.

End result, if you're smart, are Buzzes that are of the most interest to specific groups. Win for everyone. So many people post crap to Facebook endlessly about stuff I don't care about, and get 'hidden' as a result.

Totally Riding That Buzz (4, Interesting)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 4 years ago | (#31144594)

I think Buzz targets people who desire a very simple interface. It seems to perform a lot better on my slow machine than Facebook but is negligible on my main box. Honestly I haven't experienced any Spam on Buzz at all. Don't you have to follow the Spam bot or hacked account to get the Spam?

It's missing a lot of options, I guess time will tell if that is the intent or merely TBD yet. I do like how it's integrated with Google Reader. I share a lot of my news offerings with my followers. I don't like that it wants me to integrate with Picassa. I simply have too many Google contacts (some Slashdot readers I've never met!) to have them looking at my pictures!

So the one thing that Buzz has over Facebook is Aardvark [slashdot.org] . I signed up for that three or four days ago and have asked a question [vark.com] (with very positive results) and answered a [vark.com] few [vark.com] questions [vark.com] . I didn't get quite what I wanted out of answering questions although I think the people that answered my question did a pretty good job. How this is different from Yahoo Answers or Wiki Answers seems to be that it's tightly integrated with Buzz and GChat. Also it actively finds things for you to answer. I'm guessing what Google has with mining your e-mail and chats and searches it will use to locate experts for your questions and also pair you with better questions you're more capable of answering. A lot remains to be seen as to whether or not this is an actual beneficial addition or some more of the bloat a Facebook application would have to offer one.

Yes, I have already made two book purchases off of those suggestions from my question. Note that a problem with GChat caused two of my questions (which I tried to designate as separate) get slotted into one question. I could just hear the software thinking: the second question is about authors, he must be continuing his thought.

Personally I'm not leaving Facebook for Buzz. But I'm not decommissioning Buzz. I'm keeping it as a sort of News social network much like The Auteurs [theauteurs.com] and Afternoon Records Community [ning.com] are for my movies and music respectively. Granted none of these niche networks get as much time as the all encompassing Facebook, they still exist harmoniously in the bag of sites I visit. I recognize I'm probably an outlier though.

no spam here (1)

jDeepbeep (913892) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145384)

Honestly I haven't experienced any Spam on Buzz at all.

Nor have I.

Re:no spam here (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31145568)

+1

Re:no spam here (4, Funny)

badpazzword (991691) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145730)

Somehow I think making a list of people who aren't spammed (yet) isn't a very good idea...

Re:Totally Riding That Buzz (1)

0100010001010011 (652467) | more than 4 years ago | (#31146676)

I think Buzz targets people who desire a very simple interface. It seems to perform a lot better on my slow machine than Facebook but is negligible on my main box.

So basically everyone that jumped ship from MySpace to Facebook?

Then they added Apps and started redesigning the site monthly (I JUST figured out the old interface). I still don't know how to go directly TO my albums without having to go to photos of me, then me, then my albums.

What's next? (2, Interesting)

BadAnalogyGuy (945258) | more than 4 years ago | (#31144700)

If there's anything I've learned over the years watching technology, it's that if everyone is suddenly climbing aboard a certain technology, it's time to find the next big thing.

Social computing may be really hot right now, but I'm wondering what the next big thing is going to be. First we had personal websites, then we moved to blogs, then to social computing and tweeting. What's next? What are you working on or with that is the next step in technological evolution?

Re:What's next? (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31144746)

If there's anything I've learned over the years watching technology, it's that if everyone is suddenly climbing aboard a certain technology, it's time to find the next big thing.

Social computing may be really hot right now, but I'm wondering what the next big thing is going to be. First we had personal websites, then we moved to blogs, then to social computing and tweeting. What's next? What are you working on or with that is the next step in technological evolution?

I'm working on a new technology (script based) where people log into a news site and post completely offtopic and unrelated comments drawn from a bag of on-the-surface-interesting-but-truly-vapid comments.

Re:What's next? (1)

BrokenHalo (565198) | more than 4 years ago | (#31144898)

I'm working on a new technology (script based) where people log into a news site and post completely offtopic and unrelated comments drawn from a bag of on-the-surface-interesting-but-truly-vapid comments.

Well, that would be vastly more interesting than the kind of blather we typically see on Twitter or Facebook. Comments there aren't even interesting on the surface.

Re:What's next? (1)

BadAnalogyGuy (945258) | more than 4 years ago | (#31144902)

That's interesting, but it seems like it would remove interactivity from the activity. That would fly in the face of all the other developments thus far.

Maybe I'm not understanding your idea. Tell me more about log into a news site and post completely offtopic and unrelated comments drawn.

Re:What's next? (2, Funny)

vlm (69642) | more than 4 years ago | (#31144918)

I'm working on a new technology (script based) where people log into a news site and post completely offtopic and unrelated comments drawn from a bag of on-the-surface-interesting-but-truly-vapid comments.

You're in the talk radio business?

Re:What's next? (1)

Mashiki (184564) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145542)

You're in the talk radio business?

It's more profitable than TV these days.

Re:What's next? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31145016)

>> it's time to find the next big thing.

Information arranged linearly on pressed dead plant material?

Re:What's next? (1)

flyingfsck (986395) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145790)

"First we had personal websites"

Hmm, no, first we had Bulletin Boards, Xchat and Gopher.

There hasn't really been anything new on the internet since about 1970.

People think that if they add colour or more pixels to something that it becomes a new idea, but it is merely an incremental improvement of the same old crap.

Re:What's next? (1)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145842)

First we had personal websites, then we moved to blogs, then to social computing and tweeting.

Isn't that like saying first we had automobiles, then we moved to cars, then to mass transit and bicycling. I thought blogs were personal web logs.

Re:What's next? (1)

dzfoo (772245) | more than 4 years ago | (#31146310)

I think he's talking about the evolution of technology buzzwords.

Re:What's next? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31146934)

So far the progression has been from larger coherent bodies of work to smaller streams of consciousness. Pretty soon people will just be grunting at each other. We are coming full circle!

Re:What's next? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31147234)

Grunting at each other is the entire point of socializing with potential mates.

Re:What's next? (4, Funny)

harmonise (1484057) | more than 4 years ago | (#31147254)

What are you working on or with that is the next step in technological evolution?

Teledildonics

Google Buzz's Skyrocketing Usage (5, Informative)

MediaStreams (1461187) | more than 4 years ago | (#31144770)

"If my buzz box is any indicator, the spammers are pretty much the only people actually using Buzz, and until Facebook can integrate, i wonder if that will change. "

Wow, way to make to make yourself look silly submitter:

http://mashable.com/2010/02/14/google-buzz-column/ [mashable.com]

"Google Buzz's Skyrocketing Usage
While it's still very early into Buzz's life cycle, initial indications show that Google has a hit on its hands. Linking Buzz to Gmail's millions of users has clearly brought people into the company's new social domain.

Google has only released two numbers so far: there have been over 9 million posts and comments in about 56 hours, amounting to around 160,000 posts and comments per hour. That's even more impressive if you consider the fact that most users didn't get Buzz until Wednesday the 10th.

The other number: over 200 mobile check-ins per minute, nearly 300,000 mobile check-ins per day.

Those numbers are simply stellar."

Every major blogger is using Buzz now and some of them are saying they already have a larger Buzz following in just a few days than they had with other social media sites that they spent years building up.

Re:Google Buzz's Skyrocketing Usage (1)

IANAAC (692242) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145012)

Every major blogger is using Buzz now and some of them are saying they already have a larger Buzz following in just a few days than they had with other social media sites that they spent years building up.

The impressive numbers in the linked blog are assuming that all GMail users are, in fact, also using Buzz. That's a rather general asumption, no?

Don't what major blogger(s) you refer to, but most of the daily blogs I read have been very quick to mention they've turned off Buzz completely, and provided instructions to their reader on how to do so in kind.

Re:Google Buzz's Skyrocketing Usage (1)

Useful Wheat (1488675) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145428)

From my buzz Inbox, and I quote:

Jeff - Buzz - Public - Muted
what the hell is this?

Sean - no one knows. its like google wave raped twitter. kinda like how blade was formed...

How many of those 9 million posts you referenced are complaining about buzz, asking how to turn it off, and asking why in gods name is there no button to kill it with fire? Seriously, I need a button to kill it with fire. I would never stop pressing it.

Re:Google Buzz's Skyrocketing Usage (1)

dylan_- (1661) | more than 4 years ago | (#31146690)

How many of those 9 million posts you referenced are complaining about buzz

Why the hell did you choose to try it out if you didn't want to try it out?

asking how to turn it off

Click "Turn off Buzz".

Re:Google Buzz's Skyrocketing Usage (2, Funny)

BrokenHalo (565198) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145036)

Every major blogger is using Buzz now...

You might as well say "Every major loser is using Buzz now". Most bloggers write drivel (hence this [dropline.net] ), and I fail to see the value in Google providing yet another means for cretins to prattle inanities into the void.

Re:Google Buzz's Skyrocketing Usage (3, Interesting)

WinterSolstice (223271) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145040)

I have to agree with this. I found buzz to be just about ideal - it's unobtrusive, simple. and more of a 'feed aggregator' than a twitter app.

One of my friends just uses it to share his twitter feed with those of us not using twitter. Another just uses it for occasional comments on his flickr photo stream. I use it just for the occasional IM type comment that I would want to send to 3 or 4 people (not things like "I'm watching the game", but things like "everyone who bet on x owes me money", or "did you see this news story").

Sure, it's kinda pointless. But it does a really good job of combining several disparate feeds of pointless into one simple console that I already have open anyway.

It's a win for me.

Re:Google Buzz's Skyrocketing Usage (1)

martas (1439879) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145196)

me too. i've been using it a lot as a pretty (albeit entirely useless, for me) icon on the side of gmail. it's a revolution, i tells ya!

Re:Google Buzz's Skyrocketing Usage (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145632)

Feed aggregator? just use yahoo pipes and create a custom one.

That's what I did, I simply filter my own facebook feed to give me friends feeds, as well as twitter and the like. works great and I have 100% control.

Re:Google Buzz's Skyrocketing Usage (1)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 4 years ago | (#31146536)

Yeah, Yahoo Pipes is nice indeed. I just wish it there was a more "programming" approach to it, instead of the GUI stuff.

Re:Google Buzz's Skyrocketing Usage (1)

WinterSolstice (223271) | more than 4 years ago | (#31146802)

Sure, but Yahoo is powered by Bing... and I'm not a big fan of Bing.

Yahoo was fine 10 years ago - now they're just a mess. Google may be the same in 10 years, I guess we'll see.

I wouldn't create a yahoo account just to create a aggregator by hand, nor would I create a gmail account for Buzz. But hey, if you have one or the other, might as well use it.

Re:Google Buzz's Skyrocketing Usage (2, Informative)

Korbeau (913903) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145098)

Google Buzz's Skyrocketing Usage

When the usage passed from 0 to 1, one might argue it got infinitely more popular!

Wow, Way To Make Yourself Look Stupid (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31145190)

Way to go dumbfuck. You are so stupid you didn't grasp you were replying to a post with hard numbers in it.

Re:Google Buzz's Skyrocketing Usage (0, Troll)

Dachannien (617929) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145434)

How does any of that refute the initial assertion, that most of the "buzz" about Buzz is the result of spammers?

Gmail is a notorious harbor for forum spam e-mail accounts (used to receive the "click this link to complete your registration" e-mails from forums), meaning the spammers already have countless registered accounts on Gmail. It would seem trivial to update the spambots to use those accounts for the purpose of spamming other folks on Buzz.

Re:Google Buzz's Skyrocketing Usage (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145604)

that's just everyone in Brazil.

Kinda like how Orcut turned into a non starter for social media.

Re:Google Buzz's Skyrocketing Usage (1)

cpscotti (1032676) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145830)

and 99% of that 9 million posts is:
"testing... testing",
"is this going to work?"
or
"hi all"

Re:Google Buzz's Skyrocketing Usage (5, Insightful)

afabbro (33948) | more than 4 years ago | (#31146036)

While it's still very early into Buzz's life cycle, initial indications show that Google has a hit on its hands.

My astroturfing meter is pegged.

Re:Google Buzz's Skyrocketing Usage (1)

Curmudgeonlyoldbloke (850482) | more than 4 years ago | (#31146880)

Rarely have I read such complete bollocks.

Example Link (1)

brownpau (639342) | more than 4 years ago | (#31144798)

I like how TFA is pretty much a fluff piece which doesn't even bother showing a single link to (or even screenshot) of said Google Buzz spam. It's not hard to find; like with Buzz searches for pharma-related terms: https://mail.google.com/mail/?shva=1#buzz/search/levitra [google.com]

Re:Example Link (1)

FictionPimp (712802) | more than 4 years ago | (#31144868)

I had some kid who is running for state office spam me. At first I though it was a legit comment, until the exact same comments (and reply comments) appeared on a dozen people I know's buzz accounts.

What exactly were you expecting? (5, Insightful)

FlyingBishop (1293238) | more than 4 years ago | (#31144842)

What makes Facebook so good is that it's all tied to people - even the fake accounts need to seem to be people.

When you enable social networking for everyone who thought they were signing up for a mailbox, you're naturally going to cause a mess. Social networking is about the walled garden, and the security it gives you in terms of who you're talking to.

The underlying problem is one of anonymity and the Internet, and finding a way to verify identity without a walled garden. If Google is looking at innovating, they need to find a compelling way to bridge the anonymity gap.

Re:What exactly were you expecting? (1)

CodeBuster (516420) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145378)

and the security it gives you in terms of who you're talking to.

Which is to say: none. Does anyone here believe that Facebook wouldn't sell data mined from your logged chats down the river if they thought that it would make them a buck? I also have no doubt that they would roll over immediately if certain three letter agencies demanded their user data; heck, they would probably roll over for a phony DMCA notice. Facebook doesn't care about privacy; their founder, Mark Zuckerberg, has said as much [guardian.co.uk] .

Re:What exactly were you expecting? (2, Interesting)

FlyingBishop (1293238) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145658)

I meant security about authentication. Email is probably more secure than Facebook in terms of knowing that your communication is private (even on Gmail, though only marginally so.) What Facebook means is that when you get a message from someone, you can be fairly sure it came from that person. At least as sure as you can possibly be without that person personally comparing the message you're looking at to the one they sent. Even if you're using public key authentication, there's still the potential for an attacker to get your private key, etc.

Facebook - you know who you're talking to.

Gmail - you do if you've talked to the person through some other medium. Trying to shoehorn it into the Facebook paradigm was a stupid idea.

Re:What exactly were you expecting? (1)

techno-vampire (666512) | more than 4 years ago | (#31146050)

Does anyone here believe that Facebook wouldn't sell data mined from your logged chats down the river if they thought that it would make them a buck?

If that bothers you, do what I do: don't participate. I've never been to Facebook, let alone registered. Never seen the point of it, really. And, I might add, I turned both Google Buzz and Chat off as quickly as possible because I find them pointless. Let them data mine all they want, AFAIC because there's nothing of mine there for them to sell.

Re:What exactly were you expecting? (2, Interesting)

IamTheRealMike (537420) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145772)

What makes Facebook so good is that it's all tied to people - even the fake accounts need to seem to be people.

Current prices for a facebook account on the spam markets are around $5 per 1000 friends. Creating fake accounts that seem to be people isn't that hard - just scrape pics of hot girls off MySpace, couple with a fake name generator and off you go (assuming you can get past Facebooks defences of course, but then GMail has defences too).

Indicator (1)

Aladrin (926209) | more than 4 years ago | (#31144892)

And if my inbox is an indicator, Spammers are the only ones -not- using it.

Seriously. 1 inbox as a measure of success?

Now, for seriousness... HOW are the spammers hitting it? The article doesn't say, and I've never seen it myself. With twitter, you can target a person just like you can with email... Does Buzz do that? Or is there some way to force things into a user's feed?

Re:Indicator (1)

Andy Dodd (701) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145816)

Same here, so far I haven't seen any spam. After all, you choose who you follow.

So far it just seems like another Twitter with a few extra bells and whistles (namely, the "Remember me" function ACTUALLY working, instead of consistently logging me out over and over again like Twitter does) to me.

Re:Indicator (4, Informative)

nschubach (922175) | more than 4 years ago | (#31146960)

No spam here... Compared to Facebook and those incessant applications everyone keeps using. I have quite literally turned off everything but allowing friends to post on my wall and I still get invites to make someone's farm bigger or stupid greeting card invites. I see no option to deny all applications forever, only individual ones as they are sent to me.

Has google lost touch with reality? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31145092)

Lately they seem to be the kid who does what the cool kids seem to be doing but can never get it right. Buzz was a dumb idea with an even worse implementation, and what exactly did Google really hope to gain with this one? If you are going to enter a market you damn well better have a good plan to actually do something other than slap your label on.

Astroturf (1)

Bakkster (1529253) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145216)

I can't wait for Buzz astroturfing. It's the perfect format for it, considering it is geo-tagged and then piggybacked onto one of the most popular online maps.

So, a store just needs to post lots of fake positive buzzes, like "Wow, I can't believe the great deal on shoes/hardware I just got at Macy's/Best Buy" centered around your store. Alternatively, you can pay real people (preferably me) to do the astroturfing for you.

Reporting in (1)

buckadude (926560) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145328)

No spam in my buzz box... also I would add that buzz imho is great.

(1) (1)

Lord Lode (1290856) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145366)

For me, if in my GMail, next to Inbox it says something like (1) or some other value (N), then to me that's an indicator: I have a mail or a TODO! Must process the mail to get back to 0 unread messages!

Now suddenly this Buzz thing appeared below Inbox, and it sometimes also gets a (1) next to it, and this for things that I'm currently not using (I'm waiting a bit until all the privacy things are settled and/or enough friends push me into using it before actually using it)!

So the Buzz gives my GMail the appearance of being "Busy" or requiring processing!

Luckily you can hide things from the list on the left, so that's what I did to Buzz as a current solution for this problem...

Buzz in your inbox? Kill it with fire! (1)

argent (18001) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145952)

It's worse.

I've been seeing Buzz showing up in Inbox, if I've replied to someone's comment and someone replies to THAT.

Re:Buzz in your inbox? Kill it with fire! (1)

nschubach (922175) | more than 4 years ago | (#31147026)

What's up with two posts from two supposedly different people in the same thread wanting to "kill it with fire?"

http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1550596&cid=31145428 [slashdot.org]

Re:Buzz in your inbox? Kill it with fire! (1)

argent (18001) | more than 4 years ago | (#31147322)

What's up with two posts from two supposedly different people in the same thread wanting to "kill it with fire?"

Results 1 - 10 of about 39,000,000 for "kill it with fire". (0.24 seconds)

Re:Buzz in your inbox? Kill it with fire! (1)

nschubach (922175) | more than 4 years ago | (#31147532)

I must really be getting old, because I don't see the point of stressing that you want to kill it "with fire" when you could say something much more concise. "Kill it with fire" sounds like something ripped straight from the bowels of an A.D.D. teen populated forum. The only thing that could make it more juvenile would be to change the spelling of the words and paste it in a picture of a cat with a stupid look on it's face.

*shakes fist and mumbles *

You're Doing it Wrong (1)

MBoffin (259181) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145618)

If you're Buzz box is full of spam, it means you you are following spammers. Either you suck at finding new people to follow, or your frequent contacts are spammers. Either way, "you're doing it wrong."

If you don't like what someone is posting in Buzz, don't follow them.

Re:You're Doing it Wrong (1)

Funnnny (1409625) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145768)

Just followed Mashable, and then my Buzz inbox full of Buzzes and comment.
Still need some ways to filter out or search friend ( the current search is wayyyy slow )

I'm just waiting for... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31145718)

FarmVille for Buzz... come one already! ;-)

I knew there was a reason not to use Gmail (4, Insightful)

Fnkmaster (89084) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145814)

For years now, it's been "Gmail is so great", "why don't you use Gmail?" I've been that curmudgeon who has these strange ideas about privacy and not entrusting too much data to one company.

I felt vindicated the other day when my wife freaked out upon seeing people she had emailed with on gmail sudden on her new friends list in the Google Buzz system that she never signed up for, along with the suggestion that she share photos with them and other private data about every action she takes on any system owned by Google.

On Facebook, at least you went into it *knowing* that everything you post there gets shared with every person you once spoke to in a grad school class who friended you randomly three years later. Google has insidiously roped you into using a bunch of disconnected services that were great and generally free and all the while, you've known that sure, they collect data they can use for advertising to you, but it's all so goddamned warm and fuzzy, what's there to worry about?

Suddenly, you find that Google Reader, Picasa, Gmail, etc. are all part of a social networking service you didn't intend to sign up for and Google is trying to push you into sharing everything you do with everybody you email with.

I consider this utterly, well, evil. Deceitful. Sketchy. This stuff needs to be totally opt-in.

I helped my wife turn off all the "sharing" features of Buzz. But could not find any way to completely opt-out of Buzz. There didn't seem to be a way, other than to cease using Gmail entirely. I consider that vile.

Re:I knew there was a reason not to use Gmail (4, Informative)

Nidi62 (1525137) | more than 4 years ago | (#31146014)

But could not find any way to completely opt-out of Buzz. There didn't seem to be a way, other than to cease using Gmail entirely. I consider that vile.

Go into full gmail, and scroll all the way to the bottom. Right above the line that has all the legal stuff is another line with things like "Gmail view" "turn off/on chat" "Turn off/on Buzz". Click on turn off buzz. It will then be removed from the list of links on the top left-hand side with Inbox, Drafts, and all that.

Re:I knew there was a reason not to use Gmail (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31146660)

Yes, but you still have your followers if you turn off the Buzz tab.

Re:I knew there was a reason not to use Gmail (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31147240)

When you click on "Turn off Buzz" it just removes the Buzz link from your gmail UI. That's it; it doesn't disable Buzz!

More details here [google.com] .

Re:I knew there was a reason not to use Gmail (1)

AnswerIs42 (622520) | more than 4 years ago | (#31147282)

Thank You! I looked at Buzz... it looks like twitter... I never use twitter. For what I do, facebook works fine and buzz is not needed.

Re:I knew there was a reason not to use Gmail (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31147374)

Thanks! Although I thought I declined when it bugged me the first time I logged into Gmail after the launch, Buzz was on anyway.

When I want to be social, I leave my basement.

Re:I knew there was a reason not to use Gmail (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31147640)

Click on turn off buzz. It will then be removed from the list of links on the top left-hand side with Inbox, Drafts, and all that.

Unfortunately, it seems that removing the link from the sidebar is in fact all it'll do. Here [cnet.com] 's how to really disable buzz for good, courtesy of CNet.

Re:I knew there was a reason not to use Gmail (1)

icebrain (944107) | more than 4 years ago | (#31146788)

I've been trying to find an alternative to gmail for just the reasons you've specified. Do you have any suggestions? I've thought about using my ISP but I don't know if I trust them much further than Google...

Re:I knew there was a reason not to use Gmail (2)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | more than 4 years ago | (#31147656)

You have to enable it and you can disable it. I fail to see how giving people more options is a bad thing

I see no spam on Buzz (1)

argent (18001) | more than 4 years ago | (#31145986)

But that may be because I'm only following people I actually know, and a few of the more lucid friends of theirs.

Who on earth are you following that are spamming you, and why are you following them?

Which Times? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31146012)

The Times is usually used to refer to The Times of London, not the New York Times. This is an international site, let's get it right people!

Google Apologies - Beta (1)

rickb928 (945187) | more than 4 years ago | (#31146126)

That's an app someone needs to write. In a hurry. Sure would save some time.

Suppose it will be in beta forever?

Ben Heck is a poseur (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31146226)

No real tech knowledge, nothing electronic done, just retail electronics jammed into a different 'box', and the end result is unusable. His usual. *yawn*

Anonymous (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31146588)

|On Facebook, at least you went into it *knowing* that everything you post there gets shared with every person you once spoke to in a grad school class who friended you randomly three years later.

Wow, when I joinned Buzz on day one, there was a windows saying "Make you're profile available to public" and you had to click Yes or No, if your wife clicked Yes without knowing what it was (like 80 % of all the internet users) then yes she didn't know (it's like riding on an highway that suddently change to a slow speed road, but you didn't see the sign, it was there but you didn't read it, and then the cop arrest you and you say "Mr Officer, I didnt see the speed limit")

Spam on Google Buzz (1)

tpstigers (1075021) | more than 4 years ago | (#31146790)

And Begg-Smith gets the gold!

How Google Failed (1)

chucklebutte (921447) | more than 4 years ago | (#31147284)

I love Google, but they fail at socail networking. Google profiles is sooooooooooooo fucking kick ass except one minor problem, I cant add any friends to it at all! Give us that, like all the other sites buzz is a twitter rip off and until we can add friends to our google profiles without them being gmail onry users then and only then will google succeed in socail networking.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?