×

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!

Facebook Blocks Google+ App, Google Removes Twitter From Real Time Search

samzenpus posted more than 2 years ago | from the punch-the-person-to-your-left dept.

Cloud 250

An anonymous reader writes "Facebook has blocked access to Friend Exporter, a Google Chrome application that helps users import their Facebook contacts into Google's new social network — Google Plus. " Meanwhile, reader dkd903 points out that Google has been busy removing Twitter from real time search, due to a contract expiry with Twitter."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

250 comments

Alas. (4, Funny)

Vegemeister (1259976) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660270)

Begun, the Corp War has.

How Microsoft of Them (5, Insightful)

causality (777677) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660390)

"Facebook has blocked access to Friend Exporter, a Google Chrome application that helps users import their Facebook contacts into Google's new social network — Google Plus. "

Clearly Facebook is afraid to compete on the merits of its services. Isn't that the message whenever any sort of vendorlock is implemented?

I never before took Google's social network very seriously. Now that Facebook is showing fear of them, and acting so childish about it, I'm willing to reconsider that. To anyone with some sense, Facebook is providing a more stunning endorsement of Google's services than Google itself could have ever created.

Re:How Microsoft of Them (2)

inasity_rules (1110095) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660442)

I second that. Also the clever marketing ploy where google plus tells me they've got no further capacity right now... Check back later....

Re:How Microsoft of Them (3, Insightful)

Bloodwine77 (913355) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660518)

If Google+ is to succeed, they need to stop with the invite-only nonsense. A social network is only as strong as its user-base, and Google+ remains questionable until it has enough people on it to make it worthwhile.

Re:How Microsoft of Them (2)

inasity_rules (1110095) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660576)

To be fair, they're "still testing." A bit like how gmail was in the early days...

Re:How Microsoft of Them (5, Interesting)

beuges (613130) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660660)

Except that you can test an email platform with a limited amount of users, because those users can still email others outside of your platform, due to the way email works.

I've had a google+ profile for almost a week, and I haven't bothered logging in after the first day, because none of my friends are on it and I can't invite them either. It's a social network that doesn't allow you to network with your social circle.

When I mentioned that I had a google+ account, at least a dozen of my friends asked me to invite them, and I couldn't. They'll probably lose interest waiting for an invite, just as I've lost interest waiting to have more friends to interact with.

How exactly am I supposed to help them test their platform if I can't use it?

Re:How Microsoft of Them (1)

mcvos (645701) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660736)

On the other hand, I love Google+, because a lot of friends are on it that never were on Facebook. And most of my favourite and more active Facebook contacts have also migrated already. So for me, it's a big win already.

Re:How Microsoft of Them (2)

AvitarX (172628) | more than 2 years ago | (#36661470)

That's how facebook took off too.

It started with less annoying people than myspace (being university only), then opened to the public, but the fact that social network whores were already invested in myspace slowed the pace of facebook becoming annoying.

What do I know though, I thought buzz was alright, and it's automatic stuff was painfully clear and explained to me.

Re:How Microsoft of Them (1)

bberens (965711) | more than 2 years ago | (#36661736)

Hopefully the "circle" concept will make it easier to make it so you don't have to hear social network spam from your friends with no lives. I don't have a g+ account, and I'm not particularly interested in signing up but it does seem like it could make some headway wrt what you're talking about.

Re:How Microsoft of Them (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36661016)

You can invite them! Make a circle of all your friends by their email address, and make a status update with that circle as the target. It will mention under that it will be emailing all your friends, make sure that is turned on.

Once you post that, they'll all get an email telling them about google+. google are leaving the signup door open for hours on and hours off each day, it seems, so tell them to keep trying - I do it in the status update. They click the links they get in their email and they, if Google have signups turned on, can then sign up to Google+.

You don't even have to make a circle, just paste their email addresses in to the target box and do a random status update aimed at them, they'll get the email eventually. I think it has to be a gmail account though possibly? Although you should test that.

I've invited over 60 of my friends now and I haven't had even one invite :P

Re:How Microsoft of Them (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36661106)

I've managed to add quite a lot of people by adding their e-mail addresses to a circle I called "invite", and posting something in this circle's stream. Most of them immediately got the e-mail and could join Google+.

But I see your point: before it goes public, there's not much value to it.

Re:How Microsoft of Them (1)

daedae (1089329) | more than 2 years ago | (#36661174)

That's what happened for me with Wave. Eventually I got my wife on it and we used it to plan some travel, but none of my other friends really used it. (Of course, the bigger problem with Wave was nobody really knew what to use it for, even once it opened and they had people to use it with.)

Plus has worked out much better for my social network, though: one of my friends got an invite and the majority of our network got added in the ~12 hour period that invites were open. One of our friends remarked that we're clearly not the norm and that while most of her computer science grad student friends had gotten full networks, all of her non-computer science friends on Plus basically only had her in their circles.

Re:How Microsoft of Them (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36661328)

This [ansonalex.com] is supposed to be how to invite to google+.

Here's the ZDNet article [zdnet.com] about using Yahoo as an exit.

Re:How Microsoft of Them (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36661602)

Not to mention, you /can/ invite people, it's just not straightforward and still limited. I invited about 20 people yesterday, by sharing a post with them. They could "Only view it by email" but within the same day, or worst, by the next day or so, they could all log in and create accounts at some point.

Re:How Microsoft of Them (2)

Nemyst (1383049) | more than 2 years ago | (#36661692)

I've invited my friends just fine. You just need to share something with them, at which point they'll get an email with info and a link to join Google+.

Re:How Microsoft of Them (2)

WelshRarebit (1595637) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660670)

Yup, if they had opened it up immediately and there were any bugs, these same folks would be here bitching and moaning that they should have tested it first.

Re:How Microsoft of Them (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36661700)

But they *should* have tested it first. Leaving your product testing to a random bunch of internet people is a terrible idea. How many are going to encounter an issue, figure out how to replicate it, then go file a bug report? None? It's no different than the idiots who downloaded the Windows 7 beta then, rather than report bugs to actually improve the product, sought help on third-party forums and bitched when something didn't work.

Re:How Microsoft of Them (4, Interesting)

segedunum (883035) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660590)

Facebook was effectively invite only for a while until anyone over 13 could join up and that only seemed to increase the excitement. You want to be a part of what you can't have.

If I was Facebook I would be worried. Zuckerberg merely came up with a few chance ideas that made social networks......social. Relationship status and all that. Apart from that it's merely a fairly clean looking, unspectacular PHP application. Facebook's lead as the premier social networking site is everything. If they have to start competing on technology then the future doesn't look bright.

Re:How Microsoft of Them (3, Interesting)

Zenaku (821866) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660868)

Facebook started out by being only available to students attending a few select schools, but I don't think that is "effectively invite only." The difference is that when one is a full-time student at a university, the vast majority of your friends and acquaintances are also students at that university. It wasn't open to the public, but for those it was open to, it was also open to a great many of the people they would want to interact with.

With Google+ the sample of people you could network with is essentially random. I would like to try it, but I haven't scored an invite, and even if I did -- I only know one other person who has been able to try it.

Re:How Microsoft of Them (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36660632)

Facebook started out with a limited pool also, you had to have an email address with .edu to be able to join. It was several years before they opened it up to the masses

Re:How Microsoft of Them (1)

Riceballsan (816702) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660968)

On the other hand maybe they want to make sure there aren't any kinks or drastic oversights that will cause mass poor publicity, like what happened with buzz.

Re:How Microsoft of Them (1)

DarkOx (621550) | more than 2 years ago | (#36661610)

I don't know about that. Facebook owes I think much of its early success to its at the time exclusivity. First it was just Harvard, then it was Harvard and some other top teir schools. People joined because it was people they already knew personally and trusted or people that had already been vetted by the administrations board of an institution they have some degree of trust in, who they would be encountering as other users of the service.

Then Facebook expanded to pretty much any College, which still restricted its users to a particular social economic group for the most part. They exploited the comfort level of that trust. Then after the users were path dependent of FB they violated that trust and through the doors open to all. I never would have created an account if FB had been like it is today when I signed up.

Re:How Microsoft of Them (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36661618)

Amen to that.

Although I'm not a user as yet, and as much as I want to like Google+ and see it succeed, I believe Google have already sewn the seeds of demise of their so-called "social" network.

This "invite only" shenanigans is neither social nor a network. All they're doing is giving just enough time for Facebook, Twitter et al to make improvements to their own services (based upon initial feedback from Google+) to make Google+ completely irrelevant.

Clearly, the Network Effect [wikipedia.org] is lost on Google.

Re:How Microsoft of Them (1)

bberens (965711) | more than 2 years ago | (#36661686)

Manufactured scarcity is one of the many marketing tactics used to increase demand. It's used in everything from cellphones and Nintendos to even Facebook, which started out as an "exclusive" service to members of certain colleges.

Re:How Microsoft of Them (1)

slyrat (1143997) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660824)

I second that. Also the clever marketing ploy where google plus tells me they've got no further capacity right now... Check back later....

The reason they are doing this is because of previous problems with letting everyone in at the beginning. They messed things up with Buzz when they did that. I think it is a good idea so that a lot of the kinks and small annoyances get worked out.

Re:How Microsoft of Them (1)

_Sprocket_ (42527) | more than 2 years ago | (#36661168)

The reason they are doing this is because of previous problems with letting everyone in at the beginning. They messed things up with Buzz when they did that. I think it is a good idea so that a lot of the kinks and small annoyances get worked out.

The problem with Buzz was that everyone was immediately integrated in to Buzz which exposed some aspects of one's other Google service accounts that wasn't otherwise previously available to others.

Re:How Microsoft of Them (1)

ByOhTek (1181381) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660644)

Agreed. I wonder if Google should pay facebook commission for this? Maybe a LOL email every 1k users?

Re:How Microsoft of Them (4, Insightful)

Xest (935314) | more than 2 years ago | (#36661024)

It all wouldn't be so bad if it weren't for the fact that Facebook built up it's userbase around taking information from things like MSN, your e-mail contacts and so forth.

Worse, I've had a Facebook recommendation from Facebook for someone I've only ever spoken to via MSN and have no real life friend connections, and both of us are tech savvy such that neither of us let Facebook import friends from Outlook, MSN etc. and we both live at opposite ends of the country and have never met IRL so I'm still to this day a little perplexed as to how the hell Facebook made that link. It kind of implies that Facebook has had access to MSN data even when explicit permission wasn't given.

In this respect it's sheer hypocrisy, I mean what the hell is wrong with them? It's fine for them to build their business off the back of others, but not for someone else to do the same with them?

Re:How Microsoft of Them (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36661436)

you provided them with your email address and they've most likely used that

Wrong party (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36660296)

They should rather block access from CIA and other departments.

And the consumer is in the middle. (2)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660316)

Facebook is really annoying because my friends are well my friends. My pictures and so on.
Twitter is and Google I hope will fix this. Twitter is just an odd thing. How do they make money without destroying Twitter? Also I am shocked how few people use Twitter and yet at the same time how important it has become.

Re:And the consumer is in the middle. (4, Funny)

Missing.Matter (1845576) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660402)

Didn't you read the TOS? Your friends are now Facebook's friends. Your pictures and memories.... all belong to Facebook. I believe there was something about your soul in there as well...

Re:And the consumer is in the middle. (2)

Bieeanda (961632) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660432)

Nah. They made a play for people's souls, but millions Liked the 'plz dont take my soul FB' group page and they backed off. Everyone expects them to try it again sometime soon, though.

Re:And the consumer is in the middle. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36661012)

That's exactly what google+ tries to do.

Re:And the consumer is in the middle. (2, Insightful)

Lazy Jones (8403) | more than 2 years ago | (#36661238)

Twitter is and Google I hope will fix this.

Last time I checked, Google was a big corporation determined to increase its revenue by all possible means, just like Facebook. If they have turned into a charity recently, I must have missed it.

Die Zuckerberg! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36660376)

u POS, can't believe people bestow so much attention and laurels to a clusterf#$@ like Facebook.

How many forms does Twitter have? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36660400)

And which one was removed?

People are Facebook's product, not their customers (5, Insightful)

Bloodwine77 (913355) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660408)

If there was any doubt as to how Facebook thinks of its users, this should drive home the fact that people are Facebook's product. It is only free if you don't value your information.

Derp (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36660444)

Hurr People are the product, Durr, not the customers.

being a /.'er... (1)

Thud457 (234763) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660616)

I sure am glad I don't have any friends so I don't get sucked into any of these corporate loyalty scams and have my identity stolen.

Re:People are Facebook's product, not their custom (3, Insightful)

thePowerOfGrayskull (905905) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660562)

Fortunately for Facebook, ~500 million people don't value their information.

Re:People are Facebook's product, not their custom (1)

Abstrackt (609015) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660722)

I'd like to believe a reasonable percentage of those people use fake or unhelpful-to-Facebook information. For example, my political views are listed as "yes" and my religion is listed as "Pastafarian".

Re:People are Facebook's product, not their custom (4, Insightful)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660746)

That might not matter quite as much as you think. Do you only have nonsense conversations with your contacts on Facebook? Do people only post nonsense messages on your "wall?" Do you only click on random links? Facebook collects a lot more information than what you overtly give them.

Re:People are Facebook's product, not their custom (1)

zlogic (892404) | more than 2 years ago | (#36661548)

Don't forget that the facebook "like" buttons are collecting data on which sites you're visiting.

Re:People are Facebook's product, not their custom (2)

TRACK-YOUR-POSITION (553878) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660882)

I'm not sure what Facebook considers helpful, but from a statistical perspective a semi-unique joke-response probably reveals more than an ubiquitous sincere response. Take two people who list Christian on their profile, and take two people who list Pastafarian (you aren't the only one). I suspect that the latter pair has more in common than the former pair.

Re:People are Facebook's product, not their custom (2)

sakdoctor (1087155) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660568)

Why does this SHITE always get posted?
For a dating site, would you say the women are the product, and the men are the customers?
No, they are both customers, just not equal due to the pricing structure.

Facebook is structured like any agency, with two products, facing two different sets of customers.

Re:People are Facebook's product, not their custom (1)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660668)

For a dating site, would you say the women are the product, and the men are the customers?

No, but for a cattle farm I would say that cows are the product. The farmers feed and generally take care of the herd, but nobody would claim that there is some kind of "tit for tat" relationship.

Re:People are Facebook's product, not their custom (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660822)

Can you name a similar species that is anywhere near as prolific?

Re:People are Facebook's product, not their custom (2)

Abstrackt (609015) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660770)

For a dating site, would you say the women are the product, and the men are the customers?
No, they are both customers, just not equal due to the pricing structure.

You picked a bad analogy; you're both a product and a customer on a dating site. You (customer) browse the selection of men/women (product) available and they (customer) do the same to you (product).

Whatever. (0)

sakdoctor (1087155) | more than 2 years ago | (#36661584)

OPs karma whoring, ad nauseum statement is no more insightful this time, than the last thousand times it's been posted.

Services are products. Facebook provides a social networking service to it's users (customers), at a zero price point. It also provides advertising space to advertisers (customers).

You don't need OPs warped definition to explain away why facebook treats its users so badly. Facebook is simply run by assholes.

Thank you Facebook (4, Insightful)

JanneM (7445) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660410)

You just gave me another reason to go with Google+ and ignoring you.

Re:Thank you Facebook (3, Insightful)

arth1 (260657) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660614)

You just gave me another reason to go with Google+ and ignoring you.

I see a reason to avoid both empires.
Yes, despite common belief, you can have an active online life without Facebook and Google.

(I switched my search provider from Google last week. After the latest "improvements", almost all search results I get are from Chinese wholesale companies and Indian ad-sponsored keyword re-bloggers, of which there appears to be millions. I.e. Google has become far less useful.)

Re:Thank you Facebook (1)

Kamiza Ikioi (893310) | more than 2 years ago | (#36661680)

Don't add your reason to the giant pile of reasons to leave Facebook which is so high it's blocking the sun in parts of South America. Reduce, Reuse, Refriend.

So (5, Insightful)

hjf (703092) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660452)

When does the antitrust trial begin? It's like Microsoft all over again. Facebook abuses its dominant position on the internet (facebook forms in almost every "web 2.0" website, just like IE was "so tightly integrated in windows that it couldn't be removed"). And now they're also trying to destroy competition by blocking them.

In comparison, with IE you can at least download another browser. Facebook won't help you in your transition (or let you delete your stuff from their servers).

Come on, guys... you hated MS for much less than this.

Re:So (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36660642)

> Come on, guys... you hated MS for much less than this.

Who are you addressing? What's the point of this statement? Do we all love Facebook and all hate Microsoft?

Re:So (1)

hjf (703092) | more than 2 years ago | (#36661624)

Yes. This is Slashdot. Their motto is: HATE Microsoft, support Linux, use Apple. And deny that Google and Facebook are sleeping with the government. Because Facebook helps antisocial nerds, and Google swears they "do no evil".

Re:So (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36660692)

I use Firefox and Chrome, yet I cannot uninstall IE from the machine. That's product tying. It's a waste of disk space, and worse, it means that even though I have installed a more secure browser, some stupid program is going to be able to load up IE anyway, and get hit by all the security holes in it. To avoid that, I have to waste my internet connection downloading updates for a browser I don't want in the first place.

I don't use Facebook. Somehow, simply by not using Facebook, I have been able to avoid having my profile created there, and avoid entering my personal information.

So, what have Facebook ever done to me? Absolutely nothing. Yet, you claim we "hated MS for much less than this". How much exactly is "much less than" absolutely nothing?

Re:So (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36660838)

Antitrust for what? Facebook has no legal obligation to let Google access the information on their own site. Are you an idiot?

Re:So (1)

Alrescha (50745) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660944)

"Come on, guys... you hated MS for much less than this."

Your historical information is incomplete. The integration of IE into Windows was the least of Microsofts abuses.

A.

Re:So (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36661116)

Not really... Microsoft also stole your data, forcing you to use proprietary formats.

ha ha, 'friends' (2)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660496)

"Being friends" through these sites is sort of like 'having sex' with blow up dolls, but worse, because you actually own the dolls and can do whatever.

On the other hand nobody who uses these sites pays them anythings, so maybe it's not like 'having sex' with blow up dolls.

Or maybe it is, I am not sure anymore. How many libraries of congress can fit in one's 'friends list' on a site like that exactly?

Re:ha ha, 'friends' (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36660580)

I'm friends with your mom. I guess that's like having sex with a blow-up doll version of your mom except I don't own your mom. ;-)

Re:ha ha, 'friends' (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36661112)

On the other hand nobody who uses these sites pays them anythings

I think this is where everybody is wrong about Facebook. FB sells ads. Ads work (they make you buy things you would not have buyed otherwise). When buying that stuff you pay the ads that made you buy this. So you can't say Facebook is free.

(If you have a convincing argument that ads don't work, please say it now. And a multi-billion industry will fall down in pieces.)

Niggatastic! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36660510)

It's like a nigga, who's in the hole,
It's like a nigga, he's on the dole!

It's like a nigga, he's fantastic,
It's like a nigga, he's niggatastic!

Curious (4, Informative)

benjfowler (239527) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660572)

Facebook count on the social network being 'sticky' enough to retain their users and make it hard to move. Obviously, with competitors which don't suck, they need to play dirty.

I was keen to see if their backup feature exported email addresses. Sure enough, it doesn't. So there goes my idea of writing a script to extract my contacts out of Facebook backups suitable for import into Google+.

About the only way this state of affairs will change, is if the bad publicity gets bad enough for Facebook to be shamed into doing the right thing.

Smart move by Facebook -- pissing off their hardcore techie users. Very classy.

Re:Curious (1)

preaction (1526109) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660776)

The hardcore techy users are not their base. Their base are the millions of 13-23 year olds whose social lives are completely run via Facebook. The loss of your occasional status update is not going to impact them very much.

Re:Curious (1)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660846)

Smart move by Facebook -- pissing off their hardcore techie users.

So an irrelevant minority that they will never miss?

Re:Curious (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36661182)

You mean the irrelevant minority that drove Firefox to, what, 40%+ adoption rate?
Seriously, non-techies can often be heavily influenced by what their techie friends tell them, since they realize they don't know computers and techies do. Hence, techies can have a disproportionate influence on adoption.

Re:Curious (1)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 2 years ago | (#36661534)

You mean the irrelevant minority that drove Firefox to, what, 40%+ adoption rate?

Yes, I do. Just because some group may have (and your assertion is highly questionable due to the high usage of Netscape among non-techies before Firefox even came out) helped push the adoption of one piece of software in no way hold any sway over the adoption of some other product or service.

Seriously, non-techies can often be heavily influenced by what their techie friends tell them, since they realize they don't know computers and techies do. Hence, techies can have a disproportionate influence on adoption.

Great, now prove that the huge userbase of Facebook had anything at all to do with hardcore techies.

Re:Curious (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36661202)

Smart move by Facebook -- pissing off their hardcore techie users. Very classy.

I was under the impression that FB's success lied in attacting users which are not "harcore techies".

In fact, everyone I know who refuse to use facebook are "techies" of some kind (except for a few old people who don't use computers at all). I guess, to be concerned about putting your whole social life in someone else's database, you need to understand what a database is and what it could be used for.

Removed from "real time" search (1)

countertrolling (1585477) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660646)

This kinda proves that Google is not really a "search engine" per se, as if we needed any verification of that.. I guess we all have to send out our own crawlers to actually find anything outside the advertising realm. It's not that I mind seeing Twitter or similar removed, but I always wonder about the truly valuable stuff that's not being indexed because there's no ad link or contract involved.

Are there any useful alternatives?

Re:Removed from "real time" search (3, Informative)

Lazy Jones (8403) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660686)

Are there any useful alternatives?

Not at this time I suppose, but I wish projects like YaCy [wikipedia.org] would make some progress / gain more attention.

Fortunately redirecting through Yahoo still works. (5, Informative)

morgosmaci (1277138) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660728)

Just sign into yahoo using your facebook account and it will even create a throw away yahoo acount for you and import all of your facebook friends as contacts. Then just export those contacts into a vcf and import them into a contact group in gmail. (Or import them directly into G+).

Re:Fortunately redirecting through Yahoo still wor (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36660936)

Grabbing my contacts that way now. Thanks!

Turnaround is fair play (1, Informative)

Alan Shutko (5101) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660740)

Last year, Google blocked Facebook from accessing gmail contacts. This is just tit for tat.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704353504575596913266928110.html [wsj.com]

Re:Turnaround is fair play (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36660950)

Google blocking them was their turnaround for Facebook not allowing its contacts to be exported.

Re:Turnaround is fair play (1)

imbaczek (690596) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660952)

that's only because facebook never allowed google their contacts in the first place.

Re:Turnaround is fair play (4, Informative)

makomk (752139) | more than 2 years ago | (#36660998)

They blocked Facebook from accessing GMail contacts directly because Facebook wouldn't allow them to import Facebook contacts directly. You can still download your entire GMail contacts list yourself in a multitude of formats and do whatever you like with them, including importing them into Facebook if you really want to, whereas this news article is about Facebook blocking their own users from doing the same kind of mass-export.

Title is very misleading (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36660742)

How did "Facebook Friend Exporter wasn’t designed with Google+ in mind" (original article)

Become

"Facebook Blocks Google+ App, Google Removes Twitter From Real Time Search" (This article)

WTF!

Is SD the News of the World now?

well... (1)

Tei (520358) | more than 2 years ago | (#36661150)

I hope the existence of this closed gardens are a temporal phenomenom on the internet. We will learn as much as possible about how people want to interact on the internet (because everything is possible), then we could implement that as a open protocol, so it avoid all the problem of closed gardens.

Anyway, seems to me that is not the time for open protocols, not yet.

Google+ (1)

Snarky Jones (2317960) | more than 2 years ago | (#36661218)

I am seriously hearting google more and more these days. They make it so where I mind less and less about being trapped on the grid.

But but but (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36661550)

If you go into Account-> Account Settings, there's an option there to download all your data. Does that include contacts and such which could then be imported into Google+ ?

(I don't actually know, I'm trying it now, apparently it'll take a while to get my information together into a download, I'll receive an email when it's ready)

Useful? (1)

vlm (69642) | more than 2 years ago | (#36661572)

reader dkd903 points out that Google has been busy removing Twitter from real time search, due to a contract expiry with Twitter.

Has anyone out there in /. land ever google'd for something and found the answer in a twitter post? Has anyone on /. ever seen a twitter post containing something that could theoretically be something someone would search for?

I imagine its about as common as searching for airline tickets and finding a UFO.

Why use Google+? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36661740)

I have a very busy Facebook page, even with only under a hundred friends. Many are techies. But as far as I know, a grand total of zero of them (including me) dislike it even remotely enough to even look at a competitors app. Its free, its works on both the computer and on mobile phones and its so easy to use my mom can do it.

So why again would I even look at Google+?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

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>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...