Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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!

Feedly Forces Its Users To Create Google+ Profiles

timothy posted about 8 months ago | from the rapids-pulling-you-downstream dept.

Google 251

somegeekynick writes "Feedly users, a lot of whom migrated from the now-defunct Google Reader, are now finding out that they will not be able to login to the service without a Google+ Profile. In a blog post from Edwin Khodabakchian, which was posted almost at the same time the change rolled out, the reason for the change is stated as following Google's own move from using OAuth to Google+ for authentication. What has riled up a lot of users, as can be read in the comments, is that this change has come without warning and a lot of feeds are now being 'held hostage' by Feedly, especially for users who are reluctant to create Google+ Profiles."

cancel ×

251 comments

What the fuck is a "Feedly"? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45373847)

Yes, I know, I can look it up on my own, but can somebody tell me what the fuck a "Feedly" actually is? The summary should do that, but of course it doesn't.

rs (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45373865)

The main Google Reader replacement.

Re:rs (4, Informative)

ericdano (113424) | about 8 months ago | (#45374715)

The main, crappy replacement. The real replacement is Newsblur.

Re:rs (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45374983)

Hey... http://www.dailyrotation.com/ [dailyrotation.com] is still out there....

Re:What the fuck is a "Feedly"? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45373871)

Feedly is the service that pumps gallons of semen into your mom's anus.

Re:What the fuck is a "Feedly"? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45373943)

I laughed.

Re:What the fuck is a "Feedly"? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45374277)

Oh jesus me too. Sometimes these types of comments are just so perfectly timed and pithy that you can't help but laugh, even though it's so old and predictable by now.

Re:What the fuck is a "Feedly"? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45374071)

You can pump gallons of semen into my anus.

Re:What the fuck is a "Feedly"? (-1, Redundant)

zidium (2550286) | about 8 months ago | (#45374827)

HAHAHA!!! If only I had mod points! This doesn't deserve -1!! +5 Funny!

Re:What the fuck is a "Feedly"? (5, Informative)

penix1 (722987) | about 8 months ago | (#45373889)

More importantly, this is a non-news story since they have since rolled back those changes.

Re:What the fuck is a "Feedly"? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45374041)

Death by a thousand cuts. They'll do it again. This is all part of an apparently huge push to force g+ on people.

Gmail recently started requiring access to plus.google.com in order to login. Some of us block access to social networks.You must now regularly few (sometimes more than once a week) a g+ nag screen.

I am migrating my dozen+ accounts from gmail. Thanks for the push, google!

Re:What the fuck is a "Feedly"? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45374119)

Death by a thousand cuts. They'll do it again. This is all part of an apparently huge push to force g+ on people.

Yes and so many of them are docile little consumers who bend over and spread their cheeks, so it will work. It's sad and unjust that thinking people are often burdened by what the majority deserves, but it's abundantly possible to never end up in that situation to begin with.

I am migrating my dozen+ accounts from gmail. Thanks for the push, google!

The attempts to track my web use without even asking if I consent made me stay away from all Google services years ago. I recommend you adopt the same zero-tolerance policy towards corporations that do things disrespectful of you as a human being. I use Startpage [startpage.com] to get Google search results and I have never, ever, not once used any other online service Google provides. The tracking methods aren't difficult to defeat either, not with a few browser addons.

I have never seen any Facebook page either, nor any Myspace page before that. I imagine the crackhead thinks the idea of life without crack is absurd, an unrealistic pipe dream. Meanwhile those who had sense enough not to ever use crack consider life without it their normal everyday existence. Shady corporations are like this. Don't ever get involved with them for any reason and you'll find that you never miss them nor anything they offer. Or whine about their business practices while making a bunch of excuses for why you'll sell your soul for a little convenience. It's your choice, after all.

Re:What the fuck is a "Feedly"? (1)

dcollins (135727) | about 8 months ago | (#45374375)

" I imagine the crackhead thinks the idea of life without crack is absurd, an unrealistic pipe dream."

Or an unrealistic pipeless dream, as the case may be.

Re:What the fuck is a "Feedly"? (1)

zidium (2550286) | about 8 months ago | (#45374887)

Just use PolarisMail like me. 25 GB of space for $25 a year. It's the best deal I've found on the Internet, and George (the owner) is a top-notch developer and very helpful, too.

https://www.polarismail.com/Enhanced-E-mail-hosting-service/ [polarismail.com]

Re:What the fuck is a "Feedly"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45374163)

"I am migrating my dozen+ accounts from gmail. Thanks for the push, google!"

Me too mate. When I started seeing Google+ crap trump my YouTube subscriptions, that was my final straw. Migrating all my stuff off of Google.

Roll your own authentication guys (4, Insightful)

wiredlogic (135348) | about 8 months ago | (#45373879)

We also understand that some people would prefer to have more identity choices. So we have been testing twitter, facebook and wordpress login options. We will be rolling them out over the next 7 weeks.

Apparently they are too busy looking for other ways to force you to have 3rd party accounts to realize the obvious solution and roll their own authentication system.

NEVER roll your own authentication. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45374027)

Software developer should NEVER try to roll their own authentication, just like they shouldn't try to roll their own encryption.

Security is the domain of PROFESSIONALS and EXPERTS only. Your average softdev should NEVER EVER EVER try to roll their own authentication.

It's better to use existing software written by PROFESSIONALS and EXPERTS. Like OpenSSH. That's what everybody should use for authentication.

Re:NEVER roll your own authentication. (4, Insightful)

Jody Bruchon (3404363) | about 8 months ago | (#45374057)

Were you going for a "funny" tag with this? Are you a software developer? You know that OpenSSH isn't a program for website user authentication, right?

Re:NEVER roll your own authentication. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45374223)

Were you going for a "funny" tag with this? Are you a software developer? You know that OpenSSH isn't a program for website user authentication, right?

You know that a web server is a computer with a TCP/IP stack that can be used for multiple purposes, right?

Re:NEVER roll your own authentication. (4, Informative)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | about 8 months ago | (#45374157)

Software developer should NEVER try to roll their own authentication, just like they shouldn't try to roll their own encryption.

Security is the domain of PROFESSIONALS and EXPERTS only. Your average softdev should NEVER EVER EVER try to roll their own authentication.

It's better to use existing software written by PROFESSIONALS and EXPERTS. Like OpenSSH. That's what everybody should use for authentication.

Wow. How wrong could this be? Let me count the ways...

Nah. I have better things to do. I'll just say that a "real" developer uses tools developed by others to "roll their own" authentication. Nobody said you should to invent your own hashing algorithm or anything. Just follow recommended practices, use a known-to-be decent hash method, and be sure to salt.

It ain't rocket science.

Re:NEVER roll your own authentication. (4, Insightful)

Salgat (1098063) | about 8 months ago | (#45374689)

I simply don't trust myself to make a 100% secure server, as most should not be and are not qualified to do so. Why go through all the trouble and risk when a free alternate solution already exists?

Answers.com isn't getting any answers from me (3, Insightful)

tepples (727027) | about 8 months ago | (#45374711)

Because some of the users that you want to serve disagree with the policies of one of the major authentication providers. For example, Answers.com isn't getting any answers from me because I have no Facebook account. (I graduated and lost my .edu mail before Facebook existed.)

Re:NEVER roll your own authentication. (1)

pla (258480) | about 8 months ago | (#45374961)

I simply don't trust myself to make a 100% secure server

Funny, neither do I - So why would I use your code (for some non-literal value of "you") instead of my own? :)

Only half kidding here. Yes, I understand why we should generally avoid rolling our own unless necessary. But don't assume that just because someone else has written it already - Possibly someone far, far less experienced and less knowledgeable about security best practices - That you'll end up with a better result with something off the shelf than DIY.


Why go through all the trouble and risk when a free alternate solution already exists?

Well, because as the entire point of TFA, the "free alternate solution" that already exists requires signing up for a service that quite a few of us actively do not want.

In the case of using Google or Facebook or Twitter or the like to handle your auth, you can probably ignore my concern from above about quality. But then we get into concerns about deliberate weaknesses for the purpose of collecting data about us for their marketing departments.

Re:Roll your own authentication guys (1)

istartedi (132515) | about 8 months ago | (#45374551)

Programming is hard. Let's go shopping. [codinghorror.com]

There are two sides to this of course. Reinventing the wheel is bad. Outsourcing rifle production to your enemies is bad. There are a lot of things in between those two extremes.

Pump up the numbers (3, Insightful)

Desler (1608317) | about 8 months ago | (#45373883)

Well thats one way to keep pumping up the Google+ numbers with more inactive accounts.

Re:Pump up the numbers (4, Interesting)

icebike (68054) | about 8 months ago | (#45374481)

Well, first, you missed the bit about it being retracted.

But besides that, Feedly has nothing to gain by pumping up Google+. (Unless there is some money changing hands under the table).

Google is out of the feed reader business, so all you really need is an account at Feedly. They would like to pawn off the
authentication server stuff onto someone else. But they are just serving up news feeds. There is really no reason to
have any account details at all on hand, and they could just hand out random numbers for accounts.

The problem here is that Feedly is finding it just as hard to monetize RSS as Google did, because, quite frankly, RSS was never
intended to be monetized. It was intended to bring you to feeder's web site.

But once you have things like Feedly and before that Google Reader scraping the full stories linked to the feeds, it becomes unprofitable
for feedly, and unprofitable for the Feed sites, because nobody visits the sites anymore.

I read a couple dozen feeds. On some feeds I never visit the site. On others, I have my reader (not feedly) set up to automatically go to
the site, scrape the page via Google Mobilizer and show me just the text. No pictures, adds or any of that.
The upside, those things aren't fetched from the site, saving them bandwidth. The downside, the site makes no money from me.

 

Re:Pump up the numbers (1)

Nerdfest (867930) | about 8 months ago | (#45375071)

I would think targeted ads would be a nice juicy way to monetize it. You not only know what topics a person is interested in, but even what specific articles. I can't think of a better way to determine a users interests. It still amazes me that Google dropped it,

Not a Story (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45373903)

From TFA:

[Update 2: The change has been rolled back: you can now go to http://cloud.feedly.com and login using the old Google Authentication mechanism. The main lesson we learned here is that user should control how they want to login to login to their feedly. We will make sure not to forget this. Have a good week end].

Nothing to see here. Move along.

Re:Not a Story (3, Insightful)

rudy_wayne (414635) | about 8 months ago | (#45374155)

From TFA:

[Update 2: The change has been rolled back: you can now go to http://cloud.feedly.com/ [feedly.com] and login using the old Google Authentication mechanism. The main lesson we learned here is that user should control how they want to login to login to their feedly. We will make sure not to forget this. Have a good week end].

Nothing to see here. Move along.

Until they try to figure out another way to force this on people.

Google's ultimate goal is simple. You can't just use only Gmail or only Youtube or whatever. If you want to use one service, you have to use them all.

Re: Not a Story (1)

modmans2ndcoming (929661) | about 8 months ago | (#45374411)

Frankly the YouTube move is nothing but good for content producers who actually want to make money and be taken seriously... Let alone build a functioning community for their product.

Re:Not a Story (1)

Nerdfest (867930) | about 8 months ago | (#45375079)

You can still use each service under a different account, although it would be a pain in the ass. Having the stuff integrated is actually convenient for many people.

Can anyone explain these "-ly" names? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45373913)

Maybe it's because I'm not a hipster, but I just don't understand all of these companies with names that take some word and stick 'ly' at the end.

What is it even supposed to mean? What is 'Feedly' supposed to mean?

Re:Can anyone explain these "-ly" names? (2)

Mitreya (579078) | about 8 months ago | (#45373961)

I just don't understand all of these companies with names that take some word and stick 'ly' at the end.

It's simple -- they are the companion websites to all those "-ster" websites everywhere.
I wonder what Feedster is doing!

WHOIS feedster.com
Registration Service Provider: Dotster.com, support@dotster-inc.com

Re:Can anyone explain these "-ly" names? (1)

WWJohnBrowningDo (2792397) | about 8 months ago | (#45374159)

Damn plebes jumping on the bandwagon.

I was into hipster.com way before this "-ster" trend.

Re: Can anyone explain these "-ly" names? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45374143)

It comes from start ups wanting a cheap domain name and getting one like:

feed.ly

Which is the Libyan suffix. Obviously feed.com is taken and/or is outrageously expensive.

All your accounts are belong to us. (4, Insightful)

TheDarkener (198348) | about 8 months ago | (#45373927)

I'm f***ing sick of Google and their integration of Google+ into Youtube (and obviously their other, and 3rd party services). I don't like Google+. I like Youtube (less and less these days, however). I don't use GMail, or any other Google service (besides search when DuckDuckGo doesn't find me what I want). It's like they're trying to force-feed us their horrible social network via proxy (no pun intended). NO I DO NOT WANT TO POST MY YOUTUBE COMMENTS ON MY DESOLATE GOOGLE+ ACCOUNT. Just keep them separate, they were never meant to be tied together.

OK, we'll ask you again later. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45374113)

No, please DO NOT ask again me later

Re:OK, we'll ask you again later. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45374519)

No, please DO NOT ask again me later

OK, would you prefer to open that old dried up piece of leather you used to have to crack open every month to pay for these services?

No?

Shocking. Real shocking. And yet you continue to bitch, piss, moan, and complain.

Re:All your accounts are belong to us. (3, Interesting)

Joining Yet Again (2992179) | about 8 months ago | (#45374219)

If geeks had 1% of the organisational skill of a bunch of illiterate factory workers at the beginning of the 20th century, stuff like this - and almost all of our First World problems - would be trivial to deal with.

For this one, my suggestion would be for everyone nagged to create a G+ page to fill their page with dildos and friend only Google executives. Use competitor Facebook to spread the word. Once a few million people have done this, G+ becomes a joke.

Re:All your accounts are belong to us. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45374457)

"Becomes" a joke? Do you mean it stopped?..

Re:All your accounts are belong to us. (1)

Joining Yet Again (2992179) | about 8 months ago | (#45374487)

G+ has always seemed too irrelevant to elicit any feelings at all in me.

Now they've gone full Microsoft with their force feeding, I actually spent 15 minutes trying to get to grips with G+.

Just.

Awful.

It almost makes me appreciate the Facebook UI team.

Re:All your accounts are belong to us. (1)

hibiki_r (649814) | about 8 months ago | (#45374857)

That only works if you actually like their competitor. If you don't, then you see that Google is mostly copying their competitor, who has been promoting using their system for 3rd party forums for quite a while now. Many places have stopped taking comments without a Facebook account.

Why do you think Facebook, well known for shitting on people's privacy settings, is any better than Google?

Re:All your accounts are belong to us. (1)

Technician (215283) | about 8 months ago | (#45374293)

It helps to provide real examples of why a single sign on is not wanted.

For me, I don't want the NSA using my compromised info to log into any of my other accounts. A break one breaks all policy is an Identity Theif's goldmine. Google +, Facebook, Bank of America, Bank of Nova Scotia, E-Trade, Ebay, Amazon..... There is a reason not all my eggs are in one basket.

Re:All your accounts are belong to us. (4, Informative)

norite (552330) | about 8 months ago | (#45374317)

Try this:

https://www.startpage.com/ [startpage.com]

It uses google, but even google don't know who you are when you go through these guys :)

Re:All your accounts are belong to us. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45374327)

NO I DO NOT WANT TO POST MY YOUTUBE COMMENTS ON MY DESOLATE GOOGLE+ ACCOUNT

Why not?

Seriously, why not? If you don't use the account, if no one has you circled, why do you care that your comments show up in two places, one of which no one looks at, instead of one?

In any case, you can always just uncheck the "share on Google+" checkbox.

Seriously, some people get so worked up over nothing.

Re:All your accounts are belong to us. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45374435)

Google+ is the account system for Google. If you don't want an Google account, don't sign up for one. If you do want a Google account, don't complain that you have one.

Google accounts predate Google+ profiles (2)

tepples (727027) | about 8 months ago | (#45374751)

Google+ is the account system for Google.

Google accounts were around years before Google+ profiles. Even if someone has a Google account, that doesn't mean he wants to create a public Google+ profile with his legal name.

Re:All your accounts are belong to us. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45374505)

I'm f***ing sick of Google and their integration of Google+ into Youtube (and obviously their other, and 3rd party services). I don't like Google+. I like Youtube (less and less these days, however). I don't use GMail, or any other Google service (besides search when DuckDuckGo doesn't find me what I want). It's like they're trying to force-feed us their horrible social network via proxy (no pun intended). NO I DO NOT WANT TO POST MY YOUTUBE COMMENTS ON MY DESOLATE GOOGLE+ ACCOUNT. Just keep them separate, they were never meant to be tied together.

I must confess that it does have a certain creepy feel to it, in a Lord of the Rings sort of a way ("One ring to rule them all and in the darkness bind them") Yeesh!

Re:All your accounts are belong to us. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45374549)

Yesterday I deleted my 2 YouTube accounts, including all my videos there.
Even though I've always been a YouTube fan.
I was just sick of their Google+ bullshit.

Re:All your accounts are belong to us. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45374693)

wtf, man. if you're smart enough to not use google as a primary search tool, why give in if ddg doesn't deliver? use startpage.com (google results) or ixquick.com (bing and yahoo, iirc) instead.

Re:All your accounts are belong to us. (1)

Somebody Is Using My (985418) | about 8 months ago | (#45374731)

I saw this video earlier today. It seems strangely appropriate.

Dear Google... [youtube.com]

I have to say, I sort of agree. I barely use Google services so it doesn't effect me too much but they do seem to be pushing their Google+ product pretty heavily, and even I find it a bit annoying. I don't know if it's really popular or not (I have no interest in it); I just wish they wouldn't try to shove it in my face so much.

And btw Google, Ablehard Franklestein Snortheimer III /is/ my real name; who are you to say it isn't?

Re:All your accounts are belong to us. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45374807)

It's been great fun watching Google piss off everyone these past two days!

I'm glad I gave up all things Google a couple years ago.

Re:All your accounts are belong to us. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45374861)

I'm f***ing sick of Google and their integration of Google+ into Youtube (and obviously their other, and 3rd party services). I don't like Google+. I like Youtube (less and less these days, however). I don't use GMail, or any other Google service (besides search when DuckDuckGo doesn't find me what I want). It's like they're trying to force-feed us their horrible social network via proxy (no pun intended). NO I DO NOT WANT TO POST MY YOUTUBE COMMENTS ON MY DESOLATE GOOGLE+ ACCOUNT. Just keep them separate, they were never meant to be tied together.

Wait a minute... there are thousands of various websites that only offer Facebook as authentication option. Thousands. Maybe tens of thousands. But ONE website decides to use G+ (and then rolls back that decision), and the whole Slahsdot community is up in arms?

Re:All your accounts are belong to us. (1)

couchslug (175151) | about 8 months ago | (#45374965)

No need to use a Google account to interact with Youtube that isn't a throwaway in the first place.

What is the issue with creating a Google+ account? (-1, Flamebait)

linuxguy (98493) | about 8 months ago | (#45373949)

So you don't want to give your information to the man. Then don't! Nobody puts a gun to your head to do that. Just create an account in any name you want, could be John Doe, could be your real name. What precisely is the issue with this?

Are you afraid that you'll "accidentally" add friends to your Google+ account and then add more information about yourself to your account when nobody is forcing you to?

I keep seeing the seeing these paranoid critters screaming bloody murder about being forced to use Google+. What exactly is the issue with creating a Google+ account and not adding any information you do not want to share? Please enlighten me!

Re:What is the issue with creating a Google+ accou (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45373993)

No one has two names (first/last) on the Internet. That's already a huge problem during registration.

Re:What is the issue with creating a Google+ accou (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45374133)

Says Coward, Anonymous to Guy, Linux.

Re:What is the issue with creating a Google+ accou (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45374381)

While Name, User watches from the sidelines.

Re:What is the issue with creating a Google+ accou (1)

PPH (736903) | about 8 months ago | (#45374565)

Well, I have a middle name as well in real life:

"Your Name Here".

Re:What is the issue with creating a Google+ accou (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45374109)

Why should I give Google +1 user? There's nothing in it for me.

Re:What is the issue with creating a Google+ accou (1)

linuxguy (98493) | about 8 months ago | (#45374259)

What is in it for you? You get to use a Google service for free. That's what. Obviously nobody is forcing you. So there is little room to complain.

Re:What is the issue with creating a Google+ accou (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45374377)

There's all the room in the world to complain. A product is a product and taking to public venues to express your displeasure is how capitalism works. We all get upset because we recognize the initial symptoms of a death spiral at Google. Those of us old enough to have gone through a couple of boom-bust cycles know all to well what happens when the marketers gain the power to make product decisions. It always results in the demise of the company. We like a lot of the Google services that they're currently sabotaging, that's why it sucks. And if they keep on this road Google will go the way of Alta Vista and Lycos. Remember them? But, just like every stupid teenage male, Google thinks they're different and they'll be successful pulling the same shit everyone else failed at.

Re:What is the issue with creating a Google+ accou (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45374749)

There's all the room in the world to complain. A product is a product and taking to public venues to express your displeasure is how capitalism works. We all get upset because we recognize the initial symptoms of a death spiral at Google. Those of us old enough to have gone through a couple of boom-bust cycles know all to well what happens when the marketers gain the power to make product decisions. It always results in the demise of the company. We like a lot of the Google services that they're currently sabotaging, that's why it sucks. And if they keep on this road Google will go the way of Alta Vista and Lycos. Remember them? But, just like every stupid teenage male, Google thinks they're different and they'll be successful pulling the same shit everyone else failed at.

If everyone else eventually failed, and yet somewhere in their time of existence they managed to be successful, then what you are describing isn't failure.

It's called a business cycle.

And it's a cycle that usually breeds millions or even billions for the investors, so don't expect a fucking thing to change, regardless of eventual outcome.

Re:What is the issue with creating a Google+ accou (1)

icebike (68054) | about 8 months ago | (#45374577)

What is in it for you? You get to use a Google service for free. That's what. Obviously nobody is forcing you. So there is little room to complain.

I look at their ads. Its not exactly free is it?

(And before someone thinks to school me on Adblock, I already have it. But there is a lot of stuff on the net you simply can't get to with Adblock turned on).

Re:What is the issue with creating a Google+ accou (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45374189)

What is the issue with creating a Google+ account?

The issue is that using "John Doe" as your name when it is not your name is in violation of their Names Policy [google.com] , you are subject to having the account suspended or canceled. [google.com]

This is so much bullshit on so many levels. Using a real-life and permanent name in conjunction with social networking activity is, in my opinion, extremely stupid. Making this a requirement for participation is frightening.

G+ has taken some steps in the right direction [eff.org] , but IMO this has been more talk and less action than is necessary and their behavior with forcing G+ membership for Google store/youtube comments is abhorant.

Preserving anonymity, pseudonyms, and online identity separate from 'real life", insofar as is possible, is essential to a healthy Internet.

AC

Re:What is the issue with creating a Google+ accou (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45374583)

What is the issue with creating a Google+ account?

The issue is that using "John Doe" as your name when it is not your name is in violation of their Names Policy [google.com] , you are subject to having the account suspended or canceled. [google.com]

This is so much bullshit on so many levels. Using a real-life and permanent name in conjunction with social networking activity is, in my opinion, extremely stupid. Making this a requirement for participation is frightening.

This! A thousand times this! At first, it was a friendly offer to sign up for G+ for free. OK, that's cool; not gonna use it, but thanks for the offer. Then it became "you must have a G+ account in order to participate in youtube or whatever". Now they are moving on to the new strategy of requiring a G+ account for participation in third party sites. So far, I have managed to avoid the G+ account requirement...but I have no doubt that someday soon I will finally be caught in their web. Sigh

Re:What is the issue with creating a Google+ accou (1)

nanoflower (1077145) | about 8 months ago | (#45374759)

Yep. This is the number one reason I've stayed away from Google+. It would be one thing if they just threatened to delete your G+ account, but they say they will get rid of your G+ account, your Youtube account, your Gmail account and any other Google account you have. Unfortunately they did manage to create a Nano Flower G+ account finally when I hit the wrong button when trying to use Youtube. So I'm at risk of losing my accounts just because Google kept trying to force us to create and eventually succeeded.

Re:What is the issue with creating a Google+ accou (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45374679)

The issue is that using "John Doe" as your name when it is not your name is in violation of their Names Policy [google.com], you are subject to having the account suspended or canceled.

Got any examples of that actually happening, outside of the handful of quickly-debunked reports that floated around when Google+ was first released?

Preserving anonymity, pseudonyms, and online identity separate from 'real life", insofar as is possible, is essential to a healthy Internet.

Been to Google+ lately? There are all sorts of pseudonymous accounts.

Re:What is the issue with creating a Google+ accou (1)

couchslug (175151) | about 8 months ago | (#45374993)

"The issue is that using "John Doe" as your name when it is not your name is in violation of their Names Policy [google.com], you are subject to having the account suspended or canceled. "

I solve that as I solve many things, by not giving a shit. It's the Internet FFS!
Providers of free services need not care about their customers, and their customers have no moral imperative to care about their rules. Fuck Google's "rules" with George Carlin's proverbial big rubber dick! If they become too cumbersome to conveniently avoid I'll dump Google as I dumped Yahoo and, long ago, AOL.

Re: What is the issue with creating a Google+ acco (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45374347)

I did just that and it carried my fake name over to my gmail. Pain in my ass to clean that up. I'm glad feedly wised up and is rolling it back.

Re:What is the issue with creating a Google+ accou (5, Insightful)

icebike (68054) | about 8 months ago | (#45374559)

I keep seeing the seeing these paranoid critters screaming bloody murder about being forced to use Google+. What exactly is the issue with creating a Google+ account and not adding any information you do not want to share? Please enlighten me!

Has the privacy disaster that is Facebook not once entered your brain after all these years?

People are losing jobs, and failing to get jobs, because of this nonsense, people are being forced to turn over social network account passwords, and the accounts, with or without passwords are being mined, not only by advertisers, but also by government agencies. [businessinsider.com]

Look, its fine that you buy into this stuff, but don't drag me into it, just because you don't see a problem in your little world. Even teenagers are starting to realize facebook is a trap. [techcrunch.com]

There is simply no reason to believe Google+ is going to be any different. You can see the creeping invasion already.

Re:What is the issue with creating a Google+ accou (1)

Stan92057 (737634) | about 8 months ago | (#45374763)

What's the matter with this? Choice its just that simple. Remember when goggle decided that every goggle user had no choice but to be a G+ User? They are still trying.

The Frog In Boiling water... (2)

enter to exit (1049190) | about 8 months ago | (#45373973)

Use Google to search for an alternative you can use on your Android phone and sign up to it with your Gmail address.

If you have an android phone/a youtube account/ or a gmail address you have a g+ account.

Google account != Google+ profile (3, Informative)

tepples (727027) | about 8 months ago | (#45374767)

Use Google to search for an alternative you can use on your Android phone

So what handheld computer should I use if I want to write my own software but don't want Google

If you have an android phone/a youtube account/ or a gmail address you have a g+ account.

No, you have a Google account. Google is requiring certain users who already have a Google account to add a Google+ profile to their Google account and associate all activity on their Google account with their Google+ profile.

Stop resisting. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45373979)

Everyone will eventually have a Google+ account. Why fight it? Give in.

Re:Stop resisting. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45374199)

Everyone will eventually have a Google+ account. Why fight it? Give in.

On the contrary, a well-informed user knows that depending on Google
for ANYTHING of importance is something that seasoned users of the web don't do.

Google has provided repeat examples that Google makes arbitrary decisions
which leave users who were dependent on various Google services high and dry.

][

OAuth and cross-site SSO (1)

MatthiasF (1853064) | about 8 months ago | (#45373983)

....letting the websites you frequent spy on you across the Internet since 2006.

Re:OAuth and cross-site SSO (1)

manu0601 (2221348) | about 8 months ago | (#45374623)

When SSO protocols are open, you can host your own identity provider, or at least have someone you trust host it. Once protocols are proprietary, this is not possible anymore.

Re:OAuth and cross-site SSO (1)

tepples (727027) | about 8 months ago | (#45374777)

Stack Overflow and other Stack Exchange sites use OpenID, an open SSO protocol first introduced by LiveJournal.

Find a better Google Reader replacement... (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45374125)

Feedly's login policy was what forced me to use Inoreader (www.inoreader.com), the only reader I was aware of that provided a standalone login. And boy am I happier for it. Light, fast and simple yet also feature rich. Just like the Google reader I used to know and love....

Re:Find a better Google Reader replacement... (2)

gigaherz (2653757) | about 8 months ago | (#45374185)

I use The Old Reader [theoldreader.com] , but I do login with OAuth. As far as I know, they have their own login box, I just don't use it.

Re:Find a better Google Reader replacement... (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | about 8 months ago | (#45374539)

Or, you could just forgo cloud services all together and set up Tiny-Tiny RSS [tt-rss.org] on your own home server or shared hosting account. I find it works great. Web interface is a little slow, but I mostly use it from my phone anyway. Their official party line is that they don't support shared hosting, but I didn't have any problems getting it to work.

Re:Find a better Google Reader replacement... (1)

tepples (727027) | about 8 months ago | (#45374813)

set up Tiny-Tiny RSS [tt-rss.org] on your own home server

And lose home Internet for 12 months if discovered.

Their official party line is that they don't support shared hosting

I don't see how that's sustainable with the IPv4 address shortage. I was under the impression that each VPS needed its own IP address, and servers on an IPv6 network still need to be accessible by clients stuck on IPv4-only ISPs.

For OS X, the "Vienna" reader is very nice : (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45374145)

It is not perfect, but the developers obviously care and
even at this stage it is quite useful to me and many others.

The only problem I've seen is that deleting old feed items
en masse can often cause Vienna to crash. But reloading
Vienna takes little time and it doesn't crash twice in a row
unless you again attempt a mass delete of old news items,
so I consider this a minor flaw.

Kudos to the developers !

http://www.vienna-rss.org

Re:For OS X, the "Vienna" reader is very nice : (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45374221)

Even better, just accept that RSS was a failed excrement that no-one cares about and is now as dead as USENET.

Tell all your friends via. UUCP, assuming you can remember their bangpath.

If not RSS, then what other than RSS? (1)

tepples (727027) | about 8 months ago | (#45374831)

just accept that RSS was a failed excrement

What alternative to RSS do you recommend for aggregating headlines from multiple sources without having to go through FB or TWTR or a comparable bottleneck?

I don't see the problem (1)

SeanBlader (1354199) | about 8 months ago | (#45374205)

A lot of sites make you use Facebook to use them, why should this be a problem?

Re:I don't see the problem (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45374249)

Has it never occurred to you that some of us DO NOT WANT to use facebook?

Re:I don't see the problem (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45374393)

Please name a few. I have yet to encounter a site that requires facebook, and I would like to keep it that way.

Answers.com requires a Facebook account (1)

tepples (727027) | about 8 months ago | (#45374837)

I have yet to encounter a site that requires facebook

Spotify used to require it. Answers.com still does; its native authentication system is closed to new users.

Re:I don't see the problem (1)

SeaFox (739806) | about 8 months ago | (#45374905)

I've recently been enjoying discovering neat projects on Kickstarter. I have friends who use Kickstarter and possibly family, too. But, despite Kickstarter having it's own authentication system and profile pages for users, there no way to associate yourself with other Kickstarter members without being friends with them on Facebook, which leaves me out completely since I refuse to use Facebook.

just for example (1)

frovingslosh (582462) | about 8 months ago | (#45374439)

Facebook is blocked in my company's routers. To be fair, we don't have any little girls working for us who might be expected to use Facebook, but it also blocks a lot of insane tracking through Facebook and sign-in through Facebook. Google+ isn't yet blocked, but I would not be shocked if in the future it is, particularly as the abuses mount. While we don't expect our employees to waste their time on Facebook or other social sites, we don't object to our programmers keeping current reading news feeds in their down time. But if a feed sets up rules that we must allow access to something that is blocked, the Preventer of Information Services will be much happier letting them cut them-self off rather than relaxing any routing rules.

Re:I don't see the problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45374459)

A lot of sites make you use Facebook to use them, why should this be a problem?

Not everyone wants to use Facebook.

In fact, I don't know a single person I consider truly intelligent
who uses Facebook.

Forces? Also, it's been rolled back (-1)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about 8 months ago | (#45374261)

Feedly Requires Its Users To Create Google+ Profiles If They Want To Keep Using The Service

Fixed. No-one's putting a gun to your head here.

Actually it's now entirely out of date, since they've rolled back the update.

Google+ is not available in some companies and on some Google Apps domains

Oops. More research next time.

Could be worse (1)

TrollstonButterbeans (2914995) | about 8 months ago | (#45374503)

If it required a Hulu+ account, that would be mighty annoying ...

tt-rss is highly recommended (5, Informative)

Fragmented_Datagram (233743) | about 8 months ago | (#45374589)

I highly recommend setting up the free tt-rss service [tt-rss.org] . There's also a nice mobile client.

Feedly? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45374595)

How about talking about something more people know about.. like Youtube forcing you to use G+ to comments now too

TTRSS (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45374819)

So glad I went the TTRSS route and just host my own news aggregator. .

Commafeed is the best I've found. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45374903)

When google fucked us over Reader a while back I tried many options, including rolling my own. I found the best of all worlds in CommaFeed [commafeed.com] . It is open-source and Libre software, and available hosted too. I think it's better than Reader ever was with less frou-frou.

I'm currently using the hosted version and paying for it to support the developer (and hopefully forestall a Reader-like fate). But I keep a current copy of the code so i can roll-my-own if anything happens.

Forget "Feedly" (1)

Rooked_One (591287) | about 8 months ago | (#45374935)

Youtube is now impossible to use... The comments sections have been rendered useless - or about as useless as a wet blanket.
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>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...