Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:exactly this. (Score 1) 213 213

I'm going to cross respond with my reply to someone who used this same kinda concept.. his example was an optional photo app extension.

I find your idea appealing in general, and would love to see a social network that worked like that, I'm not sure how it could work. Doesn't that mean that the pictures app developer would have their own privacy settings (and maybe "backup" pictures on a server they control)? And wouldn't app interoperabiility would probably make your privacy "the weakest in the chain"/"the weakest installed"? Also, doesn't that make it where every single feature needs to hit critical mass independently... after all, how do I see your pictures if I need to install an app to do so? What about dueling options fragmenting the market?

Comment Re:What's wrong with social networks? (Score 1) 90 90

Links take you to learn more info about something.

Except that SN's are trying to host that data within themselves, and FB is using it's monopoly power and it's algorithims to prioritize stuff in the newsfeed hosted on FB.

Social networks already have you so profiled that they know where you want to go and take you there.

They know the intersection of where you will spend time and where they will serve ads. This is not the same.

Comment Re:Heavy hand vs Light touch (Score 1) 213 213

Google's name is too tarnished with regards to privacy and will never be able to launch a social media site again.

I don't know if it was really a privacy issue. After all, FaceBook is probably the only site more devoted to mining your data than Google is.

No privacy issues. If I don't want my plus profile to have pictures, I just never download a picture app.

I find your idea appealing in general, and would love to see a social network that worked like that, I'm not sure how it could work. Doesn't that mean that the pictures app developer would have their own privacy settings (and maybe "backup" pictures on a server they control)? And wouldn't app interoperabiility would probably make your privacy "the weakest in the chain"/"the weakest installed"? Also, doesn't that make it where every single feature needs to hit critical mass independently... after all, how do I see your pictures if I need to install an app to do so? What about dueling options fragmenting the market?

Comment Re:exactly this. (Score 1) 213 213

I actually think a big part of the failure of Google+ was something that, in hindsight, looks so small that a lot of people forget about it: When Google+ launched, it was a limited invite-only service.

You mean like Facebook and Orkut did?

But seriously, those were due to scaling concerns. Google could have flipped a switch. I think they're problem was they went backwards... feature complete to a limited number of people, as opposed to a slow feature rollout to everyone.

Comment Re:Privacy (Score 4, Informative) 213 213

One also doesn't have to use facebook. I don't even have a facebook account,

Sure you do. Even if you don't register for the site, they create shadow accounts based on the contact numbers in people's phones, based on ID'ing the same person showing up in pictures, etc. They, I think, even allow your friends to tag you in pictures using the shadow account.

Google's attempts to foist Plus on us felt a lot like how Microsoft forced Internet Explorer on us by bundling it with Windows 95 OSR2 and later versions of Windows.

Nonsense. Microsoft was successful.

Comment Re:Is this any different from Google or Apple? (Score 1) 467 467

Siri didn't come with ToS that grant Apple full right to read and share all of your personal files with anyone it wants.

That was the Windows 10 preview. It makes a ton of sense that tech previews are loaded with spyware.

Comment Re:Solution: (Score 2) 133 133

. The end user doesn't know what they want, but you do. Make the decisions for them.

Unlike the rest of your snarky post, this part is most certainly true. An end user rarely knows what they want.

Of course, if you ignore what they say they want, you have to actually be able to deliver something that scratches that itch. Basically "fulfilling the exact spec from the user" is just the least culpable way of failing.

Comment Re:The future of private and open tech? (Score 1) 353 353

there was a time when there was no such thing as Facebook. Believe it or not, people still managed to have social lives.

Yeah, there was. And people had social lives with other people not on facebook. But facebook exists now. And too many people allow it to gatekeep their entire social life. So there is no social life with those people without facebook.

Depending on where you live, how old you are, etc, excising those people may be acceptable or not.

It is not best to swap horses while crossing the river. -- Abraham Lincoln

Working...