Unless requiring people to wear nametags at social events is an "abuse of power" as well. They're providing a service and thereby dictate the terms upon which people use it. Don't like it? Don't use it.

It's sad how people feel entitled to dictate how others run their business. If that business has a requirement you don't like, suck it up or don't do business with them. It isn't rocket science.

How could NASA have run out of funding with projects such as these?!

Amazon used intentionally misleading and vague wording. They did not state definitively whether or not the devs would receive 20% of the earnings, but I can see where there was confusion. It's always good, especially when dealing with businesses, to err on the side of caution, due to situations such as these.

I believe you dropped your tin foil hat.

I'm fairly certain I won't "slip up" and post half nude pictures of myself while in a relationship and in a position of prestige. Actually, it's really not that hard.

Facts? There are no "facts" stated whatsoever in either this page or the article. I thought /. was relevant news without the hyped up media bullshit. I guess not.

I loathe Apple. There's been evidence time and again of their questionable (to put it mildly) business tactics. However, I fail to see why this matters in any way whatsoever. In the end, Apple still approved it. Sure, they took a while. Perhaps there was a reason? They could just pull a Facebook and try to impede G+ by not allowing it at all (though in the end it wouldn't do much). ...or we can all be outraged in typical /. fashion at how evil this corporation is, regardless how pedantic the reason might be.

Yeah, let's go with that.

Before you start blaming the interface, perhaps you should first look inwards.

-There is no "someone else's wall".
-Uploading a profile picture is stupidly easy and intuitive, as is managing photos and albums.
-To see who can view your posts, click the text that says "Limited" right next to it. It shows every single person that can view your post.

What are the "dozens of other problems"? I'm sure they're extremely easy to address. Keep in mind though, that this is an alternative to Facebook, and as such, isn't required to function exactly like Facebook.

Additionally, G+ as it is now is the bare bones of what it will be. When it was first rolled out to Google employees only, the majority feedback was "simplify". Once it is out of trial, they'll show what it can really do. What it is now, in comparison, is practically nothing.

Funny, I got my invite (several, actually) by giving out an email on 4chan as well. Though G+ still is saying they're full and can't add me, and I've tried repeatedly the last few days.

You mean "pussies".

This. I meant for my statement to include Libertarians and intended for it to be implied as such, but perhaps I should have been more specific, as people look for any excuse to attack minutiae rather than the core argument that was originally proposed

Referring to the anti-corporation, anti-government posts on /., which is what the responses have been thus far in this thread in regards to Facebook.

Last I checked, emails weren't legally binding, as a contract is, yet people here are posting about how Facebook is corrupting the judge? The dude made the right choice, especially considering money-hungry lawyers won't even represent the obviously nutty client. I'm not fan of Facebook (in fact, I hate it), but come on, if you're going to stand up for the ultra-liberals, at least do so intelligently.

True that. I meant they'd need one that often to keep me entertained, as that's the only reason I even stay with Nintendo in the first place.

Provided they come out with one every six months and it isn't the difficulty level of a nine-year-old, maybe.