Pigskin-Referee writes: When Google rolled out the beta of their "magical and revolutionary" social network (oops, sorry — that's Apple's line), I dutifully signed up like everybody else in the tech industry. I played around with it and found some features I really liked — and some that made me scratch my head and think "Why in the world can't I do that? I can do it on Facebook." I circlified my friends and acquaintances, followed a few people I knew only by reputation, thoroughly enjoyed the "instant upload" feature for smart phones despite its scary aspects, got thoroughly annoyed while trying to navigate the interface a few times, and then... headed back to Facebook. It seems as if most others are doing the same thing; I've noticed a drop-off in posts on G+ lately (when I bother to go there). I haven't given up on it, but it's an afterthought, whereas Facebook is a part of my life. It's not that Facebook is technically better — in many ways, it's not (although Facebook as been hard at work, making improvements to give people the functionality they've found and like on G+). Ultimately, social networking is about the people, and in general, the people I care about and enjoy "hanging out" with (to borrow a G+ term) are on Facebook. I'll log onto G+ if I want to get into a technical discussion or a political argument. Many of my colleagues are there. But my friends are on Facebook.
Pigskin-Referee writes: You now have another reason to check your privacy settings. According to the U.S. Federal Trade Commission, Social Intelligence Corp, has been given the legal thumbs up to archive seven years worth of your Facebook posts. These archives will be used by SIC (oh the applicability of the acronym) as part of their background checking service for job applicants.
There are a couple sides to this argument that have been hashed out many times over. A hiring manager could say that they were glad they discovered that Johnny the master of the great resume also drank heavily every night and posted all his parties on Facebook — so they could avoid hiring him. The other side of the argument has been that if someone is functional, professional and sober at work, then why is it fair to factor in what they do outside of work when deciding if you should schedule an interview? As long as they are not a violent criminal or addicted to hard drugs, who cares?
Pigskin-Referee writes: Gmail creator Paul Buchheit is putting Google's new Chrome OS on a deathwatch.
He writes on FriendFeed: "Prediction: ChromeOS will be killed next year (or "merged" with Android)." His reasoning for why Chrome is toast: "Because ChromeOS has no purpose that isn't better served by Android (perhaps with a few mods to support a non-touch display)"
While it sounds like a bold statement, he also adds, "I was thinking, 'is this too obvious to even state?', but then I see people taking ChromeOS seriously, and Google is even shipping devices for some reason."
He's 100% correct about Chrome. We've been thinking about this too. What problem does Chrome solve? We're stumped.
Buchheit left Google years ago to start FriendFeed, which was a Twitter rival. Twitter won out and Facebook bought FriendFeed. He spent a few years at Facebook and is now with Y Combinator.