... when are they going to patent the idea...?
Google has unveiled its latest answer to Facebook, and as it turns out, the long-rumored Google +1 project is a shameless knock-off of the Facebook "Like" button. Mountain View unveiled Google +1 with a blog post on Wednesday, describing it as a way for Google search users to recommend links to others. "We’re ... enabling you …
... when are they going to patent the idea...?
you were thinking of Microsoft.
(The post is required, and must contain letters.)
RE: "Perhaps you were thinking of Microsoft"
The OP was thinking of Microgoopleonykia-every-other-multinat-tech-company. They are all in it up to their rectums (which are just behind their teeth, FYI) as much as each other.
Oooh. You did prior art! Now will the US Patent Office notice when the patent application lands?
The "Like" button is one of the things that irritates me the most about Facebook - you see it plastered all over the web and my news feed used to be full of stuff like "Joe Bloggs likes XYZ at whateverwebsiteyoulike.com", before I installed a Greasemonkey script to hide all of that nonsense.
I really don't see how a Google knockoff is supposed to be appealing, or am I missing the point here?
Yes, you are missing the point. The point is to allow Google to increase their profile granularity and better target ads at you.
Unless you block the hell out of Google Ad Services etc.
Wasn't that their FB killer?
The one thing that fucks me off most about forums and their communities is the + fucking 1 replies.
Just what I want to see now when viewing web pages, along with all the Facebook, Twitter, Buzz, Digg, Slash dot buttons etc is a fucking +1 button.
It is unnecessary. Seriously, fuck off with this +1 nonsense.
(Awaiting some smart arse to +1 my post!)
For heavens sake, I DO NOT under any circumstances want search results polluted by recomendations of my "friends". I know some lovely people. Not a one of them knows the difference between a diamond and a turd when it comes to web pages though.
I'm personally getting a bit fed up Google "interpreting" my queries and deciding it knows better than I do which words I'm looking for.
use another service then
I've seen stuff on Facebook about recent disasters where the Like function is massively inappropriate.
"10,000 killed in Japan tsunami."
"Jenny likes this."
I mean, FFS, can't they come up with a word better than Like?
The Like API allows you to change the verb to Recommend IRC..
...but Jenny doesn't know what an API is.
... and Jenni doesn't need too.
Looks like El Reg is already ahead of Google and Bookface; not only does it have a "+1/Like" equivilent in the Thumbs Up icon, but it has also introduced radical and revolutionary "-1/Dislike" functionality on it's forums. Quick, patent it before the web titans steal the idea for themselves!
Thumbs-down icon because I am so in awe of the concept.
Well alright I am an IP, but please just leave me alone!
I don't care that someone I had an online conversation about winkle picking 6 years ago likes get-your-norks-out.com too!
When I was 8 years old I had limited tastes in music ( The Moody Blues and Roland Rat as it happens! ), then as I got older those tastes changed. I don't like the same food I liked when I was 12. Heck there are things I liked 6 months ago, that I no longer like. I take pictures, I liked taking pictures of beaches 4 months ago, can't stand at the moment preferring trees and forests! People change and adapt, despite what all the marketers seem to think, "da web" is not yet a fully organic thing that can change at the same pace a persons tastes can.
What about discovering something by chance? I well remember the days of popping into Our Price and simply buying records just based on the sleeve or the names of the band members, some music was good a lot of it was utter crap. I wouldn't have such varied tastes in music ( anything from Elgar to Cannibal Corpse if you must know! ) if I hadn't just leapt into the unknown and just taken a chance on a few snap decisions.
Now just sod off and leave me to be finicky on my own please!
..because then we'll be able to put expertsexchange to the knife :)
Stop making a fucking "social circle" out of them. No I don't care to see whatever they "like" in the future when doing search.
Wasn't the 20 year slap for breach of privacy, just yesterday, enough?
If you want to catch up that kind of crowd create a Googlebook or some such, but leave your main product alone or at least I will be the one doing the leaving. Bing isn't too bad at all these days.
When will Facebitch be renamed to Facepalm? When that day comes I may well use the +1 button...
Hopefully, Google's "facsimilie" won't be a fraksimilie...
Hopefully, +1 will ask you to indicate on the 'social circle" whether or not you actually MET said person. This would allow granularity and access control in a 'ring-like" visual metaphor, sort of like sets and subsets.
(I hope this explanation serves as new-then-prior art, so, don't anyone go getting off trotting to file for a patent. .... You can BET i will apply this metaphor and refer to a screenshot of this very public disclosure...)
But, fb is tainted and polluted people having "friends" consisting of people they never even wrote once. Considering that the USAF and other governments use avatars and fake profiles, unless one has MET someone, how can that person truly be a friend?
So, when one posts, an arc-slider gizmo on screen would let users do ad-hoc rearrangement of who is in and who is not on a story. Back-end enforcement would attempt to keep information or posts from automatically appearing on the "wall" of users not designated to receive the notice. In some ways, this would be akin to my observation of US Military classified message traffic generation:
-- Determine the addressees;
-- Assign document overall classification;
-- Mark each and every paragraph with classification markings;
-- Flag the paragraph's words or passages that cause a specific classification
-- Demote or promote paragraph and reference and document classification according to highest or lowest passage/paragraphs in or related to the document
Now, apply such a scheme to friend and association relationships. Exes could be excluded, parents could be sidelined. Where this breaks down is if someone copies and pastes and shares passages with others. When found out, then sideline or eject that person. Better yet, customizing each message could help figure out the leaker, if the +1 tool is used in a closed environment.
Thought the man from mars was back for a mo.
Why not naming it "Google me-too"?
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017