skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Internally, G+ is marketed as a unified login/account system. Management's stated reasoning goes something like:

* It's silly to force users to have separate accounts for
Google services because most users would prefer to have
Gmail, Docs/Drive, YouTube, Calendar, and so on under the
same account/identity.

* Users who want to have separate public identities will
create pseudonymous "Pages" for each of their identities.
These pages will still be owned by the same account, so
the user only has to log in once.

* Users who are strongly opposed to a unified Google account
are a sufficiently small population that it is acceptable
to inconvenience them if doing so improves the experience
of every other user.

By itself, these arguments are reasonable and could probably have been implemented without too much trouble (though "Pages" continues to be a confusing and unclear term). The problem is that the new account system was introduced at the exact same time as a social network, with the /same name/, and that the social network decided to inject a hard requirement of Facebook-style name validation rules into the new profile system.

Now the term "Google+" has become so strongly connected with the Google+ social network (and its infamous names policy) that any attempt to expand the Google+ account system is met with fear and outrage. I don't think upper management expected this or understands why the community reacted thus, just as they didn't expect or understand why requiring a Firstname Lastname format on the Internet was problematic.

I don't believe Google+ management is malicious, but they do seem woefully unaware of how internet-native communities behave.
We like quasiquotes and backticks around here.
Not a google employee, but here's my take. It seems like value in web ecosystem is changing from "views" to "verbs" -- like, share, etc.. actions that spread content rather than passively consuming it. Google has based its business on monetizing "views" and its competitors (fb) are building on verbs.

Also, Google has to maintain a forest of separate identities for everyone. (youtube, gmail, g+, etc). It's super annoying just to maintain one login. There's huge business value in consolidating those, even without adding features.

Finally, Youtube comments are a cesspool. Even when they're not racist or threatening, they're immature and, at best "wow that's awesome". They drive viewers away. I bet google wants to try to do-over comments in a way that makes them useful to people, not unsettling.

And I would hesitate to call it a disaster. Sure there's a lot of whining about it now, especially in tech circles, but every big interface change comes with a wave of whiners. We'll see in three or four weeks if anyone is complaining.

They'd certainly have a much tougher time doing this if there were another option for the masses, but for most people YouTube is it. Saying people are going to quit watching or uploading to youtube is silly, they'll go where? Vimeo?

They're going to keep tweaking it, people are going to adapt and learn, videos of cats falling off objects will continue to be uploaded.

ps: "How do they keep morale up"? Free food and big piles of money. How else do you do it?
It's a property based on the premise that not just any made up number is equally good as a valuation...

The very definition of "valuation" points to the underlying "true" part -- valuation means an attempt to guess at the value of something.

It might not be possible to have a perfect guess (because nobody has all the data or knows all the future events that might affect it), but it's very possible to know a valuation if BS and critisize it.

Would you buy a Denny's dinner in rural Nebraska for 1 billion dollars?
Frameworks come and go, it just so happens that Angular and Ember both came out at a similar time, and Angular narrowly got a bit of a better foothold initially, that compounded into a solid head of steam and growth.

I've been back and forth on the two of them, and I don't know that Angular is that much easier to test and debug, or is 'much' more mature, but their are more blogposts, SO questions, etc. because Angular is more popular.

Don't forget, Angular has the backing of Google, so things are probably going to move a bit faster.

Some people like Ember, there is nothing wrong with it. However, I'd suggest new projects go with Angular just because over the next few years, more developers will have experience with Angular than Ember (or likely even Backbone).
Yes it lets you add multiple meteor servers not multiple mongo servers
There are assholes everywhere in this world, including HN. Your point?

>Some folks probably should feel tied down by their reputation/ego.

I'm pretty sure that implies that you don't want the "bigots" in your worldview to be able to express themselves anonymously.
This falls short. Phones should never be locked, even if there is an open contract.
Why so serious?!
The comment on the article page asks the same question with a different sentiment:

> Instead of proposing that unlocks be allowed, how about pushing for subsidy locks to be made illegal instead? There's no need for them; if you've received a subsidy on a phone, you've already signed a contract by which you're legally bound until its expiration, so there's zero need for the phones to be locked in the first place.
thought this was particularly interesting especially when thinking about how Android 4.4 / Google is now attempting to display unknown caller id by using data collected from companies like these
And yet, if one avoids this supposed "fallacy", the logical conclusion would be that no group has any definite properties, and everything is interchangeable.

So, yes, there actually are things that "no true scotchman" would do (else there's no reason to invoke a group named "scotchmen" at all).
How do you plan to popularize your website? How it is different from Groupon? i.e. one deal everyday.

Reasons it might not work:
1. Typically business look for building revisiting customer base. Anything in this direction, higher chances of success.
2. Your idea is like window shopping. When I look for deals, I an looking for specific category and I look for my locale. E.g. currently looking for lunch offers near Hyderabad.
I find it fairly disturbing that so many hints are of the form, "the password is "<word>". That isn't better than not having one.
Same, I deleted Google+ last week so I don't have to look at it. I still use Google for Adsense, Analytics and search. I'm tempted to switch over to DDG, and explore one of the many alternatives for tracking analytics because quite honestly, I'm losing faith in Google to maintain my privacy. Adsense is tougher to replace, I use them for backup fill after selling direct advertising, but they're still one of the better networks.

I wouldn't be surprised if YouTube goes under in the coming years. Someone is going to create an alternative, and hit a homerun. YouTube is primarily about watching videos, and their video player is one of the worst available. Porn sites have offered much better video players for years, so what's holding up Google? It's been seven years, and they still haven't fixed it. Either it's not in their list of priorities, or they're incompetent. I don't care which one it is, they lose my support, and I'm ready to get behind the next alternative that's better in touch with the needs of users.
The limited, but minimally viable materials to build the shanty towns is very analogous to using RAD frameworks like the ones you mentioned.

I think the real problem is the subjective nature of deciding when an app is too big and needs to split apart.
I didn't take it to mean that the McRib had a gram of TBHQ, just that is what had been used in testing. I don't think most of the general public need to be any more afraid of the McRib than they already are :)
Another anecdote here, but I jumped the GOOG ship long ago and apart from a very minor bump (adjusting to DDG) it was painless too. Sure, for a couple of days when I was unhappy with results I went back to Google, but they were no better. And sure, some Gmail features are great. But on the whole, they're not irreplaceable, and I reckon they need to take better care of their customers than they currently are.
You can be anybody on the internet. It is just sad how many people choose to be just random jerks. Somehow those people confuse nihilistic empty sarcasm with "being honest". Usually it has much more with having nothing (else) to say than with being honest.
It's not Karma. It's the fact that your comments are persistent. On 4chan, they have a life between a few minutes and a few days, and that it really. No persistent ID to lay "claim" to your work. It's not about whether someone else can identify you by your comments, its about the psychology of creating something that will exists for an indefinite time, that your peers will read and judge, and thus judge you.

You feel the same feeling even when contributing to 4chan, however, you know it wont matter for long thus it's far less mental weight to deal with.
I am now actively reducing my youtube usage. Maybe it's a drop in the bucket, but I think a lot of people are getting tired of Google's bullshit.
University (Upending My Life) and Some History
Deleted g+ and youtube account. Just not worth it anymore.
It comes back for a short time, but I don't think it is quite anually. They had it in Australia a few years ago, I don't think I've seen it this year.
I'm a puppet newbie, but I think that you might use Augeas rather than concat bits from conf.d.
I've seen it. Can't recall the specifics but I believe it essentially skips the technical aspects of the modern era instead focusing on history leading up to the US Federal Reserve and some subsequent well known major events in an effort to raise concern about the systemic problems of fractional reserve and well known derivative issues versus the realities of globalization.

For example the fallibility of national regulators, corruption of financial institutions, challenges of post-facto manual slapdash policing versus things like HFT and off-market trading, etc.

Notably, I don't recall any mention of SWIFT or the ISO's centralized currency register.

Most of the documentaries I've seen are pretty much like that one: comfortable topics people feel are approachable and that they can easily acquire public faces to discuss. Dated enough to be out of view. Already discussed enough to be not too controversial. Often with slightly corrupting funding influences, eg. from the BBC.

As for investigative journalism at the heart of the matter, I've never seen any. While nobody can assert a complete knowledge of the current situation, there are clearly some places where digging needs to be done in the global public interest.
Apple buys PrimeSense
The people who lined up outside said big box stores to buy PS4s might not feel the same way
I wouldn't say that's a similar sentiment. He's not saying you should throw good fundamentals out the window.
I have no idea what the official party line is... but doesn't it make at least a little bit of sense to unify two social networks owned by the same company?

One thought about real names: what does your contacts database look like on your phone? While I know a lot of people by their online handles, I also know their real name, and I typically choose to enter that real name into my phone. Maybe this is uncommon, but if not, if you're building a communication platform, it does make some sense for the user-entered data to follow this format. Is there some intrinsic reason that someone be referred to as "Jonathan Rockway" when you send them a message via the SMS protocol, but "jrockway" if you send that same message via Jabber? It then follows to wonder: if you're talking to your friends via YouTube, why would you use yet another nickname?

Maybe what people want is a unique identifier that only they know, and then choose to share a different name with different groups of people?

I don't have any strong feelings one way or the other, but I am interested in what other people have to say.
I am very positive this would be the perfect moment to start a kickstarer funded youtube clone! Yea, glad I inspired your next big project, thank me later! (But please don't forget to... I know you won't if you are a good hacker. I am not in the position to dedicate any time/resources to this project. Please ask me for some contact info when you are sure you will be diving into this. Please do it, and... good luck!)
4chan, like any diverse online community, has a lot of awesome people using it.

And, yet, 4chan spawned this:

http://jezebel.com/what-happens-when-a-13-year-old-4chan-cam...

And, this:

http://www.dailydot.com/society/adria-richards-4chan-raid-se...

And, this:

http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/internet/2012/06/dear-inte...

I'm speaking of the culture of the place. Every individual user has the ability to not participate in some of the really awful shit that goes down...but, groupthink and a culture that celebrates the worst of it ("none of us are as cruel as all of us"), leads to some truly awful behavior. And, it is so often white males targeting women (and, worse, young girls).

People with privilege are rarely aware of their privilege, and 4chan is a great exhibition of that. It's possibly useful as a tool for seeing just how much people don't see how awful their community can be, and how much oppressive behavior is tolerated and celebrated. We've got thousands of years of oppression to undo. I'm calling it out, not because I'm "sensitive", but because I've had some of this shit explained to me...I've had my own oppressive behavior called out to me. And, now that I see it, and have begun to understand it, it's my job as a white male ally in a centuries-old struggle to call it out when I see it.

It's not white knighting, and it's not sensitivity. 4chan isn't hurting my feelings or making me mad. 4chan is just doing what white men have done throughout history: Enjoying their position of privilege to make fun of those with less power. And, I recognize it for what it is because I've done it, too. The only surprising thing about it is how much most 4channers think they aren't acting like every prior generation of white men in the face of being asked to treat women and people of color like equals. They genuinely believe they are a different breed, above race, and gender, and identity; all the while promoting the same old shit.
Don't forget that one of the tacit reasons for G+'s existence is simply to have a reason to encourage G+ buttons on each page for further tracking of what's happening on the internet. Using a single identity helps to reconcile a unique user that help both the advertiser reach "uniques" and for Google to better understand that user's behavior.

Back to the point: Google's ethos is to track and analyze as much of what's happening on the Internet as possible. If, as an employee, you don't appreciate that this is Google's bread and butter, you simply may not care enough about these things to ever get worked up about G+'s account management.
Better in what way? G+ has confusing and horrible interface, it's slow, and keeps asking me to import friends every single time I open up the page. That's not 'better product' in my opinion.
Most burner numbers are for legitimate purposes. It is probably only way to avoid spam. Or other way: I did not gave my phone number to most of my paying customers, why should I give it to some random website?
Even if this installation somehow enhanced Russian military (and I presume they will launch the satellites regardless), surely having the installations on US soil is a _benefit_ to the US. They can be monitored and, if necessary, shut down much more easily than if they are on foreign soil.
Simple way to display the most recent Flickr pictures for a wall LCD or tablets
Try verbatim mode:

https://www.google.com/search?q=freebsd+openvpn+push&tbs=li:...
At first I thought this meant they would use the phone number as a proxy to your personal reputation, which was very troubling, but then I realized that's not the case. They are merely trying to predict whether a phone number is real or fake (fraud detection).

It doesn't sound like an end-run around around anonymity, but more like the way retail stores crunch data to predict personal purchase patterns.

It's a CAPTCHA for criminals.
I'd be more concerned when they start forcing G+ on open platforms like the Web and Android. Maybe it's already started with Android KitKat shipping with Hangouts as the default messaging app.
2nd best: reddit for pseudopseudo-intellectuals

I disagree of course, but it did make me lol.
Not a google employee, but this disgusting mistreatment of its users may actually be a good thing if it blows up in their faces. My prediction is that the change to automatically showing the users g+ profile pic next to comments will be what gets them in hot water by empowering stalkers and trolls.

Here's a simple example, if you go to the video for Miley Cyrus - Wrecking Ball, there are the usual back and forth comments arguing her merits. However, you can now easily spot preteen girls if you were looking for that specific demographic, and then subscribe to them for more efficient creeping.

Shame on Google. This behavior is stunningly evil.
How can one bypass the signup wall? Going via Google doesn't work.
nothing new said here.
> They could bias the admission process in favor of female applicants (or other underrepresented demographics) without conflating financial issues, right?

They could, but would that honestly be better? Would you want them to lower standards for women or reject highly qualified (male) applicants just to make room for more female applicants in the accepted pool?

It's not an ideal solution, but considering the school is tuition-free for everybody, regardless of gender, I don't think this approach is all that bad.
That was not my intention, but I can see how you might have taken it that way. I followed with, "brings the entire discussion down to a level that I don't have any desire to participate in."

My implication was that I opt out of such discussions, and I think (much) less of those who participate in casual sexism, racism, and homophobia.
Google has owned youtube for 7 years and this year they decided to mess with people. Why?
I write like that on occasion.

Pretty sure it's because my thought process isn't like a linear story. It's more like a series of contextually leveled bullets -- each inner statement adding some useful (albeit sometimes unnecessary!) information to the overall discourse.

I can assure you that people who write like that don't mean to be intimidating or rude. They're probably just trying to leave no gap unexplored! (Much like how programmers have to think!)
4chan considers reddit to be a hotbed of radical feminist activism, solely due to /r/SRS. Of course, they'd probably say the same of any community where you use something close to real names, like HN.
Point taken ;-)

I was thinking more along the lines that you can not have a building with 100 rooms, where each room has a door to every other room. In software on the other hand, nothing (except your own sanity) stops you from having 100 classes, where each class accesses every other class.
From https://support.google.com/plus/answer/1319578 :

> The +1 button isn’t used to track your visits across the web.
> Google doesn’t keep a persistent record of your browsing
> history as part of the process of showing you a +1 button or
> otherwise use the fact that you personally have visited a page
> with the +1 button.
I would be willing to bet that 90% of extremely upset users are using Adblock Plus anyway, and a smaller amount (though significant, in this crowd) use NoScript or something similar to block Google Analytics altogether. It would be basically impossible for Google to even notice their disappearance.
Optical tracking system to triangulate star positions, i.e. star trackers.

http://www.fas.org/nuke/intro/missile/icbm.htm

https://www.opci.com/ocns.htm
I think you strike the nail on the head here, and in the process touch on something that I have noticed:

"Trolling" is about power. People do it because being able to push somebodies emotions one direction or another lets them play with that person like a marionette. Making people upset is a power trip for trolls.

It would not suprise me if many (not most by any means, but many) trolls are in fact psychopaths who are 'practicing' in a way. Running low-risk experiments on how to control people.
That first one is my post! Haha. Can't believe someone noticed it.
This is somewhat ridiculous on the part of the US government. This is data easily collected by survey-grade GNSS systems, that anyone could collect. If the Russians wanted to do SIGINT, they wouldn't announce where they're putting their gear; they would load a van up with a couple hundred thousand dollars worth of RF equipment and position near their targets.

To give you an idea of reference stations in the US for the GPS system, head on over to: http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/CORS_Map/

Granted, these are used for post-processing position data for increased accuracy, and not for updating mission-critical orbit/atmospheric error data, but the principal is the same.
Probably a combination of: having the idea, having the right infrastructure, and having a team of engineers to write the code and migrate the data.
> But in reality probably only .00000001% of facebook users probably quit because of privacy reasons, which is probably a drop in a bucket compare to the amount of new users they get everyday.

Normalization is a tricky job. Your assumption is that the entire set of users were aware of privacy problems with Facebook. Out of the universal set of Facebook users, there would be two subsets - people aware of privacy problems and their ill effects and people who don't. You should check "how many people quit (or significantly reduced activity on) Facebook, once they found out about privacy issues and their effects" and then report the percentage.
Average consumers don't necessarily understand that cheap android phones are shit because they're cheap, why would you assume they will just buy another android phone?
When you create a new "fake" ID, they ask for your real name. And they even have an opinion on whether your name sounds fake to them.
It's not a kind of captcha, it's an "account discrimination" system. Everybody who cares about the privacy is affected, not only the criminals, and the text shows why: use the throwaway phone, get rejected at the site.
I'm waiting for the real life dancing badger.
Tried and I can share to any app, no problem here
I like how, in a thread parodying HN comments, one 4-channer still managed to complain about "white-knighting".
> You're right in that it would be possible to have the OS report "0 contacts" instead of throwing an error, and THAT case should be handled.

...or to write your own wrapper which does the same by handling the exception, and to then exclusively use that wrapper in your client code.
You can also add Go language to your list
It says it by their actions which are not conductive to one's anonymity - real name policy, etc. It is clear that they goal is for users to have their real-life identity to be linked to their Google identity. Which may be not what the user desires - but that just means the product Google is selling is not for this user.