He wasn't uptalking was he? .. If he was, we might be missing the 'gag me with a spoon' portion of the conversation ..

G+/ .. very excited? .. super excited? .. I got that part - taught us to say stuff like that as freshman in college ..

Any old used car runs great if you want to sell it I guess ..

Google Plus is a bit of a desert. He doesn't seem to get the whole Social aspect of Social Media. It isn't enough that people have G+ accounts, they have to use them. It is a brief interview but it is Turing Test weird.

Regards...jmcc

Nest -- was a pretty expensive company -- What we got with Nest was a complete, functioning company and brand in an important, emerging area, that’s doing really well. ~ Page

And so was DoubleClick and look what happened to that - Nest tech will be merged into non-existance and Google will make their 'product traction' into their own and take all of the credit for it.

Back in the day, Alta Vista, if I might use it as an example, wrote all of their own stuff - Alta Vista won the most awards (for their day) on building the newest technologies in house ...

Google, however, has always taken the much less innovative approach - They buy the things they can't build - The only thing that could even remotely be considered all original about Google, is their top-heavy search engine and it's formula. Everything else was built by someone else.

heh .. Google ... "Why innovate when you can duplicate?"

With G+ they have a system which requires its use for access to certain services. That link will only get stronger over time, and i'm sure Google will soon move as many new things over to the requirements for a G+ account over time.

With the requirements for G+, no wonder he's not unhappy about it.

heh .. Google ... "Why innovate when you can duplicate?"

Yeah but they call it their "Knowledge Graph" while we all know that it's just a jumped up Wikipedia scraper along the same lines that Cuil tried to do years ago. :) But the technology churnalists and Goofs (Google fanboys and fangirls) believe the propaganda. The big problem for Google, and its share price, will be when people start copping on to the fact that most of Google's innovation is really that of others. Google is really in the market dominant position that Microsoft occupied just before the Anti-Trust cases.

Regards...jmcc

With the requirements for G+, no wonder he's not unhappy about it.

Forced membership isn't really membership at all ... it's all a facade.

I don't ever recall Twitter or Facebook pushing in such a fashion as that - I could be mistaken, but if I close my Twitter, I don't have to give anything else up because it's not attached to anything else.

.. they call it their "Knowledge Graph" ..

Is it just me, or does Alexa come to mind every time you hear the term?

At any rate, I hope Google doesn't end up trapping themselves in that little walled garden they're creating for themselves -- All it will take is for that one product or a service to be deployed that the majority loathes, and there goes all of their puffed up user numbers as everyone bails ...

Google is really in the market dominant position that Microsoft occupied just before the Anti-Trust cases.

True.

However, MS never had the ecosystem Google and Apple currently have. When it comes to the walled garden, Apple is still the creepiest of them all.

We really wouldn't be having any of these discussions if all this technology had open APIs and the ability to plug-n-play each component of the software provided by any vendor.

Instead, all parties are vying to be the market ecosystem from your phone, TV, DVR or similar device, computer, tablet, and now watches and glasses. People will pick one vendor from front to back so that the experience is seamless and everything works together.

The odds are a TV with Google or Apple tech in it won't respond to commands from Google or Apple phones, tablets, computers or watches so we're talking a major tech investment per person way beyond just buying a computer like it was in the old days.

Not to mention each platform also ties you to their media systems for movies, music and books.

Heck, it used to be you only had to worry about your computer, monitor, printer and scanner all working together. Then it was MP3 players, phones and now all this so in the end what's left?

Privacy.

Which company provides the most privacy, best ecosystem, etc. will win in the end and as long as there are two contenders, Google will have to keep their ass in line.

If Apple stumbles, Google will do whatever the hell it wants.

Forced membership isn't really membership at all ... it's all a facade.

And as time goes by even the facade is showing signs of crumbling.

It's fascinating seeing G try to pretend that G+ is doing so well but at the same time removing the foundation stones, one by one, that support it.

It's a painful process for them backing down but then again, if the boss proclaimed it as the backbone of the company it's going to be a long and laughable process watching it slowly being dismantled.

Forced membership isn't really membership at all ...

OK I'll admit I'm not getting any younger but I'm still a bit miffed about being forced onto G+. I only want to use a few services of the GOOG and eventually had to cave in on + to comment on YouTube. I definitely comment less now as a result. And I locked down my + profile as much as possible. So sure you could consider me a user, but not a happy one. Seriously, everyone knows G+ isn't the success that the co-founder pretends it is.

I have online privacy concerns, I'm spreading my data around at the moment to help myself "feel better" LOL. Outlook.com for email, Apple for phone, DuckDuckGo for search, Google for adsense, etc. When I sign up at forums and other places I do not link my facebook or google account, I create a standalone account. My profile and data is out there but not 100% in one spot like a fanboy of GOOG/AAPL.

Another quote from the article:

People forget we’re able to make our services better by understanding your relationships, making sharing work and understanding identity. These are deep and important things for us as a company.

People forget we’re able to make our services better by understanding your relationships, making sharing work and understanding identity. These are deep and important things for us as a company.

It's funny, Google only ever make changes for the benefit of the user. They're such good guys!

Do they think we buy it?

Removing authorship from serps might signify that G+ realizes that their network is over-represented by webmasters. I'm guessing Google is going to try to let their membership grow more naturally(and inherently slowly) at this point. Perhaps G+ can mature into the role it wanted to claim right now.

G+ was, to me, like that awkward geeky kid who is neither social nor cool trying to announce his awesomeness to the world and force them to come hang with him. I like the kid, I think he's brilliant in many ways, I'd hire him to work for me in an instant but socially he's a misfit to an extreme degree and not part of my social circle because of it. Stop trying so hard to be what you're not, kid.

Forced membership isn't really membership at all ... it's all a facade.

"Forced membership?" I know any number of people (including active bloggers) who don't belong to Google+ and haven't the slightest interest in Google+.

Getting back to what Larry Page said, he made some interesting comments about healthcare and saving lives. And he's right: Looking for patterns by data-mining patient records could be an enormous boon for medical researchers and for ordinary people who are at risk for diseases or conditions and don't know it.

Take a larger and more historical view of the world and society in general (any part of the world) and you'll see that G+ is Unions At Work. Some like Unions. (As in Labor Unions) Others Don't.

There will always be those who think a Union is best, and there will be just as many who don't. But Unions can only grow if there is a forced membership, from which each member has to give up something for the Union to grow itself even larger.

Just closed my experimental G+ (last month) as the creepy was just too pervasive. That said I also didn't use it. Total of 10 interactions (as I wanted to see what benefit it might bring me, and there was none). So, my case, no harm, no foul, but I'm not playing their game and I suspect others feel the same way.

As for mining medical records, if done anonymously, maybe there's a benefit. BUT CAN YOU TRUST THEM? Haven't met a gubermint (sic) yet I can trust. Not even mine.

As for mining medical records, if done anonymously, maybe there's a benefit. BUT CAN YOU TRUST THEM? Haven't met a gubermint (sic) yet I can trust. Not even mine.

Google isn't the government. At least, not yet. :-)

True. Even thought about editing that last line to read "gubermint" and "corporations", but was a bit late and actually, wasn't worth it. I don't trust any of "them". Thanks for making the distinction of no difference. To hear the EU talk about G they seem to think G is a multinational national... :)

OK I'll admit I'm not getting any younger but I'm still a bit miffed about being forced onto G+......

I feel exactly the same. I try as much as I possibly can to avoid G+ because it's just creepy how they try and force you to engage.

It is probably their worst mistake ever because as far as I can see even Jo Public is now aware that some aspects of their privacy (they know not the specifics) is being invaded.

It is probably their worst mistake ever

Larry Page said that they're superexcited about it

Superexcited. that's a medical condition, right? :) Usually terminal.

"Forced membership?" I know any number of people (including active bloggers) who don't belong to Google+ and haven't the slightest interest in Google+.

As do we all... By "forced membership" I'm pretty sure it was meant along the lines that you're now considered an active Google+ user when you check your gmail, etc. It's not an accurate portrayal of people actually using Google+. But they're making it seem like it is to the mainstream media.

you're now considered an active Google+ user when you check your gmail

I don't understand this. I have 2 gmail addresses, one of which I check every day. But I'm not a member of google+ and never have been. So how can I be counted as an active member when I'm not a member at all?

So how can I be counted as an active member when I'm not a member at all?

I believe that if you sign up for GMail now, you get a mandatory G+ account. I think the same goes for all new Android phone activations. Not positive, but older GMail accounts were not forced into G+ in the same way YouTube commenters were.

Thanks for the reply Swanny007
Yes I think you must be right. My Gmail addresses were created many years ago, before G+ existed.

I didn't know that you have to join G+ to get a new Gmail address now. It looks like an enticement to get people to join G+

By "forced membership" I'm pretty sure it was meant along the lines that you're now considered an active Google+ user when you check your gmail, etc. It's not an accurate portrayal of people actually using Google+. But they're making it seem like it is to the mainstream media.

This ...

I have a very old gmail account, but when I go visit GWT or AdSense, G+ is there at my login, and when I sign out, the big blue link is right there to go to G+. I have nearly clicked through by accident but I've never clicked through. I have received emails about adding to my profile there and updating my information. I consider it forced (if unused) membership. I just see no reason to hand them more than they already have. And I don't consider myself a G-hater at any level, I just don't see a need to add to my list of things to keep up with.

G+ on it's own merits was not growing to scale. A year or so back G changed the game and G+ membership became a requirement for a gmail account... thus the numbers began to scale. However, G+ is still not generally considered a successful "social media".

not2easy
You must have joined G+ accidentally. I'm not a member, and I can still check my Gmail accounts and use WebmasterTools. I know I'm not a member because I get messages telling me about the advantages of joining.

new Android phone activations

Not just phone but anything that runs Android. Yep, GMail + G+ +++++

I use the device(Note 8) for testing mobile layout on sites i build. that is it. Was forced to get a GMail account to activate - felt like I was cheating on myself with an Electric Iron.