Eric Schmidt Says G+ Is An Identity Service

Eric Schmidt, speaking at the Edinburgh International TV Festival, decided to add to the long list of creepy ass things he has stated in public.

I asked him how Google justifies the policy given that real identities could put people at risk. He replied by saying that G+ was build primarily as an identity service, so fundamentally, it depends on people using their real names if they're going to build future products that leverage that information. Regarding people who are concerned about their safety, he said G+ is completely optional. No one is forcing you to use it.

Click to expand...

Don't really see that as a creepy statement, just a simple matter of fact truth. At least Google is honest and upfront about it, unlike facebook.

That said, I never have and never will use either service. The chances of me using my RL name on the web are absolutely zero.

What sort of relationship does he have with google now? They like him as their spokesperson?

Steve said:

Eric Schmidt, speaking at the Edinburgh International TV Festival, decided to add to the long list of creepy ass things he has stated in public.

Click to expand...

It's really not creepy at all. He sucks at spinning it, but it's far from creepy. This forum is basically the same thing. It runs on an identity. You can't even use a gmail, hotmail, or yahoo account to sign up here because this forum wants a "real" identity per user. All social networks run on identities, that's pretty much the very definition. Forums, IMs, even chatrooms are mostly identity based. Most of the world runs on identities. Places that don't tend to end up like 4chan.

Then again, the link also clearly says:

These aren't exact quotes, but I did my best to paraphrase the gist of what he was saying.

Click to expand...

so we really don't know what Schmidt actually said.

Parmenides said:

What sort of relationship does he have with google now? They like him as their spokesperson?

Click to expand...

He is on the board still, he just isn't CEO anymore.

Of all the things I've seen and heard google do recently, that statement doesn't even come close to qualifying as creepy. In fact I'd say it's just the flat out truth, if the privacy concerns bother people, don't use them.

Dekoth-E- said:

Don't really see that as a creepy statement, just a simple matter of fact truth. At least Google is honest and upfront about it, unlike facebook.

That said, I never have and never will use either service. The chances of me using my RL name on the web are absolutely zero.

Click to expand...

honestly they don't need to be upfront about it, cause its common sense that these services are just.. that, they are social networking sites

dyzophoria said:

honestly they don't need to be upfront about it, cause its common sense that these services are just.. that, they are social networking sites

Click to expand...

And a social networking site is nothing but a data mining service designed to market itself as providing targeted advertisement.

Merc1138 said:

And a social networking site is nothing but a data mining service designed to market itself as providing targeted advertisement.

Click to expand...

You say that like it's a bad thing. Nothing in life is free and if I'm going to be subjected to advertising then it's in both the advertisers and my best interests for it to be relevant. I've had decades of being sold panty liners, nappies, eye shadow, conservatories and such on the telly whilst my eyes glaze over. They can mine the shit out of my data please.

New up in 2012, Gmail will start charging for usage unless you have a G+ account to "verify" identity.

kllrnohj said:

You can't even use a gmail, hotmail, or yahoo account to sign up here because this forum wants a "real" identity per user

Click to expand...

That changed here 2-3 years ago, or maybe they just relaxed it for the regular users. None of the forums I frequent need my RL name, address, and phone #, and it shouldn't be required to track an identity to target ads.

kllrnohj said:

It's really not creepy at all. He sucks at spinning it, but it's far from creepy. This forum is basically the same thing. It runs on an identity. You can't even use a gmail, hotmail, or yahoo account to sign up here because this forum wants a "real" identity per user. All social networks run on identities, that's pretty much the very definition. Forums, IMs, even chatrooms are mostly identity based. Most of the world runs on identities. Places that don't tend to end up like 4chan.

Click to expand...

So your real identity is "kllrnohj"? Many sites may require your real ID to sign up, but they let you use whatever you like as your public screen name (like [H], for example). Google+ requires your real name as the exclusive public name you must use on their service. Big difference.

I agree, it is a bit creepy that he just comes right out and says that Google+ is primarily an "identity service," instead of a social network. There is not even a pretense. "If you're not paying for it, then you are the product."

poee said:

So your real identity is "kllrnohj"? Many sites may require your real ID to sign up, but they let you use whatever you like as your public screen name (like [H], for example). Google+ requires your real name as the exclusive public name you must use on their service. Big difference.

I agree, it is a bit creepy that he just comes right out and says that Google+ is primarily an "identity service," instead of a social network. There is not even a pretense. "If you're not paying for it, then you are the product."

Click to expand...

It's as real as a name that was given to me by my parents. Heck, it uniquely identifies me far more than my RL name does. It is a difference, but not all that big - at least not for a social network where everything is based off of RL name anyway as that's the entire point of a social network.

I would like to change my display name on G+ independently of my RL name, but It's far from creepy that they don't allow that (yet?).

FragMagnet said:

That changed here 2-3 years ago, or maybe they just relaxed it for the regular users. None of the forums I frequent need my RL name, address, and phone #, and it shouldn't be required to track an identity to target ads.

Click to expand...

G+ doesn't need that either. Well, except for the RL name, which has nothing to do with targeting ads.

Not creepy, honesty is good. If you don't like it don't use g+. How much more simple can it be?

Google does more for the user than any other company who is in the business of collecting data. Name one company with a data liberation page like google.

bacon said:

Not creepy, honesty is good. If you don't like it don't use g+. How much more simple can it be?

Google does more for the user than any other company who is in the business of collecting data. Name one company with a data liberation page like google.

Click to expand...

Amen.

In the mean time, I'm enjoying Google+ and services.

I don't need an "identity service," I already have an identity.

I used to think that Apple was a great company that cared about its customers. I loved "the Woz," and even Jobs then, and all that Apple seemed to stand for. That was back in the '80s, but it still is no excuse for such naivety on my part.

I kind of forgot that lesson when I found Google's search in 1999 and continued to see such great, useful products roll out from them over the years, and all of it free to use. I loved their "Don't be evil" motto and thought these guys (Page and Brin) were awesome. I didn't mind the fact that they were offering all this cool stuff for free only because they wanted to monetize the data users generated, since I trusted them with my data. I had become a fanboy without realizing it since so many others felt the same way. "Google" had become a common verb, and they were one of the only corporations that I felt were trustworthy.

A new start-up may have management with strong ideals. But if they are successful to the point where they become a multi-billion-dollar global conglomerate with a fiduciary duty first and foremost to their shareholders, "trust" becomes just another malleable metric by which owners of a brand name can gain an advantage over their competition in the marketplace. Corporations are not "trustworthy;" that is not their purpose (other than the shareholder's trust that the company will do its best to give them a good return on their investment). They are not people, notwithstanding the persistent attempts of corporate lobbyists to change the law to make them so.

Just because a company has been good to you over the years (and Google certainly has been good to me) doesn't mean you drink their kool-aid and become an uncritical apologist or fanboy. When you start to hear yourself defending a company's particular policy for no other reason than you "like" them, that's when it's healthy to step back and try to assess the situation more objectively. Is the policy worthy of your gracious defense? Perhaps it may be. Perhaps it is not. But whether or not you "like" a company or their brand is not a very good indicator of the soundness of any particular policy they decide to implement.

Aluisious said:

I don't need an "identity service," I already have an identity.

Click to expand...

If your name is Johan Yaburgis, maybe..... or something unique like that.

If you are like me, people (like friends of friends, or potential employers) will google your name and find out a different person with the same name as you. This person might be drinking beer and acting like a clown (literally a clown, in my case).

I made my Google+ account, and instantly, wala I am #1 on the search now
There was other ways to get #1, but this was easy and my #1 reason for making a Google+ account before it became public.

Plus, Google+ is better than FBook.... circles alone make it SO much better, in my honest opinion. And did you notice FB and myspace are copying Google+ now with identical copycat features? LOL desperate..... google+ is the growing faster than facebook ever did, look it up

Dylan80 said:

If your name is Johan Yaburgis, maybe..... or something unique like that.

If you are like me, people (like friends of friends, or potential employers) will google your name and find out a different person with the same name as you. This person might be drinking beer and acting like a clown (literally a clown, in my case).

I made my Google+ account, and instantly, wala I am #1 on the search now
There was other ways to get #1, but this was easy and my #1 reason for making a Google+ account before it became public.

Plus, Google+ is better than FBook.... circles alone make it SO much better, in my honest opinion. And did you notice FB and myspace are copying Google+ now with identical copycat features? LOL desperate..... google+ is the growing faster than facebook ever did, look it up

Click to expand...

it may be getting accounts fast but i'll bet that less than half of those accounts are actually staying, lol.
Seriously though, G+ may be cool and all but in the end it's just FB but run by Google. If you think other wise then your just a bit delusional .

Baby steps, just before the giant leap.

I think the circles thing makes it a lot more appealing to people who avoided facebook for obvious privacy concerns.....like most of the people who work in tech. yeah some of them are on there for family reasons or pressures (I was one) but I definitely think Google+ is a lot more appealing to people who don't want everyone to know what they are up to at every second of the day. I mean, it has that capability, but it also (unlike facebook) has the option to choose who you want to talk to. That's where its unique and innovative mostly..... there's also hangouts and such, which facebook is copying AS WELL as a few other google+ features. Twitter has copied the tiered comment boxes from Google+ too.

Dylan80 said:

I think the circles thing makes it a lot more appealing to people who avoided facebook for obvious privacy concerns.....like most of the people who work in tech. yeah some of them are on there for family reasons or pressures (I was one) but I definitely think Google+ is a lot more appealing to people who don't want everyone to know what they are up to at every second of the day. I mean, it has that capability, but it also (unlike facebook) has the option to choose who you want to talk to. That's where its unique and innovative mostly..... there's also hangouts and such, which facebook is copying AS WELL as a few other google+ features. Twitter has copied the tiered comment boxes from Google+ too.

Click to expand...

Stay tuned this time next year or in 2 years eveyone who hates FB now will hate G+ cause it will turn out the same, they all do eventually .

Once the FB'ers find out about the games on G+ they will start spamming it on everyone's walls and such just like they do on FB, the option is there too to send all the shit game stuff to everyone on your friends list, just like FB has.

Like I said, same shit just a different company.