Not so busy, not so productive
Feb. 14th, 2010 08:18 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
altivoI actually took a nap in the middle of the morning today. Because I felt like it (or felt bad enough) but it's very rare for me to be able to sleep in daylight even for a few minutes, let alone a full hour.
It's a tradition in Gary's family to plan the summer's vegetable gardens on Valentine's day, so we started on that. Hopefully we won't have such awful floods this spring. Last year most of my seeds were washed out and had to be replanted. I'm also reminded that I need to get out and prune apple trees in the next couple of weeks some time.
We had pink pancakes for breakfast, which is sort of a tradition. Gary gave me a teddy bear with a "HUGS" sweatshirt on, and I gave him a big soft plush husky pup. We had talked about going out for dinner, but made comfort food instead and stayed in because it's just too cold to go out. He's busy with homework anyway.
I'm about to trash Google's "Buzz." They pushed it at Gmail users pretty hard, as in saying "no thanks" just meant they kept asking you again and again. I gave in only to find out they they automatically set up a profile and set me to follow people from my most frequent contacts. They did not explain in any detail what this meant, and it turns out there are some issues with it. I'm not personally hiding or afraid of being known, but there are definitely people I correspond with regularly who would not want to be publicly associated with either gay men or furry fandom. While I disagree with that attitude, I don't want to violate their wishes either. Google was quite willing to violate their wishes without asking them and without really telling me that they would be publicly visible to anyone as my associates, whether they wished that or not. This is very wrong in my opinion. Saying that it was stated clearly doesn't matter if the statement was (as Douglas Adams put it) "published by putting it in a folder in the bottom drawer of a filing cabinet in the disused lavatory in the cellar, where, just by the way, the light was burned out."
Now that the damage is done, Google apologizes and say they will do better. But they can't put Humpty Dumpty together again, can they? Not really. They've lost my trust, and won't get it back easily now.
Then there's the matter of user interface. Since they chose to automatically link Google Reader and Picasa (yes, people could opt out of that, but it wasn't clear what they were opting out of and had the appearance that Google was "recommending" the link) many had their personal photos exposed to viewership unexpectedly as well. However, the straw that breaks this camel's back is Google Reader. For those who leave Google Reader linked to their profile, anything they "share" with others via the Reader interface is published to Buzz as a "link" entry. (Very similar to Facebook "links" if you're familiar with those.) The difference is that many people use Reader specifically to share piles of reading material with a circle of friends or colleagues. Often that reading matter is on subjects of no interest to me, even though I may be their personal friend. My Buzz "inbox" is overflowing with this stuff, which from my end is similar to the stuff that aged relatives used to "forward" to my e-mail. I'd have been delighted if they wrote me messages about what they were doing or how they were feeling, but instead they just constantly forwarded piles of "cute stories" and "scary warnings" about non-existent viruses, gang initiations, and, of course, the dreaded brain tumor boy. I'm sure there is real content in Buzz, but frankly, I can't find it under all the Google Reader links. Google gives me no option on this. If I follow someone, I can't filter their output. If they are sharing 50 links a day with business colleagues over Reader, I'm going to get each and every one of them as a separate "buzz." There is no way to say "do not send me Google Reader output." The only choice Google gives me is to unfollow the individual in question. This in turn looks to them as if I'm rejecting them personally or something, which isn't true.
There's another issue too. I get unknown, suspicious followers on Twitter, of course. Everyone does. Most of us know how to deal with that, and we just block them. Unfortunately, Google created a situation with the "automatic" following such that many of us have followers we can't block and can't identify. Because they never created a Google profile, we can't see who they are and have no "block this guy" button to click. This is creepy in the extreme, and utterly unacceptable. Facebook has this right. They don't let anyone follow you until you approve them as your friend or at least accept their request. People who ask to be my friend on Facebook yet have protected their own profile so that I can't see their photo or name or anything about them until I accept them as a friend... Well, they get rejected. Too bad.
Consequently, I will be disconnecting Buzz from my Gmail and my online presence. Google has promised to give us an automated way to do that (something they also forgot to do before activating this thing) and as soon as they provide that I will use it. Presently one has to delete all one's follows manually, erase one's profile manually, delete one's comments and posts manually, and only then "turn off buzz." Omitting any of these steps leaves personal information lying about where it can still be abused. I expect Google to clean up their own mess, not make me do it, so I'm marking time at the moment.
I just want to say to anyone who is following me or who was followed by me, "It's nothing personal. I just found that Buzz is not something I need in my life, and I'm removing it."
It's a tradition in Gary's family to plan the summer's vegetable gardens on Valentine's day, so we started on that. Hopefully we won't have such awful floods this spring. Last year most of my seeds were washed out and had to be replanted. I'm also reminded that I need to get out and prune apple trees in the next couple of weeks some time.
We had pink pancakes for breakfast, which is sort of a tradition. Gary gave me a teddy bear with a "HUGS" sweatshirt on, and I gave him a big soft plush husky pup. We had talked about going out for dinner, but made comfort food instead and stayed in because it's just too cold to go out. He's busy with homework anyway.
I'm about to trash Google's "Buzz." They pushed it at Gmail users pretty hard, as in saying "no thanks" just meant they kept asking you again and again. I gave in only to find out they they automatically set up a profile and set me to follow people from my most frequent contacts. They did not explain in any detail what this meant, and it turns out there are some issues with it. I'm not personally hiding or afraid of being known, but there are definitely people I correspond with regularly who would not want to be publicly associated with either gay men or furry fandom. While I disagree with that attitude, I don't want to violate their wishes either. Google was quite willing to violate their wishes without asking them and without really telling me that they would be publicly visible to anyone as my associates, whether they wished that or not. This is very wrong in my opinion. Saying that it was stated clearly doesn't matter if the statement was (as Douglas Adams put it) "published by putting it in a folder in the bottom drawer of a filing cabinet in the disused lavatory in the cellar, where, just by the way, the light was burned out."
Now that the damage is done, Google apologizes and say they will do better. But they can't put Humpty Dumpty together again, can they? Not really. They've lost my trust, and won't get it back easily now.
Then there's the matter of user interface. Since they chose to automatically link Google Reader and Picasa (yes, people could opt out of that, but it wasn't clear what they were opting out of and had the appearance that Google was "recommending" the link) many had their personal photos exposed to viewership unexpectedly as well. However, the straw that breaks this camel's back is Google Reader. For those who leave Google Reader linked to their profile, anything they "share" with others via the Reader interface is published to Buzz as a "link" entry. (Very similar to Facebook "links" if you're familiar with those.) The difference is that many people use Reader specifically to share piles of reading material with a circle of friends or colleagues. Often that reading matter is on subjects of no interest to me, even though I may be their personal friend. My Buzz "inbox" is overflowing with this stuff, which from my end is similar to the stuff that aged relatives used to "forward" to my e-mail. I'd have been delighted if they wrote me messages about what they were doing or how they were feeling, but instead they just constantly forwarded piles of "cute stories" and "scary warnings" about non-existent viruses, gang initiations, and, of course, the dreaded brain tumor boy. I'm sure there is real content in Buzz, but frankly, I can't find it under all the Google Reader links. Google gives me no option on this. If I follow someone, I can't filter their output. If they are sharing 50 links a day with business colleagues over Reader, I'm going to get each and every one of them as a separate "buzz." There is no way to say "do not send me Google Reader output." The only choice Google gives me is to unfollow the individual in question. This in turn looks to them as if I'm rejecting them personally or something, which isn't true.
There's another issue too. I get unknown, suspicious followers on Twitter, of course. Everyone does. Most of us know how to deal with that, and we just block them. Unfortunately, Google created a situation with the "automatic" following such that many of us have followers we can't block and can't identify. Because they never created a Google profile, we can't see who they are and have no "block this guy" button to click. This is creepy in the extreme, and utterly unacceptable. Facebook has this right. They don't let anyone follow you until you approve them as your friend or at least accept their request. People who ask to be my friend on Facebook yet have protected their own profile so that I can't see their photo or name or anything about them until I accept them as a friend... Well, they get rejected. Too bad.
Consequently, I will be disconnecting Buzz from my Gmail and my online presence. Google has promised to give us an automated way to do that (something they also forgot to do before activating this thing) and as soon as they provide that I will use it. Presently one has to delete all one's follows manually, erase one's profile manually, delete one's comments and posts manually, and only then "turn off buzz." Omitting any of these steps leaves personal information lying about where it can still be abused. I expect Google to clean up their own mess, not make me do it, so I'm marking time at the moment.
I just want to say to anyone who is following me or who was followed by me, "It's nothing personal. I just found that Buzz is not something I need in my life, and I'm removing it."
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2010-02-15 03:24 am (UTC)The whole thing has lowered my opinion of Google to the point where I'm really open to Gmail / Google Search alternatives, and would almost use Yahoo or Microsoft's offerings if they weren't even worse. If you leave Buzz out of the picture that is.
Also, Happy Valentine's Day to you and your mate. >.>b
no subject
Date: 2010-02-15 01:20 pm (UTC)In short, even if you declined Buzz and haven't used it, Google has probably created a profile for you and linked you to other users. Anyone who chooses to look at your profile can, by the default settings, see who your frequently contacted e-mail associates are. This is very, very not nice of Google, and they just don't seem to understand that very well. I'd suggest that you investigate and take some action to control it, rather than letting it default.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-15 04:17 pm (UTC)Meh. >.> I thought they were supposed to not be evil.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-15 03:10 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-15 12:01 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-15 04:52 am (UTC)That's nice to have someone who cares about you so much. You are one lucky horsie!
no subject
Date: 2010-02-15 12:02 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-15 07:25 am (UTC)I don't think it's the first time Google have screwed up a privacy issue, and I doubt it'll be the last, unfortunately.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-15 12:03 pm (UTC)Now if it had said "Beware of the Bear" I might have had second thoughts.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-16 02:55 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-16 03:04 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-15 11:02 am (UTC)Really? I declined it once and haven't heard from it since then (there is a "Buzz" link in the sidebar next to "Starred" now that I don't need or want, but that can be dealt with using AdBlock or your chrome/userContent.css, assuming you're using Firefox).
Of course, after reading the rest of your entry, I'm glad I declined, too.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-15 12:09 pm (UTC)If you haven't touched Buzz or used that link at all, so you have no connections and no profile for it, then you can go down to the very bottom of the page and click "turn off Buzz" in the tiny options in the footer. That should get rid of the tab and make things look the way they did before the monstrosity was released from the lab.
If you looked into the Buzz tab even just once, though, it has created a profile and automatically linked you to other people and applications. The "turn off Buzz" option does not undo that, and you'd want to undo it all and delete the profile first. Unless you do that, all the potential privacy issues still remain active, only you'll get no notification if anyone starts probing around.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-15 12:42 pm (UTC)No, I haven't used it at all, although as the article
no subject
Date: 2010-02-15 12:52 pm (UTC)Worse, they still don't seem to understand that this was a big blunder, or a violation of privacy, or anything wrong. Their "apology" says nothing of the sort, just that they'll act differently in the future. Even there, they appear to plan on continuing the same default behavior. The only difference is that they will "ask you" first. But how many people question the defaults when starting a new application? How many actually read those reams of agreements, including the privacy disclosures? Google did originally issue some very weakly worded "warnings" about the consequences of activating Buzz, but didn't explain very well just what they meant. Worse, the warnings were issued only after they had already made those links (for some people, hundreds of them) and essentially, published them.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-15 01:10 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-15 02:17 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-15 04:54 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-15 12:12 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-15 12:36 pm (UTC)I got rid of all of these, though, and turned the whole thing off for good now afterwards. :)
Still, all in all, I guess it's just another reason to move away from GMail in the end.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-16 02:58 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-16 03:12 am (UTC)