Hacker News Reader

Comment by andylei | Hacker News Reader

> anyone on its social network will be able to send messages to your Gmail inbox.

i don't get it. isn't that how email works? what people are currently not allowed to send messages to my gmail inbox?

The difference is that you don't need to know what the person's email address is.

On Facebook, you can send a message to anyone from their profile, but it shows up within Facebook rather than the person's e-mail client (and it shows up in 'other' too.)

Edit: Facebook did not email me the last time I received something in my Other inbox (but that was a couple of years ago); perhaps that has changed?

Edit2: Being able to send a Google+ message from your e-mail client is a nice convenience that takes advantage of the fact that Google owns both properties. (It would be nice if it also provided a lookup for Facebook users.) I think that is all that this is, which means there is no controversy. I imagine you could already write someone a message that shows up in their email without knowing what their email address is by messaging them within Google+. If that is the case, this change is purely an added convenience that doesn't impact spamming at all.

Except that Facebook will also email you about that unless you opt-out just like Google+.

Facebook didn't staple their social network onto a non-social-network service after the fact, and then demand you sign up for it. Not everyone on Google+ actually wants to be on Google+.

>The difference is that you don't need to know what the person's email address is.

And that prevents what exactly... people sending you email? I don't get it.

Some people are really touchy about receiving mail from anyone they don't already know. Based on this thread, quite a few people.

Email has a light-weight de facto security system where people can't send you an email without knowing your address. Obviously, this isn't perfect, and it was never truly a security feature, but, nevertheless, it is there, and for all of its manifold and obvious faults, it mostly works this way. People are used to this. Taking it away will bother people.

> The difference is that you don't need to know what the person's email address is.

Now they need to know a different piece of pseudo-public information, your G+ username. Isn't this just a lateral shift?

I mean, there's still a "report spam" button, right?

Even better, pretty much anytime anybody does anything on my facebook page I get an email from FB letting me know about it.

Marco has clearly just lost it.

But that person isn't directly emailing you.

Exactly. Perhaps parent has lost it.

Good lord these Facebook / Google hate posts are getting out of control and are becoming comical in their faux rage IMO. Do we have a name for a new meme where if a company makes more than X billions of dollars we automatically hate them no matter what they do?

My email address has never been opt-in, ever since I started using email back in 1994.

Don't want people to email / communicate with you, maybe you shouldn't sign up for a social network? Google is linking your GoogleMail inbox to your Google+ account to facilitate communication. Don't like it? Opt out and calm down.

The point is that we want to like Google, but they're making it difficult. Quit confusing frustration for hate.

You're right that we can delete our G+ account. The point is that we're trying to explain to Google why it might not be in their best interest to add 'features' like this, at least without an opt-out mechanism.

Opt out is located at: Gmail Settings > Email Via Google+ > Who can email you via your Google+ profile? > No one.

Sorry. I should have phrased it as 'with opt-out as the default.'

This is very similar to the Snapchat snafu, and they handled it just as poorly.

These are both examples of what's wrong with growth hacking.

Thanks,

I'm aware that there is an opt out, but thats not really the point. gmail was pitched as the way webmail should be, and thats how I use it. I put up with google scanning my mail to provide tailored ads for this service. Why do I also need to be vigilant for regular changes that google make that negatively affect my privacy?

Nobody wants to use google+, if google keeps trying to shove it down peoples throats, nobody is going to use google.

I don't understand why so many people defend google on this?

There is an opt-out mechanism, which is mentioned in the original Gmail blog post.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-i1l-4aC-wpk/Us3x3EySkOI/AAAAAAAABM...

Except I didn't sign up for a social network. I signed up for an email account. Thats all I want, plain simple email. But every few months google fucks me over, tries merging accounts, creates google+ accounts in my name.

Why should I have to opt out of all this crap, when all I ever wanted was god damn email. Google has delusions of being a social network. If they want to add these conveniences for the three people that use google+ fine, but for gods sack make them opt in.

It's a free service; you pay with your inconvenience so that Google can milk those who don't opt out.

If you prefer not to pay with inconvenience but with dollars , there are some great paid providers out there.

So? When somebody messages me on FB, I also get an email in my inbox. What's the difference here? I'm equally annoyed.

When you reply to someone's Facebook message it's just Facebook to Facebook, no actual email address is shown (assuming A. you don't follow the person and B. they've kept their profile hidden). With Google+ if the person responds they will see your email address.

And you can turn it off.

The uproar is over someone being able to send email to you using your name (or your G+ profile in this case) without you explicitly giving them your email address... I don't get it either

Those who know your name but not your email address.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com