Google+ goes TITSUP. But WHO knew? How long? Anyone ... Hello ... A number of Google services including Gmail, Contacts, Calendars, Chat, Drive and, er, Google+ suffered a midweek sag this morning just as Brits were downing their first cups of coffee. The ad giant's network appeared crippled to some users within the last hour. Register reader John told us that lots of different Google …
wtf is Google + ? Isn't it just that annoying login (I refused to use) on YouTube?
Yes and no. Google+ predates its integration with YouTube, this integration being part of Google's attempt to push Google+ on users that clearly didn't really want it just so that it could attempt to rival services such as Facebook. Despite the fact that Google+ is no longer the product of the moment (in Google's opinion anyway), YouTube users still have to put up with it.
And, like yourself, I refuse to use it. It's bad enough that I have to stop all the other Googlespy services from grabbing my info on site after site without serving up my details wholesale.
Google+? Just say no.
"Google+ = The social media website no one wants to use."
Especially after they dragged all the youtube users in. Once that happened it became impossible to have an intelligent public discussion.
WRT to Google drive, I imagine for some people it works well. Personally I've had no end of problems with it such as it consistently taking ages to start syncing new files across the network, or the client crashes for no apparent reason (google are worse than apple for error messages). I don't particularly like to use it, but Dropbox has so far been a lot more reliable and I'm looking into using Syncthing as a long-term solution.
What I want to know is why being "titsup" is so bad? Ignoring the possible gender based stereotyping for a moment, I would have thought that "titsdown" would be a more apposite expression....especially considering "up" is a well understood term for operational and "down" is an equally well understood term for non-operational (system is down, aircraft is down etc.)
Tits down is situation normal for many of us. If our tits were pointed up, that would indicate one hell of a bra malfunction.
I would have thought the reverse. The purpose of a bra is to keep the tits supported, or "up" in other words. Only if the tits were down could the bra be said to have malfunctioned.
Oh noes, with the whole "being a gentleman thing we're not meant to look" so this conversation has touched on the whole Schrödinger's tits paradox.
How does one know if they are up or down without affecting their existance.
This is why I love the Reg, ideas never I knew I could have.
What's being overlooked by people seeking to take offense, is that all of us, male and female alike, have tits. And if they are up, it implies lying flat on one's back on the ground, which is precisely the image that the word seeks to convey.
Certainly an adult female's tits are larger and more functional than a male's, but the word caries no implication about the size of the tits in question.
So there.
While I agree with most of your post:
"Certainly an adult female's tits are larger and more functional than a male's, but the word caries no implication about the size of the tits in question."
Thats a sexist generalization.....
(dammit, there's no duck and run for cover icon....)
With the aforementioned AdBlock......there's no revenue for the site and it'll end up titsup
Adblock allows basic static ads, just for that reason.
I've stated it here a few times now. If it wasn't for constanttly looping and quite distracting animated ads, I never would've discovered Adblock. If they would play once and stop, I would let them through. But they don't, so I don't.
[I'd love to give more support to El Reg's advertising dept but, sorry people, the ads you play were quite annoying last time I looked. Maybe I'll try again in a few months time (or if someone tells me that you've fixed them :) ) - but that damned "dancing Jesus" gif you had on recently was almost enough for me to block all images from El Reg and certainly I am weary of trying again anytime soon!]
Here we go again, clueless idiots jumping on the Google+ ghost town. That's so 2012...
Go read this, and then go ponder whether you would be better off writing for Take A Break magazine.
http://www.computerworld.com/article/2824613/why-google-is-the-place-for-passions.html
"So if Google+ is a social network for people to share their interests, what are Twitter and Facebook? In general, Twitter is dominated by news, celebrities, pundits, professionals and narcissists. Facebook is mostly about family and friends. And narcissists."
You go to Google+ and join circles of people that share similar interests to you. It's not a Facebook or Twitter replacement. If you think that, you are going to fail.
What's with people these days expecting everything to always by up and running? Stuff doesn't work that way - of course it's nice when it does but really, get a life - sometimes stuff doesn't work and when that happens everyone scrabbles around to fix it.
So let's hear a round of applause for the admins and PFY's who are working there asses off so that you can check to see if anyone's +1'd your last post.
What's with people these days expecting everything to always by up and running?
Unrealistic expectations, and stupid SLAs...
<rant>
Who the hell told people that email was either secure or guaranteed? I'm fed up of explaining to clients that just 'cos they pressed the send button doesn't mean there is 100% chance of the recipient ever receiving it. Email is a "Best Effort" service, just like the rest of the Internet. And if the client insists on making their "important" email look like a marketing flyer, the chances of anyone receiving it are getting slimmer every day.
</rant>
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
