Shared publicly  - 
 
+Robert Scoble Dude, you're using the internet wrong. You can't follow 4,000+ people and not expect to get duplicate content. Would, eventually, grouping similar stories make sense...sure. You have to realize that you're an edge case. This reminds me of when you got pissed at twitter for not being able to follow more than X thousand people (25?). I love ya Scoble, but you can't demand features that only apply to a few.
Robert Scoble originally shared:
 
OK, now that we know that Amy Winehouse is dead we see that we need dramatically better noise filters. Hey +Vic Gundotra or +Bradley Horowitz is there anything your teams can do? I'd like to say something like "don't show me any more messages about Amy Winehouse." It's 100% noise to me now that I know about her death.

On converse, let's say you really wanted to talk about Amy Winehouse more today. Why can't you "amplify" that news and push everyone who is discussing such into a "Sparks?"

The way Google+ will really take off is to give us real noise control.

By the way, the Amy Winehouse noise is a form of duplication noise.

Here's the kind of duplication noise I'm seeing on Google+:

1. Same topic, different writers. This is very clear with the Amy Winehouse story, I'm seeing all sorts of people write different posts about Amy Winehouse.

2. Same post, shared many times. Sharing is really cool, but it causes a new kind of duplication noise: one where the same post shows up in many people's feeds, but shared many times by different people.

Other kinds of noise I'm seeing on Google+?

1. Noisy actors. Let's say you are following only three people. Your mom, your sister, and me. Your mom and sister only post three posts a week, while I post three posts a day. My posts will crowd out your mom and sister's posts, even though those messages are probably more important to you than ones from me. Facebook handles this very well, they will show you more posts from people you interact with a lot (I imagine you'll interact with your mom and sister a lot more than you will me).

2. Noisy posts. I just saw a checkin about where someone is eating lunch. I can't get rid of those kinds of posts. They add no value to my life unless they are from someone very close, either in distance to me (this one was in New York) or someone very close to me relationally (I'd love to know where my brother is having lunch, or my best friend, within reason). I have a circle of 40 venture capitalists. I'd love to filter out any post that doesn't have to do with funding, startups, entrepreneurialism, VC, venture capital, etc. There should NEVER be any cat photos shared with me on that circle.

3. No filtering by media type. For some people those animated GIFs are noisy. Can you filter them out to their own stream? No. How about videos? No. How about photos? No. How about location checkins? No. We need the ability to filter things out of our streams to make them more useful, especially as more and more people come over here.

4. Interaction noise. Many people complain about my posts because they attract so many comments, which pushes them to the top of people's feeds, and visually distract. Last night I was hit by another type of noise associated with this. Everytime I wanted to refresh the page to see new messages I'd have to scroll through 200 comments to get to the bottom of a thread to see new messages. That's a retardant on participating on threads with more than 50 comments.

5. No ability to see all posts by topic. I assume Google will solve this one first, by giving us some way to do searches on both our circles as well as searches on the wider public posts. But, that will bring its own noise too. What?

a. Spam. In search, it's like putting a net into the sea. You'll bring up both what you want, say, Tuna, but what you don't want, say Dolphins and trash floating in the sea. We need a smart "net" that will bring back only high-value posts. See how DataSift works: More details on "track on steroids:" DataSift or ask +Nick Halstead who runs that company.

b. Duplication noise. If you think duplication noise is high now, it's VERY BAD on Twitter search. Why? Because let's say you are only following 200 people you will only see the duplication noise those 200 people are doing, but now if you search all public posts you'll see duplication noise that 20 million people do. Makes duplication filtering algorithms even more important, which is why I wrote this post.

c. Bad actors. On search if you searched for, say, "Amy Winehouse" everyone will get treated the same, whether it's some 14-year-old immature assh**e or music producer +Steve Greenberg. At some point I'd like to see more results from people like Steve Greenberg (maybe by using Klout scores, or something like the credibility scores that Quora is keeping) and less from trolls, jerks, or 14-year-olds who really have nothing to say to me about Amy Winehouse and how she lived (14-year-olds, for instance, won't have any authority to tell me about alcoholism and how to beat it).

Anyway, we need noise controls. Until Google solves this I will agree with VC +John Borthwick that Google doesn't get social: http://online.wsj.com/video/betaworks-ceo-google-doesnt-grasp-social-media/A479ADF4-526C-46AF-A759-4BBAEF4DAAB1.html

This will be the #1 issue between now and the end of the year on Google+ and will determine whether people stick around and spend more and more time here. So far, this is my greatest disappointment with Google and hope they solve it in a very elegant way to match the great UI and sexy features like Video Hangouts.

What do you think?
394
20
Mike Lizun's profile photoDeepak J. Nath's profile photoAnthony Dooley's profile photoThane Townsend's profile photo
241 comments
 
I think there is a minor problem as well.
 
Kevin Way to get it, You guys are not normal users and have a very different set of prolems
 
I can't agree with +Kevin Rose more on this one. Google needs to be careful who it listens to.
 
I demand Google implement a feature that takes pictures of my cat doing awesome things and posts them for me.
 
WRONG WRONG WRONG. I have a circle with only 40 people in it. IT STILL HAS ALL THE KINDS OF NOISE I WROTE ABOUT! Would you like to come over and see it?
 
what would be nice would be to only see shared items once, with perhaps a title of "Robert Scoble and 99 other people shared this."
 
Of course he can... Edge case or not, it's a good feature request :)
 
Have to agree with you Kevin
 
Kevin, you're spot on here. At the same time, filter and muting options should always be explored for power users that need some flexibility.
 
ROFLOL! "Dude, you're using the Internet wrong..." ROFLOL slam
 
Agreed on the last point - you big shot A-listers can't request features that don't apply to the general population. It works in the opposite direction, Scoble has pointed out himself -- if a person follows a handful of folks, him being one of them, he realizes he will flood their stream.
 
Let me get this straight. Endless posts about Google+ are just hunky dory, but a few people posting "Amy Winehouse RIP" in his stream is not? Yes, +Kevin Rose, I think he is doing it wrong.
 
I don't follow gazillions of people, but I also get a fair share of duplicate content (mostly reshares of posts by celebrities). Noise is an issue on G+, even if you are following a few hundred people.
 
Amen Kevin. +Robert Scoble needs a reality check and it is our reality, not his.
 
I think it's good that he does do exactly that, Kevin. Edge case, yes, but excellent test case much of the time. I only follow about 100 people, and even when I use my "Not Pundits" circle to filter out Scoble and a dozen others, I already get duplicated shares.
 
I know his is a special case, but his initial premise is right -- there has to be a better way to filter out items. I am only subbed to 200 people, and I desperately wanted a way to filter any post that had the word "Carmageddon" in it.
 
Actually my only mention of Amy Winehouse's death was Scoble's post
 
Actually, that gives me an idea for a feature that could be useful. What if you could use hashtags here and clicking on a hashtag could give you the option to add that tag as a spark? So if you became interested in Amy Winehouse, you'd just click that hashtag and would be on your way to creating a spark around her.
 
I think that the reverse side of my recent post about the issues with Discovery here at G+ is filtering. Would tags or #hashtags make this easier or make no difference?
 
There certainly is still a filtration issue where pushing things to public circles (perhaps a replacement for the relatively useless 'sparks') would help reduce noise/repetition and channel information with large events, especially if the 'share' mechanic in this sense is kind of like a reddit/digg upvote.
 
Seems kinda poor taste to use the spreading news of someones death to criticize G+. The Obama press conference yesterday would have been a better topic.
 
Shares need to be 'stuck together' and we need a block/filter.
 
I've got a dramatically better noise filter: I don't give a crap that Winehouse is dead, really.
 
Google Plus works better if you build circles like you would IRL. I don't get why people ignore this.
 
Using the internet "wrong"? Funny, I thought the whole point of the internet is that there is no right or wrong about it. Guess that was just at the beginning.
 
totally agreed kevin, thats why circles are for isnt it?
create two circles annoing people and not annoing people
 
I wanted to share this post, which includes Roberts post but each time I try it only shares Roberts post. :(
 
I just expect everyone will feel the need to post the latest news story and then it goes away. I don't pretend to know why the need is there.
 
I need a filter that removes any post that mentions Scoble. 
 
I think there is a validity to the idea of creating circles based on content vs profiles alone. This could serve to filter content to both include or exclude. For instance rather then creating a specific circle yesterday with a few people actively reporting in order to follow the events in Oslo, I could have created a circle of all the profiles I follow but those posts that included the word Olso. Think this would be a nice feature to quickly classify the public streams and filter for better or worse.
Rob Go
+
1
2
1
 
bravo, Kevin. his rant reeks of snobbery.
 
Yeah, while you're at it can you make it i can play minecraft on G+
 
The irony being that Scoble is literally the only person in my stream talking about Amy Winehouse
 
He's an edge case, but he's got some good points. For example, the way sharing works fragments discussions. It's a "hey come over here and discuss this with me!". Google+ could use an alternative like: "Hey, let's go over there and join that discussion!"
 
To be honest I think noise filters are a good idea - and it applies to normal users too - seeing the same link posted multiple times separetly does get on my nerves, and some way to reduce that clutter would be brilliant.

I've got a small number of people I'm following, but these kind of 'repeats' do detract from the experience.
 
I find some of the modern complaints about technology hilarious. Waaaahh my google+ with drag and drop photo uploading, webcam based group hangouts, and live updating info stream doesn't have one very specific feature I want. Rather than simply send feedback I need to make a public complaint. Waaaaaah.
 
Circles or not, EVERYTHING shows up in the default stream, which is annoying. We need some more control or better algorithms for the default stream. That much is certain.
 
There really is quite a bit of noise, even with < 100 people in your circles.
 
The trouble is people don't fit well into boxes or circles and they never will
 
Isn't this what google news is for in any case? Set up a google alert if you're that interested in Amy Winehouse.
 
+Kevin Rose I think Mr +Robert Scoble is right, it's not a question of number of people, it's about repetition of the same topic in the stream...I think some kind of filters are necessary on G+
 
Filters like this would really be great. Just like with search...and, +, not, etc. In the meantime, that mute button is fantastic.
 
Well, it could be fun if we could use semantic tagging to exclude "posts like this" and/or search for "posts like this" (using the general flow, no matter the connections). I would love the feature.
 
+Robert Scoble Are the 40 people in a circle entitled "Amy Winehouse Fans" :P ?, because I seriously only see two posts from the few hundred people I'm following.
 
I wouldn't mind identical link reduction like facebook, where it shows me that X number of friends linked this EXACT same URL.
 
spot on +Kevin Rose At the same time, I do think some kind of downstream filtering would be useful for the "regular" user also. At the moment any filtering is done by the "publisher" and that's generally privacy rather than content related. filtering by tags (or even by keywords) would give the "receiver" some useful control over content.
 
I agree that Robert's use-case is unique, but I also would enjoy a feature similar to Facebook's wherein it is noted how many times a particular post has been shared, but it's not re-posted in the stream.

As for his complaints regarding prioritizing posts so that important posts don't get drowned, I completely disagree. That's why you set up circles and then look at the streams for those circles. I would appreciate if they improved shortcut key functionality so that I can more easily switch between circle streams without using the mouse (similar to switching between feeds in Reader), but I'm sure that will come.
 
Oh, and "Comment, then mute notifications" would be a good thing.
 
"Scoble, but you can't demand features that only apply to a few." Hey +Kevin Rose can you replace the few with one
 
Sorry, Kevin...Scoble has spoken...YOU'RE WRONG WRONG WRONG.

Sheesh, I picture him standing there throwing a mini-tantrum while writing that. Calm down dude!
 
+Kevin Rose Well, I think "mute post by keyword" is a good one. Why not? But I do agree having 4000 followers and complaining about the noise is a bit too much.
 
+Trey Stegall NO WAY, unless it's me controlling what's getting filtered and how. The main reason I dropped FB is that they were choosing what I was to read.
 
Great post. Speaking of improvements to the Google+ experience; While reading comments the constant text shifting up was irritating. Maybe its just because I'm using my lil netbook that it seems so jerky.
 
Hmm in this Case Robert might be right. A Filter for really trending topics that produce a lot of noise would be nice. And google should be more capable of finding a solution than Twitter - just because of their size and manpower.
 
To a point I agree with +Robert Scoble . If there is a popular post (especially about Google+) many people will reshare and I will see all those posts one after one . Would like to see an option where I see a post only 1 time. (I am following less than 300)
 
Bottom line? Besides the circles feature we need something to filter out stuff :)
 
Is he really saying that one persons opinion is more valid than anothers? If posts were ranked by peoples fame and not actual content then many a gem would be missed, and the "commoners" of the world who actually have a decent follow-worthy opinion would just end up in the dregs. Just because someone is known, does not make them automatically worthwhile.

 
I agree with +Robert Scoble that some type of noise filters are needed... Or maybe some type of rating system to filter/sort out some of the growing noise. Amy Winehouse is dead? spotify:track:1YkV2y6QU4zya9sonV0m8R
 
John C Dvorak had a tag line "I get no spam", I think Robert Scoble should have one called "You're Wrong" ;-)
 
The one good point Scoble has is you can easily skip a bunch of short, duplicate posts on Twitter whereas there's much more rich content per post on your average Google Plus feed.
But, really, Scoble, dude... You're wrong as well. I'm sure once the news announcements are done with, we're going to see a bunch of people arguing about drug addiction. This is all part of conversation.
 
You can actually 4000 people? Can you also accidentally a coca-cola bottle?

Also, #firstworldproblems
 
Is there a way to filter out people complaining about "noise" on social media sites?
 
Also, in typical communications networks, repeated messages with the same content would count as "signal", not "noise", so your own argument is both fringe and moot.
 
All I know is that these more advanced features are cool to talk about but before acting on them, they should really be sure they won't scare away the other 700+ million "non-techie" FB Users that haven't moved over to Google+ yet. Google should tread lightly because they've over-complicated many of their previous social efforts.
 
And what about the noise created when +Robert Scoble posts something. Sometimes I just don't comment because my notifications window keeps pooping unread numbers. :)
I surely can mute it but see I have to mute it.
Scoble is probably right to ask for noise control but it's hard to do it.
 
Agreed, in order to get maximize the number of users, Goolge has to cater to the average user as they are the more abundant ones.
 
Yes, we do need some filters and no, features are never based on corner cases. Showing the post once, that has been shared multiple times, sounds like a quick fix but there are complications in terms of displaying comments and related content. Creating multiple circles and managing them with intelligence is the quickest and most logical fit and even then there would be noise that we as internet users should be used to filtering automatically by now.
 
This is the same complaint I hear all the time on reddit regarding reposts, but just because one person has seen it doesn't mean that everyone has. That's what happens when you have a ton of people posting at once, especially when you don't know what anyone else has received in their stream. I recommend chilling out and ignoring what you already know.
 
When you start filtering, you lose the entire point of social networking. Go back to email if that's what you're looking for. Social means you get it all, as it comes. Anything else is just, well, pointless.
 
I believe they've encountered this problem over at Facebook too. It's called the Farmville effect. There's no known solution except to renounce all your friendships.
 
Everything is so ephemeral on social networks. It's cyber attention deficit disorder. What I like about Quora is that is offers the potential to work through a particular problem or subject. Here, the first poster creates the topic and the commentary gets lost in the shuffle.
 
I only have a hundred or so people in circles and I still see the mass sharing duplication problem. FB and Twitter both have solutions to this, but I agree with many here that I would like control over those filters, unlike FB.

When did it become unreasonable to ask for improvements during a Beta?
 
I think the problem is with the USER and not the program. I see a lot of people bringing their FB mentality to G+. That is they think they have to share EVERYTHING with EVERYONE. With G+ I try to think, "is this post relevant to the circles I'm posting too?". I too used to post "checkins" all the time on FB. I still do it now but only with groups that might care, ie Family and Friends.

I think there is a lot of re-education on how to use a social network. If you don't take G+ as a chance to re-evaluate how you use social streaming, then it's just a copy of FB and no real point to changing.
 
I do have to admit, people using Google Plus as a Tumblr feed is annoying.
 
This reminds me of tech people arguing: "I didn't have a problem sorting all my contacts into 35 circles, but does your mom want to sort thousands of contacts?" Normal people don't have that much contacts.
 
Agree on the retweets point - I just saw the same dumb picture pop up in my feed three times as different people shared it. But his litany of complaints masks the few that are valuable for everyone
 
All this noise that you speak of was one of the main reasons why I was getting so sick of Facebook. I don't end up posting anything (or at least I try to) because you have millions of other people who will post exactly what you just posted.

Well said Mr. Scoble! Well said!
 
I think you guys need to deflate your egos a little to think that these major social sites are going to customize this experience simply around YOUR needs.
 
I can agree that it would be nice for Google+ recognize a trend in your feed and for you to be able to then manipulate it, but there is no rush for this particular feature. Just a natural add on that will later come about I suppose. Scoble and any other power user with this issue will leave and return when that feature is pushed out.
 
+Kyle-James Keen No he is not saying that.More like we need to focus on what the majority of people need fixed in Google+ before we work on issues for minority users. meaning they use it much different that most. But that's not what i think, I totally agree.
 
I'm just kinda sad the Scoble always ends up being the spokesmen for all these services and ends up on all these news services talking about it. All they get is one side of one mans opinion.
 
Its got something to do with the fact that nearly 90 thousand has added him to their circles also though... Its not just the number of people anyone has in their own circles.
 
I have one Amy Winehouse post. + this thread.
 
Both are right... There IS a duplication issue, but it's not as bad for the "normal" user as it is for Scoble
 
I suggested to Google that they allow us to turn streams on and off at will instead of only being able to select just one. For example, I'd like to turn off the "following" stream sometimes (which would reduce the "noise") and just see posts from family, friends and acquaintances. When I want to rejoin the "noise," I could turn "following" back on. Being able to toggle streams on and off individually would let us use G+ like facebook when we want and like twitter when we want. Very powerful little feature. That's my suggestion, for what it's worth.
 
+Eric Booth I never am the spokesman for any service. I have no idea what you're talking about. I get onto TV because I have done more work in this space than most other humans. Have you seen anyone else who has visited hundreds of companies and interviewed thousands of geeks? I don't think so.
 
I follow about 60 people (not including +Vic Gundotra ) and I saw the Google+ app story about 10 times, so while I think you are right Kevin, some people suffer from this problem more, it isn't restricted to super users.
Rob Go
 
+C B is right. very poor taste indeed.
 
Optional noise filters should not be that difficult to develop and make sense. Right now, it's like music with no bass or treble. This fits with the theme of more user control and flexibility. +Robert Scoble +Kevin Rose
 
I fail to see the issue with allowing users to filter and curate as they wish. Even much more modest accounts than +Robert Scoble do have similar issues and desire the ability to choose what they wish to see or not see. A simplistic example would be to filter out objectionable language. Not that I give a expletive deleted.
 
As Rose points out, the more famous type people are not the norm, but those types push the environment in ways the developers didn't foresee. I think Scoble has a good add to G+, I would use it.
 
Yet it is those users at the fringes that see things before the rest of us. I see both points, but having more control over how we consume the information we subscribe to is big. We need the fringes to show us the middle.
 
I don't think it has anything to do with egos +Anthony Quintano . They are just mentioning how nice the feature would be if G+ decided to develop one.
 
+kevin rose you're absolutely right. Case in point, this post is the first I heard of Winehouse's death. Wasn't noise to me.
 
Scoble is right. You can't escape the Whinehouse avalanche at the moment.
 
Sure, Scoble can reasonably expect personalization. It is (quickly) developing into a personalized (Internet) world.
 
@Kevin Rose The customer needs what he wants.. its up to the company to provide it.. if not there will be others that will eventually provide it..
 
if i had the option to "filter" out Amy Winehouse related posts...then i would not have read this one
 
+Brian Hartshorne it takes one to know one. Geesh.
 
I think Scoble needs to increase the # of people he follows thus more diversity...um maybe
 
#truthtruth +Kevin Rose considering I follow just over 100 and have seen it a couple times. Comes with the territory, quantity over personal ideas of quality!
 
+Robert Scoble I have 100 or so people in my circles and my feed is also FLOODED with Amy Winehouse noise. This doesn't only apply to few, it applies to all.
 
Oh it can be done, and i am sure it will be done. Kevin if people did not account for edge cases (e.g., "there has to be some way to communicate with other educational instutions' people." - for ex Einstein getting his theories tested - early researchers having edge cases...etc.) the Internet would not even have been born. I'm surprised by your comments, but i am just recently only getting to know you. I vote that we do need some way to eighty-six the noise. Maybe it is a Tivo like scenario that I get my needs met (i.e., a less noisy stream - duplicate shares) where I can record for time delayed consumption... I'm glad he asks for the betterments.
 
So my question is. if you don't like "noise" then why do you have these people in your circles? Since your stream is only people you have circled, then why don't you hold them accountable for over posting? You only get noise because you made a decision to add those people to your stream. My guess is that the people that are objecting to all this "noise" probably have more then 50% of people added to their circle that they don't really know that well.
 
+Jonathan Davis nice post, good ideas. I think some tagging would help a lot.
 
I demand that G+ programmes an espresso machine feature, so that, when ever I +1 something I get a shot of java!
 
The way G+ does discussion threads, it's a tricky beast when it comes to Duping Shares. My first thought was if someone (including myself) reShares a post, then I shouldn't see any reshares, just the original. For better or worse, each Share has it's own unique discussion thread. I honestly think this is the preferred behavior. This allows for private discussions about a topic with whoever you Shared with, but you can still go to original post to partake in that Discussion.

I'd like something akin to Mute, but one that doesn't remove it from my Stream. Instead, it would prevent it from bubbling up to the top as new comments are made. Yeah, I saw it, yeah, it was neat, now stop bubbling it up. Or, the transverse would be for posts to always stay inline, I can specify that I'm Watching it, so force new updates to bubble it up.
 
+Steve Burgess respectfully, just because you don't have an issue shouldn't mean that others must suffer. It is clearly an issue to some and warrants a solution.
 
I think +Robert Scoble was once a 12-year-old with a 2600 Hz voice, lurking on Alliance teleconferences. They also POSTED IN ALL CAPITALS.

And btw I hadn't heard about Amy Winehouse's death either.
 
I have > 150 people in circles. I've seen 3 people post about Amy Winehouse. Pretty nice, if you ask me.
 
I totally agree with you Kevin, I never understood the reason behind following thousands!
 
Is possible the news are the people opinion and not only the dead of Amy?
 
The thing I like most about Google + is that people actually see what I post here. I have 2k friends on Facebook and I get hardly any interaction when I post. Perhaps a linear feed instead of rising old posts to the top might make it easier to sift through the streams.
 
What do you expect from someone who writes a 400 word introduction in their G+ profile...
 
This seems like something that should be done in a firefox or chrome addon.. allow you to filter however you want. Unless you want google to do context searching within posts and allow you to do -keywords like "-NOCAPS" :)
 
I agree that this happens to people who follow a much smaller number of people as well. Maybe something could be done that would allow us to mute posts with certain tags. Of course, the effectiveness of that would depend significantly on people using tags well and consistently.
 
How do I handle this +Kevin Rose guy who just duplicated Robert's post in my stream instead of commenting on the original? :-)
 
Scoble needs to REDUCE some of those he's following and stop boo-hooing. I have multiple circles and thereby much less redundancy
 
Famous last words: "I love ya Scoble, but..."
 
+Javier Ferreiro Yes... Google Plus allows us more space to say something about a news item. Filtering too much will silence a lot of potentially interesting commentary. Twitter is great for what Scoble is asking for... I mean, we do have TweetDeck's filtering system, which is one of my favorite toys. I hardly ever use it, regardless, because it's so easy to skip 50 posts linking to the same news item.

But that's just it. Twitter is a place to make a quick 140 character post and a link. Google Plus is better for talking about the issue. If we filter, we miss out.
 
Yeah I like Scoble and all but those demands are outright ridiculous.
 
Maybe Google should implement a -1 button, too, eh Kevin? nudge nudge
 
The number of people you follow is not the core issue. Even if my Mom were following just one person (me), she would want to filter out every post I labeled "#tech". Google needs to add a way to say "don't show me this post, and here's the reason why".

I'd prefer a manual option to an automated one, but their spam detection works great ... so maybe the machine could learn just as well what to put in my stream.
 
What never ceases to amaze me is how many people are bitching and complaining about a service that's not even a month old. There's a ' Send feedback ' button right there! Use the freaking thing and move on with your day...

I mean, what did Facebook or Twitter look like and how did they function after 3 whole weeks? Probably nothing like they do now, huh? Crazy how that works...
 
Isn't great how +Robert Scoble adds six lines of noise about AW to his billion followers by complaining about the noise?

My hint for noise reduction - don't follow Scoble, Calicanis, etc. On those rare occasions when they post something worthwhile, it'll be reposted all over the place anyway.
 
The problem here is not the request. We do need to have shared posts in the same stream be aggrigated. The problem is that it's stated as something we NEED immediately which is simply not true.

It's an annoyance to have to see all these duplicated posts show up in the stream, nothing more.
Ming Er
+
1
2
1
 
Google News clusters items nicely. I'm sure well be seeing some of that algorithmic sauce later on Plus.
 
It's not really a problem +Robert Scoble, as Twitter and Facebook don't allow you to mute topics. Unfollow people if you're not interested in what they're talking about.
 
There are 2 sides to this issue. I would love ways to filter, search, and curate my streams in addition to circles. That would push g+ well ahead of any of the competition, and it's what google is already good at. Scoble has some great ideas there. The problem is his rage at noise. I'm following a lot of people. When I looked at their profile I looked to see if their posts were compelling and only follow those people, even over people I know. I've gotten a lot of Amy Winehouse posts, but it's how I got the news, and most of the posts have been original links. Once I got the idea, I just skipped post the posts about it. No harm done. If you don't like the posts the people in your circles are posting, you've done a bad job organizing your circles. 
 
+Matthew Leverton Your mom would only see it if you posted your #tech stories to her circle. I don't see the problem?
 
Thank you Kevin for getting it.
 
Noise is a problem, since many people share the same posts. However it isn't the biggest problem Google+ has right now, and noise should be dealt with after bigger problems are resolved.
 
Posting in this thread is almost impossible. Not sure why people are still commenting when most of our thoughts are going to be ignored in a thread of this magnitude.
 
a) I wouldn't have found out about her unfortunate passing without social media. b) Don't you think it's a bit outrageous that someone passes and immediately we are angry we have to read a few 140 chars back to back about it? When we should be remembering who they were and what they brought to us.
 
Although I agree that Robert is an edge case, he does make some valid points about the noise level. Twitter becomes very noisy very fast and it does make the service somewhat less useful. I think that allowing users to define their own filters based on any number of criteria would be a killer feature both here and on twitter.
 
I'd be more interested in something to selectively censor certain things. i.e. anytime anyone comments on a sport. I don't care. Though saying censor creeps me out.
 
@Scott Alvarez, I want my tech stories to be public. I don't want to have to follow people I'm not interested in just so they can see my content. I don't want to create circles called "tech" or "religion" or "sports" because I don't even know what people may want to get ... Circles, IMO, should be about privacy, not content filtering.
 
I truly believe that Robert truly believes the internet revolves around him.
 
TIL who Robert Scoble is, and how he impacts my life less than the death of Amy Winehouse (who I've actually heard of before today). ;-)
 
While I agree with some points Scoble makes - there really should be a way to group reshared - it's a bit much to expect fully formed social media with all the bells and whistles during such an early stage. Second, maybe he needs a more diverse group of people in his circles? Sure, I see multiple posts about Winehouse but they aren't the same article. Takes about 10 seconds to scroll past
 
I find it interesting that +Robert Scoble has created yet another thread to bring his views on this to the forefront instead of keeping it in this thread. Everyone should create their own thread instead of posting here! -DEADCELEBS
 
How about some kind of list of trending topics and you can select each one and choose to hide future posts about it or find more people mentioning it so you can add them to your circles
 
Who is Amy Winehouse?...this is the first I've seen about her being dead.

I guess it depends who and what you follow. ;-)
 
I do think that there's s noise issue too though. While I like to follow some people it can be regarding some specific interest and not htier whole "public" life. I have no real way to do this filtering on my end as a follower and it could be nice to have a way to follow "user + circle" where the given user provide some public circles reflecting its center of interest
 
I can agree that filtering/aggregating shares would be a very good feature. However, how is what's currently happening any different from links or posts that are re-shared on FB or re-tweeted on Twitter?

Generally, if I see something I don't need/want to read about, I just ignore it. and if it's a particular person who keeps sharing those annoying shares, I just remove him from my circles.

And yeah, I actually only learned that Amy Winehouse died because of this post. :P
 
Why doesn't google have a spark feature for top shared news among the community, then filter that news out of peoples streams if they choose to block it.
 
This expected yet unfortunate event was the tipping point, where I realized just don't need to go to my Twitter feed to get real time info. I first saw it on my Google News, and unless it's an earthquake or something, I think my behavior has changed and I'm naturally coming here to Google+ after an event.
 
I'm seeing "duplicate" content about Winehouse, but it's from people I want to see content from. What's the big deal?
 
You can't ask google to spoon feed you the important (which for every individual is different) posts but
Yes. There should be some filtering. In buzz multiple post by a person collapse together so why not in plus.
 
If a feature like this is available...Google please let me be in control by having an option to turn it off and on.
 
I would just love if it would limit the comments to about 10, i just had to scroll for 30 seconds to get through this post :)

or as an alternative it would be great if i could classify posts from the famous people that I follow so they will not show in my stream, but only in the circle I have them added to. That way I can see the important items from family and friends, and when I need my update from news or other people i am following i can just go to the correct circle...

I am taking it all in stride though since it is still very early days. It took facebook years to get to a certain point where it is filtered like it is :)

2 great fixes, combining of shared links, and ability to remove certain people from the stream and move em to circles view only.
 
I said this in Scobles post reply to this, which is it doesn't matter how many people you follow, its who you follow that contributes to the noise. Out of the 145 people I follow 5 of them generate 99% of the noise in my stream.
 
Isn't this the point of a social network, to share with people and see what they sharing? I stopped following Larry Page because he was posting millions of kite boarding photos. That is all the filter you need right there
 
+Matthew Leverton I reguard "public" posts as people yelling in a room at a party instead of "circles", have a conversation with a few close friends. If you are the one constantly yelling, and you think it's ok for all your friends to yell also, then you can't complain that here is a lot of noise. I don't think Circles is about "content" filtering, it's about "interest" filtering. I'm not so concieted that I think everything I say everyone wants to hear.

I do think that people like +Kevin Rose+Robert Scoble ect do have big public followings and it's expected to have them post "public". But then each should also be prepared to have a lot of "noise" especially if they reciprocated and added their followers to their circles also.
 
+Robert Scoble Consider me an edge case wannabe. I like listening to and learning from people who've been there/done that. ;)
 
I stopped following Scoble precisely because most of what he writes is inapplicable to the average user and he has completely derailed into these narcissistic online rants. He should realize that social media as he uses it is what ruins it for the rest of us. He wants a noise filter? He is the noise. I dropped him from my circles and my noise dropped dramatically. 
 
Bloody hell. Putting +Robert Scoble in the "noisy buggers' didn't work and I just unfollowed him this morning. Still, he keeps coming back. This man just won't go away. :)
 
Robert is so polar. FIrst he is praising G+ and then he complains
 
Steven Crader: even the best diamonds have impurities.
James M
 
Nothing of real value to add that hasn't been said already, but HELLS YEAH +Kevin Rose for pointing out that all opinions are valid, however the opinions of a select few don't often outweigh those of the majority. 
 
I would like to note that my mom doesn't post three times a week, she posts 3 times a day. You, on the other hand, post 10 times per hour, so it's still skewed. :-P
 
Speaking of duplicate content, I'm following you both
 
Personally I demand a filter that removes all of Scobles posts from my stream... oh wait. :) Well said Kevin, Scoble is not interacting with people, I do not even see how he can be reading more than 1% of his stream with that many people in circles.
 
+Philip Guthrie glad you figured out how to get rid of noise. By the way, on Bloomberg yesterday I met the guy who blocked me and wrote a post on Techcrunch about it. He says he still sees my posts, even though he blocked me (because I'm reshared so often). That's another type of noise, I guess.
 
The next "big thing" in media will be better filters. There's a plethora of ways to get information nowadays through various search mechanisms. But there's not a lot of ways one can control the crap they get with the gold, in a streaming media sort of way. About the only way to filter something like a Facebook post is to do it after the fact or to base in on the person doing the sharing.

The entity that figures this out and personalizes it will be the next big winner. At the very least, they'll get my vote. The filtering could be proactive or reactive, too, and also based on timeliness--like, "I don't want to hear about THAT right now, but maybe tomorrow."

Things to think about, Internet Leaders.
 
It makes me laugh thinking that Robert and Kevin are sitting back together drinking a beer and watching all the real time posts and plotting on how to take over the world. ROFL
 
+Kevin Rose is right, but +Robert Scoble does have a point. I would like more control over the main stream. FB will at least let you hide specific users or apps if they are annoying you. I would like to see Google go further with that. I'm already intelligently using Circles. How about letting me configure what Circles pop up in my primary stream? Seems a simple enough option.
 
+Scott Alvarez, I think you may be onto something. We're witnessing the first huge realtime troll event on G+! :-)
 
Facebook does combine multiple posts sharing the same thing into one post on my feed, that's nice. I'd like to see that taken to the next level on Google+.
 
Now only do we need better filtering and especially a dup killer. And a fix for replying to a constanty growing list of comments, I have had to reposition this page 3 times as the replys mulltiplied.
 
Simple question +Kevin Rose , why not? I follow less than 100 people and have the same issue with multiple reposts of the same content. I want what he wants and don't follow people in mass......yet?
Bo Song
 
+Kevin rose well said.
 
amazing how much less noise there is when you stop following the people who complain too much.
Anita S
 
Twitter handles this really well, letting you join in on a trending topic like #AmyWinehouse, if you want to read all about it. But at the end of the day, community grieving is part of the noise that fills the universe. It sounds awfully callous, to amy winehouse as well as to the general populous, to say "i've heard enough about this - how can I switch it off?". If it's part of the cultural conversation, then that conversation needs to take its natural course, and all need to live with that. Trying to forcefit the universe to meet your exact daily demands will always be an exercise in futility. Google+, FB, and all the rest are just a microcosm of the universe. Having said that, if Google+ created a temporary hangout for each culturally-important topic (like Amy Winehouse) or had a way of tagging say that you could filter for or against the topic, then like in Twitter I bet people will use the honor system accordingly.
 
Way to make Amy Winehouse's death all about you, Scoble... You can't expect the technology to do 100% of the filtering if you don't do some of the work and have some circle discipline. Facebook and Twitter do the same thing -- when there's a big story, everybody talks about it, not matter what the group is. Also, what did you pay for Google+? Room for improvement for sure, but pretty awesome for free.
 
I understand where Scobel is coming from with Interaction Noise. Personally, I'm tired of having to scroll through the entire list of 100+ comments in order to see the next topic, or post, on my stream. However, with that said, I understand that this isn't the final product. Google+ is still in beta, therefore, it's not perfect - yet. There is still room for improvement. Give it time.
 
Some of the posts are a bit humblebraggy but +RobertScoble has several valid points. He's an edge user now but is actually using social networks the way many will or at least should be using them in the near future.

Follow 10K people on any network and you get more noise, duh, but it doesn't take away from the need for powerful curating and filtering tools. That said, the Google+ team is probably working feverishly on said tools as we speak/troll/mute.

I'd rather have the firehose on and have power users call out areas for improvement than have the random, bewildering and self-serving changes bookface inflicts on us every 3 months.
 
This +Robert Scoble is no one to me (really had no idea who he is and now that I've seen this don't care). But after reading this, I couldn't agree more with +Kevin Rose . That Robert person needs to go back to FB because they have exactly the algorithm he's asking for... THEY decide who you see on your feed based on who you interact with, and THEY decided to set this up for us because they think we're too stupid to figure out how to filter for ourselves. I still have people just figuring this out in my feed. So, Robert, go back to FB, change your setting to "only people I interact with" and you can see only yourself on your feed. Problem solved. :)
 
OMG, she's dead? I didn't know.
 
Heavy users who have thousands of followers have one response. People who use things once in a day or a week have totally different one. So a couple things out of a few thousand are dupes. Does that really take away from value?
 
+Kevin Rose : This is just plain wrong. If you look at Facebook, I have only people friended there who I have contact in RL with, and still every day I appreciate the grouping of sharing same links. Just 50 or so people easily makes need for this visible.

G+ supports very easy resharing of same content, which means people reshare stuff they agree with; meaning many political etc articles get reshared by half a dozen friends when they pop up - meaning two pages of just one post on Google+ stream.

This is actually something that makes people to uncircle their friends, just because G+ is very rudimentary at displaying content on stream. And it should make it easier, not harder to stay in touch with people you know.
 
I have to agree - a noise filter option would be excellent. I would apply it to all those videos Tosh shows of people breaking their ankles and arms. Of course, I have to wait to get Google+ on my DVR ...
 
Damn, Im using the Internet wrong. I guess when I started with Wired magazine back in 1994 they didn't know anything about the Internet either. Laptop closed…..
 
Noise needs to stop being looked at as a bad thing. It just shows how fluid the system is for sharing. How quickly things move across and around the network. Rather than complain about the effect, perhaps we should pay closer attention to the cause -- How well the platform is working in regards to sharing.
 
Isnt this like trying to get mad at cnn for giving the news that you already saw on fox news lol im playing dont get mad at me also lmao if you not watching porn your all using the internet wrong im joking everyone i dont want to be told im bullying here lol
 
Its kinda ironic, I heard Amy Winehouse died on Facebook. All the "Noise" on G+ for me Scoble's tears. 
Eddie N
+
1
2
1
 
"OK, now that we know that Amy Winehouse is dead we see that we need dramatically better noise filters...It's 100% noise to me now that I know about her death."

Personally, I think that this was pretty disrespectful. A person dies and the only thing you can say is, "I'm sick of seeing news about her death appear in my sainted news feed"? WTH?
 
I sort of like not being in a filter bubble that I have no control over.
 
Interesting points. I think the issues raised here will affect me, with 7 circles (all under 100 in each) as well as someone who's following tens of thousands of people.

I especially like the point raised about a having a circle for a specific interest (for me it's photography). I don't want to see photos of cats from that circle either, but I have done! Being able to filter out content would be useful.

Be interesting to see what Google does to address these points.
 
i think scoble need to learn about the "incoming" tab
 
I actually think that would be a great feature. If we can search for things, we should be able to block for things for a given period of time. If you are getting too much noise from Amy Winehouse fans simply put a block on any post containing Amy Winehouse for a set period of time (2 days is probably enough in this instance) and the problem is solved. After 2 days the block is up and any new posts about Amy Winehouse will be posted regularly.

I could see how this could be handy for the average user. Living in LA if I didn't care about basketball or am not a fan of the Lakers(Which I am not a fan of) and the Lakers won another championship I could simply put Lakers/Championship/Kobe etc. on my block list for a few days and I wont have to deal with the endless stream of celebratory posts that I don't care about from all my friends. This could be applied to any popular event or occurrence and topic that you are not particularly interested in. New Twilight coming out and are not a fan? Block it for a week. Presidential Election coming up and don't care about politics? Block keywords and candidates and you wont have to deal with it.

The reason blocks are only for a set period of time as opposed to indefinite is because the goal is to reduce the noise which itself is always temporary. And because words can relate to multiple things, once the hoopla has gone down for what you are trying to block you don't want to have posts not show up because they happen to contain the same keyword or makes an off reference about Amy Winehouse 2 months later when the noise of her death is no longer an issue. Maybe also make an option to have a block override if you are tagged in a post that would otherwise be blocked. So as to ensure that when you tag someone they get it.
 
yeah a filter would be cool...I've wanted something like that for a while. Being able to filter posts, youtubes, searches, would be so handy. I'd love to be able to go through my youtube subscriptions and filter out or in key words, users, ratings, dates, etc. eg Kevin has posted a youtube vid, and i'm scrolling through the daily subscriber posts but I'm seeing a lot of vids from bloomberg and a few other news channels I subscribe to, but I can't see Kevin's...instead of clicking on his user name I'd just like to filter out certain stuff from time to time to make the daily list a little easier to manage.
hope that makes sense
 
In life, when a popular story breaks, chances are you will hear about it from different people you know (or strangers) throughout your day over and over. At least on Google + you can mute them! Also even though people would obviously have to discuss the same stuff here and there... they each will have different takes and comments on the matter from different sets of people based on who follows them.
 
There are many people I could start my conversation with saying "Dude your using the internet wrong" LMAO That's the best line EVER!
 
I very much agree with Scoble on some of the types of noise he's seeing. I'd like to add notifications as noise. If someone else posts after this (they will; this is Kevin Rose's stream), I'll recieve a notification about it, whether I care about the topic further or not. I would like to be able to filter out notification noise based on circle.
 
Amy Winehouse died??? That's so sad
 
All I learned from this is that Amy Winehouse is dead and Robert Scoble seems to enjoy the caps lock key.
 
Scoble is ridiculous. He's so mad about this like social media is the only thing that life is worth living for. And if it doesn't work to his standards, life is close to over. DUDE, IT'S G+, STOP WORRYING ABOUT IT SO MUCH!
 
Scoblazer is an infection that is best left untreated and ignored until it goes away.
 
do you know robert janssen
Add a comment...