Shared publicly  - 
Finally! A solid article from +Forbes! I've had this discussion with a bunch of people here on G+ too, and the jury was out with a bunch of different opinions.

Basically the conclusion I came to was that G+ would not be serving ads any time soon, but that basically it was a way of Google getting to know its users better, in order to serve better targeted ads elsewhere - like mail for example. 

When Glass finally becomes more mainstream, it's basically another way to gather data. I can't believe I'm agreeing with Forbes...
Mark Traphagen's profile photoEli Fennell's profile photo
I agree and have said it from the beginning. If you understand the connectivity of Google+ to all else Google than you understand why Google doesn't need to put ads here for this to be "monetized."

What I don't understand is Facebook friends who constantly complain about Facebook ads, but then say they don't "get" Google+.

I do expect that eventually there will be some way for brands to pay to promote their pages or content, but I also expect that Google+ will implement that much more smoothly than Facebook did. 
What I find amusing is when people say, "How can Google monetize this without annoying pop-up ads and such?". As if Google ever needed to annoy you with ads to make money (unless you search the price of gold, but that's the exception to the rule for now). Unlike a certain social network, they're very good at not doing that.
Add a comment...