Shared publicly  - 
For those who have been following my posts on what Google Plus means, this post from +Paul Adams is essential reading.

tl;dr: It's just the beginning.
This is just the beginning. Jul 3rd, 2011. by Paul Adams. Disclaimer reminder: I currently work at Facebook and worked on Google+ up until the end of 2010. This post does not reflect anything I did at...
Steve Ivy's profile photoPaul Osman's profile photoLauren Wood's profile photoNana Love Eshun's profile photo
+Blaine Cook that's a good read. I think that it would be useful if Google+ offered "Suggested Circles" based on our reading/commenting behavior. Don't create them for us, but offer suggestions?
It's definitely a possibility – I'm not convinced that the rich sociality that we're all aiming for is going to come from algorithms, though. After all, if we could model sociality, why would we (erm, the computers) need humans after all?
I'm curious about the asymmetry of circles. As Paul mentions in that post, someone can add me to a circle whether I allow them to or not.. so it's completely up to users to define their social contexts. I actually like that.

I suppose the alternative is the LinkedIn approach, where a user must "accept" a relationship assertion. LinkedIn is probably the most accurate social graph I have (in terms of being related to my offline relationships). Of course, I have no reason to actually spend time there, so there's that :)
I find I use LinkedIn mostly as an up-to-date address book, especially for those people I get in touch with every couple of years, when I happen to visit near where they live. And, of course, a home for job references :-). My use of it thus tends to be sporadic - when I'm setting up trips, or starting to think about a new gig, or just started one.
Add a comment...