At some point all discussions must end. When this inevitably occurs the “Discussion” feature makes for an interesting time capsule, especially with the newly introduced ‘Google+ Ripple’ feature. Certainly from a historical perspective some discussions will be more valuable than others, but capturing the thoughts, feelings and anecdotes of people as events unfold does indeed have value. As an event occurs there is often a chaotic period of discourse when thoughts and opinions are shared. Only after some time elapses does a public consensus of sorts form. When books and Wikipedia files are written usually it’s this consensus that is cited, however, how it is reached or the evolution of the conversation is just as important. The “Discussions” feature will capture this process in real-time. 

Which brings us back to the philosophical battleground. At F8, Facebook took a big step towards “seamless self-expression” or “lifestreaming” with their enhanced news ticker. Their new timeline feature allows the user to better tell their life story; again the focus is on self. Twitter meanwhile remains a tool for fast, simple communication. It isn’t necessary for Google to build a platform or a walled garden in the same fashion as a Twitter or Facebook. The web is Google’s platform, and they are uniquely positioned to once again redefine how we interact with it. They now have the ability conjure life from something that has historically been a static, one-way conversation. Having organized the web’s information and made it useful, Google is now able to turn its focus to the greatest resource of information available: People. Spontaneously connecting and organizing individuals so they may best share their knowledge where it’s most useful requires widespread reach and the ability to make the experience seamless. Fortunately, in many ways Google is synonymous with the web. Their products are easily understood and have very nearly become public utilities. What has been lacking until now is a way of effectively bringing together information seekers with information providers sans a priori so that they may undertake a constructive conversation on the fly. Google+’s intuitive interface encourages people to self-organize around topics in real-time and thus opens the door to this possibility. The focus on discovery and collaboration diverges significantly from Facebook’s emphasis on self-expression. While both strategies are organized around fundamental human activities (which are not mutually exclusive from one another), the medium needed to facilitate these behaviors is indeed quite different. That’s why a features race isn’t necessarily warranted. Although people may be drawn to flashy features, they follow ideas, and they follow vision. It’s time Google+ let these things be known so together we can work on best implementing them.