This title is misleading and implies a breach in privacy on Google+. While that's technically true, the article is actually about how Google has recognized the problem and is currently fixing it.
"First, when you have a post that is defined as Limited (anything that you haven’t shared publicly) other people will no longer be able to share that content. Previously, once you shared it, others could link to it and that created a privacy problem that Google wanted to fix in the post-Buzz world."
While we don't normally think of it as odd (probably because it happens on Facebook and other social networking sites all the time) Google+ was meant to protect privacy better than this, so it's a valid concern. And they're addressing it, as you noted.
I think you should be able to share links again, without giving access to all the comments and such. Pics and text should not be sharable... Without permission. I can imagine having things that I don't want to post 'public' but that I wouldn't mind friends sharing with friends I don't know.
They should probably just change the default to disallow re-sharing on limited posts. I found the disable re-share option immediately but my wife didn't notice it due to the low contrast of the drop down button on each post.
I'm a little more concerned with the fact that you can see who a limited post was shared with by clicking on the limited link next to posts. It should be pretty simple to figure out who your friends have placed in their circles by looking at who their limited posts were shared with.
nh posted a video below which states that based on a $25B valuation, Lefkofsky will grab $5.3B, as he owns 22 percent of Groupon. That's a hell of a lot more than he'd have made in the Google deal.
Groupon stock only has to hold its value long enough for his lockout (usually 6 months) to end. It's usually not hard to do that - when things come crashing down, it's usually a few years in the future, not months.
Not really. Unloading 20% of a company without telling anyone is both hard and, I think, illegal (as an exec). This is one of the reasons Bill Gates' stock sales are so consistent is to keep the market from freaking out when he sells stock. (Ohmigod, Bill sold stock! Oh wait, he's done that every month for 10 years... nevermind.)
Lefkofsky might be able to hedge against the decline of the stock, but hedging 20% of a big company (especially because it'd be difficult to build a portfolio which replicated Groupon's situation and risks) is a pretty tall order.
All that said, I tend to agree with your sentiment...
"First, when you have a post that is defined as Limited (anything that you haven’t shared publicly) other people will no longer be able to share that content. Previously, once you shared it, others could link to it and that created a privacy problem that Google wanted to fix in the post-Buzz world."
The original title worked just as well.