8 ms·
Facebook’s Gone Rogue; It’s Time for an Open Alternative
- snewe 16y agoCan someone show evidence of this statement? "Now, say you you write a public update, saying, “My boss had a crazy great idea for a new product!” Now, you might not know it, but there is a Facebook page for “My Crazy Boss” and because your post had all the right words, your post now shows up on that page. Include the words “FBI” or “CIA,” and you show up on the FBI or CIA page." That is scary.
- robryan 16y agoYeah this happens now, pages get a list of relevant status updates down the bottom, sometimes not so relevant. Almost seems like this should be restricted to people who like the page to keep it relevant. Also I wonder if there going to do anything about page fragmentation, they create a page for the exact way you typed something in, even though there is a more relevant page with different word formatting.
- inerte 16y agoI could write a crawl for these words, if it was a public update.
- kmavm 16y agoFacebook has had stream search for public status messages since July of 2009. Stream search is privacy-neutral; it only lets you see posts you were already allowed to see. If you don't want your status messages to be visible to everyone, set your privacy settings accordingly. Account -> Privacy Settings -> Personal Information and Posts and adjust the "Posts by Me" setting to whatever you like.
- friendstock 16y agohere you go: http://graph.facebook.com/search?q=my+crazy+boss http://graph.facebook.com/search?q=my+crazy+boss http://graph.facebook.com/search?q=FBI http://graph.facebook.com/search?q=FBI http://graph.facebook.com/search?q=CIA http://graph.facebook.com/search?q=CIA
- Alex3917 16y ago"It’s time the rest of the web ecosystem recognizes this and works to replace it with something open and distributed." Before Facebook there was FOAF, which was exactly the same except for that it was open and distributed... And nobody used it. Being closed is the only thing that makes Facebook good.
- dasil003 16y agoYes, but what standards typically lack in innovation traction, they more than make up for in 800-pound-gorilla disruption.
- derefr 16y agoPresenting itself initially as Harvard's yearbook is what made it good, as it kickstarted its network effects (everyone feels sort of obligated to be "in the yearbook," because they want to imagine they will be reminisced about.) I've seen FOAF profiles, but I've never seen a FOAF network.
- Alex3917 16y ago"I've seen FOAF profiles, but I've never seen a FOAF network." Yeah, because no one is going to give 700 million dollars to a bunch of hippies to make some internet commune.
- mechanical_fish 16y agoI agree, but the point of being closed was the privacy. I have always believed that the secret to Facebook's success was the privacy. You were among your friends. Yeah, it wasn't private in the secure sense -- it wasn't secure enough to stop a determined stalker, let alone the FBI -- but it provided a social space that was different from just spewing stuff all over the open web. Now that they appear to have given up that angle and replaced it with an unpredictable tangle of spurious logic that, yes, spews stuff haphazardly all over the open web, why not just publish your updates in the open? What needs to happen now is that someone needs to go into Facebook's old business, the one they have apparently abandoned. Where is the closed service that makes a best-effort attempt to provide an invite-only social space for myself and my friends?
- tjstankus 16y agoI love that there's a Facebook Like widget in the right column as you scroll down.
- rsl7 16y agometalike!
- silas 16y agoMight be a fun project to implement the XMPP Microblogging XEP (http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0277.html http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0277.html) as a start. XMPP seems to have a lot of the basic features for a distributed social network (buddy list, pubsub, established protocol, etc...)
- TrevorBramble 16y agoA guy I know has been working on something of the sort for awhile. I'm sure he'd appreciate some thoughtful input from enlightened beings such as yourselves. =^) http://socknet.net/w/The_Socknet http://socknet.net/w/The_Socknet
- benmathes 16y agohttp://www.linkedin.com/companies/enole http://www.linkedin.com/companies/enole
- andrewvc 16y agoUgh. Another FB article. When the revolution comes, the spark that lights the fire won't come from Hacker News. /me goes off to find a greasemonkey script to drop FB articles.
- piguy314 16y agoOther than your "pages" being totally public with no option to hide them from your public profile period and facebook's "new experience" program being OPT-OUT instead of OPT-IN I don't have too many issues with facebook's privacy. Configuring privacy settings the way I wanted them wasn't that complicated, I feel like this article may be blowing things out of proportion...
- Detrus 16y agoYea let's get an open alternative, a few years of coding, a few years of Facebook screwing up, a massive hatefest, and it will have 30% penetration in 2018. By then there will be new technologies that will make the issue irrelevant. Same as Linux and Firefox. By the time the community effort got it together, most of the effort was obsolete. Google's Chrome OS throws much of linux away. NativeClient sandboxing turns browsers and plugins into frameworks of choice, like jQuery. There has to be a more efficient way.
- sandee 16y ago> Same as Linux ... By the time the community effort got it together, most of the effort was obsolete Care to explain, how all the effort in Linux was obsolute ? (And i am on Ubuntu Linux typing this reply)
- derefr 16y agoI think he meant "most of the effort that went into a good userland GUI experience, from FreeDesktop et al" is wasted when your display is 100% filled by an HTML frame, ala ChromeOS. The Linux kernel is certainly not a waste.
- davidw 16y agoIt's a bit facile to compare something that works and has a few flaws, but is used by a great deal of people, with something that still isn't out of beta and isn't really used by anyone.
- cookiecaper 16y agoI've been thinking about doing some kind of distributed/open social network thing what with all the Facebook scandals cropping up, but it's pretty hard to do. The fact is for something like Facebook to function smoothly, it has to be centralized. There has to be a server somewhere out there that can be queried reliably for this data and that's the bottom line, even if you have something API-based like OpenSocial. It's just a matter of who you're going to trust with that data -- and as we see over and over again, money and power clouds judgment; a good candidate to control this network when it's starting out may not hold up so well under the barrages of billions in revenue and investors down the neck. The only way for users to have real control over their data is to build some P2P/self-hosting architecture, and for reasons all HN readers understand, this would be a huge, huge mess.
- wmf 16y agoThe fact is for something like Facebook to function smoothly, it has to be centralized. I hate to do this to you, but [citation needed]. for reasons all HN readers understand, [P2P] would be a huge, huge mess. Count me as one HN reader who does not understand that. (But then, it's hard to get someone to understand something if his ideology depends on not understanding it...)
- cookiecaper 16y agoI've explained a few obvious problems with a decentralized, P2P architecture here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1330382 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1330382
- kingcub 16y agoWhat would be a mess about it? Couldn't we be clever enough to figure out how to do this with what we have?
- Todd 16y agoAt first glance it seems nontrivial. As with most problems like this that can be decomposed into algorithms and datastructures, technology provides a solution. OpenID, OAuth, and Open Social were all developed to solve similar problems. My guess is that there will be half a dozen competing protocols within a year.
- sliverstorm 16y agoMy take: ignore the hype, watch people freak out and run around, and if it turns out it is a truly bad apple, pull out when I know for sure. Not because I have a vested interest in them, but I don't have any info I need to keep private (I make sure of this) and I am not one to buy into hype and running around with your hands in the air. Go ahead, downvote me for not being a Facebook alarmist. I do apologize though if I put it too curtly.
- alanh 16y ago> I’d like to make my friend list private. Cannot. > I’d like to have my profile visible only to my friends, not my boss. Cannot. > I’d like to support an anti-abortion group without my mother or the world knowing. Cannot. Great examples of what Facebook cannot do, and what the Facebook replacement must do.
- DanielRibeiro 16y agoGood article. Reinforces some of the suggestions given on Facebook And Twitter Will Always Be Crappy Businesses http://bit.ly/cMiQLa http://bit.ly/cMiQLa
- TheBurningOr 16y agoI think (hope) that Twitter has found (and realizes that it has found) a niche for itself in the 'what is happening now' part of the web. If they can focus on this, they might have a shot at becoming successfu.
- DanielRibeiro 16y agoI think the main difference between Twitter and Facebook is that the former is very clear at all times that all your data is public (by default), while the later is moving from a private to public data, in a not so clear way. But being more focused, Twitter does have an edge: it does not try to contain all data about your life, therefore, even if it sells your data, it doesn't really matter, as it was public already (buyers could just as easily use the API) and you don't have a lot of info about you anyway (unless you choose to do so). Summing it up: would we even be having this conversation if Facebook, from day 1, started with defaulting all data as public, being clear about it, and making data securing hard to accomplish?
- p858snake 16y agoA. Go to profile -> down to friends list -> click on the pencil -> Remove the tick in the box (Will still show mutual friends though) B. Change your privacy settings, Make it so you can only be found by searching certain things (eg: email address), Block your boss C. Unfortunately not (yet?)
- jasonlbaptiste 16y agofacebook is now opt-out whereas it used to be opt-in. give me something like that with early 2006 facebook simplicity and id try it. ironically, ive always wanted a higher res community for the people here on HN. this might be the perfect seeding grounds for something to happen (early adopter, good sense of community, far reach,etc.)
- c00p3r 16y agoNo way. You cannot attract so many people worldwide when the trend is already mature. The same with other mass hysterias like WoW, now the iPad, etc. The Tipping Point is a good book to learn why not. In-browser social networks is a not a cool thing anymore. It is just some feature of the net. What is really interesting - is an emerging market of the Android-powered devices. The hardware is powerful and cheap enough, and the platform is open and simple (unlike the Nokia's crap). The next generation of the social communications should be something like "texting 2.0" - texting with easy integration of a rich content from phone's camera on the fly. Just because teens loves texting, taking photos and their mobile phones.
- Nagyman 16y agoA thousand times yes. I just made the same comment not 2 days ago on reddit. The next social networks are an extension of our mobile network which already exist. My only concern is that I don't trust carriers any more than facebook. And I don't want to pay per message. So an open system is paramount ... And doing it before a Closed business gains the most marketshare in that space.
- baran 16y agoListened to a talk given by one of the Firefox guys a while back and in their vision social networking would be aggregated into the browser. Seems like a good start for this open alternative.
- deleted 16y ago[deleted]
- ff0066mote 16y agoI've noticed a trend recently whereby social networking sites on the internet are becoming integrated into desktop applications, panel applets, and now you suggest integrating it into my browser? Personally, I like keeping my online social identity sandboxed away in my browser, in a tab. If it's integrated into my browser's code, then it's harder to understand how my privacy works. In the current situation, I just have to clear my cookies to ensure my privacy is secure. I'm _not_ enthusiastic about a future where my browser has the functionality of specific web services built into it.
- rogermugs 16y agoYES!. i deleted my facebook account today... even if i only had 10% of the friends - if they were the right ones it wouldn't matter... i'd love an alternative that didn't screw with me.
- bootload 16y ago"... It’s time for the best of the tech community to find a way to let people control what and how they’d like to share. Facebook’s basic functions can be turned into protocols, and a whole set of interoperating software and services can flourish ..." That is an interesting thought. Eben Moglin, "Freedom vs. The Cloud Log" ~ http://www.h-online.com/open/features/Interview-Eben-Moglen-Freedom-vs-the-Cloud-Log-955421.html http://www.h-online.com/open/features/Interview-Eben-Moglen-... has a solution. A small web server where you control the logs and content, "do-able".
- iamdave 16y agoI think that there should be a push to build upon the idea of using XHTML markup to create a distributed social network. Formally known as XFN?
- cracki 16y agowhy do you single out XHTML? a markup language is not relevant to the problem. besides, XHTML never caught on. otoh, HTML5 is doing great.
- aarlo 16y agoIt doesn't matter what's right or wrong, or what we want! 5% of users know or care about privacy. And social networking services are all about the network effect. So, good luck competing. Facebook won.
- rmundo 16y agoWhat I'd like is distributed p2p linking. No personal data on a server that isn't yours. Any of your data hosted on a third party site if you choose so, is encrypted to within an inch of its life: they can't do ANYTHING with it except forward it to whoever you designate. Venn diagrams for your social graph. Or trees. Preferably both. If Yelp/Microsoft/whoever wants my data, they become a member of my social graph, not some all-seeing entity that hovers above me recording every comment I make. Data that goes to them is encrypted as well of course. Make it distributed, because no company hosting user data will be able to resist the temptation to use it to make money. Or build it on top of Dropbox, and have Dropbox serve as the backup for your online social life, encrypted, of course. 2GB will eventually fill up, and hopefully people will be happy to pay for extra storage, especially if you make it easy.
- ivenkys 16y ago"What I'd like is distributed p2p linking. No personal data on a server that isn't yours." - This is exactly right. do, Currently my personal photos,emails etc. all run from a server hosted in my closet and when i need to share stuff i send a link by email. A distributed p2p linking will make things so much more easier.
- swernli 16y agoThere was a post on here a few days ago about just such a distributed system. Diaspora, and it's under development by some current college students looking for crowdsourced funding: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1321651 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1321651
- rmundo 16y agoThanks for the heads up, I missed that one.
- jm4 16y agoYou could probably build that pretty easily on Opera Unite.
- BerislavLopac 16y ago
- mambodog 16y agoIt's funny seeing this article a day or two after seeing an article about Diaspora.
- malloreon 16y agoThrough this article I found out that Facebook has a "Chief Privacy Officer." That made me giggle. How long till CPO Chris Kelly's job is obsolesced by the utter lack of privacy on FB?
- kksm19820117 16y agoA la Piers Anthony: The function of the Chief Privacy Officer is to ensure that there is no privacy.
- aquinn 16y agohttp://onesocialweb.org http://onesocialweb.org
- roamzero 16y agoIs there some sort of metric out there that quantifies the number or percentage of people that care enough about privacy to drop out of Facebook in disgust? What if FB is right and most people don't care about comprehensive privacy features? It may simply be enough for FB to keep random stalkers and identity thieves away. It's easy to imagine that the Ebay effect will stick to FB and it'll be the only heavyweight social network site around for some time.
- bartl 16y agoI think it's actually time that FaceBook got shut down. By law.
- fauigerzigerk 16y agoOn what legal basis? It's just a website that you can use if you like. I think Facebook is actually very useful because they are so openly nasty, disrespectful and deceptive. Their users are, on average, so incredibly negligent and clueless that the whole thing will blow up in society's face eventually, and then much better sites (maybe even a reformed Facebook) will emerge.
- hga 16y agoIndeed; I don't see their having done anything that rises to the level where an execution by the government is warranted. If they get slapped around some more by the FTC that will become even less likely. One good thing that might come out of this is some "rules of the road" on changing ToS when they also change the social contract under which people entered their personal data.
- dangrover 16y ago"Now, say you you write a public update, saying, “My boss had a crazy great idea for a new product!” Now, you might not know it, but there is a Facebook page for “My Crazy Boss” and because your post had all the right words, your post now shows up on that page. Include the words “FBI” or “CIA,” and you show up on the FBI or CIA page." Is this really true, or is the author conflating updates with the newly-normalized interests fields?
- raganwald 16y agoHere's the page for the "Legos" interest: http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Legos/110234219005966?ref=ts http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Legos/110234219005966?ref=t... Take a look at the "Related Global Posts" list below. You'll see lots of stuff from people who don't list lego in their interests fields. The question I have is whether posts still show up if your status updates are hidden to people who are not friends or friends of friends.
- AgileCyborg 16y agoFacebook is for cheap-ass squares. They will get the biggest bang for the non-existent buck with FB. It is only the deviant evil bastards such as myself who steer clear of the site: the atheist in a sea of believers, the swinger in an ocean of conventional marrieds, the Libertarian government critic in a swirl of FBI and CIA FB meddling, the gay-rights supporter in a community of homophobes... Damn, and this is just the beginning. Free isn't necessarily freedom which is why I tend to be doubly-cautious around it.
- stickhandle 16y agoDon't get the fuss ... live by this rule -- DON"T PUT SENSITIVE INFO ON THE INTERNET. Simple. Be smart. Know what it is and isn't. Even if FBook had more enforced rules, then hackers would be the issue. As for FBook using the info you give it ... well, that's just good business.
- Keyframe 16y agoWhat facebook is for anyways? Why should anyone care? I find it becoming more and more boring, useless - and, from my experience, people tend to go there less and less. - Photos here and there - Random links/videos scooped around the net - Rants/statuses nobody cares about - Passive activism where people "join a group"/like something and do nothing about it - Farmville It is boring, really. I found twitter, recently, of immense use in two fields. First, around the industry bunch of professionals connected themselves even without knowing each other beforehand and openly discussing stuff and sharing ideas. (notably game dev). Also, have you seen stocktwits? If they can find a system to filter out the noise... excellent! I have an idea though, if they could somehow pool calls from regular users and "analysts" and compare them to a weighted random generator and post stats next to each user that would be great.
- noisedom 16y agoIf a open facebook clone is released that gets all the bands off of myspace and onto the clone then I think you'll have a winner.
- Dauntless 16y agoI think a good idea for a new Facebook would be to start at some big University college and build up from there...
- lukeqsee 16y agoI am going to work on a new implementation of a facebook style website. Built on these core values: 1) User privacy 2) Data transferability 3) Open source software 4) Open API (for only that data that users allow, of course.) I plan to do it in a Python web framework, most likely Django. I know people have been discussing a distributed social network, but I don't see a market for that among the non-techies of the world. Just like they see XMPP as gMail chat (most of them), open standards mean nothing. Just look at openID, it simply can't gain much traction -- unless a flag carrier picks it up. Distributed social networking will simply splinter the arena till it's impossible for them to know "which one?" For a new social network, the users want: 1) Simplicity. 2) Privacy. 3) Interaction. 4) Rich but intuitive interfaces. I am making a call for any interested devs, shoot me an email. lukeseelenbinder <at> the only webmail provider to use. :) (If I should post this as a new post. Let me know. I'm a little new to HN)
- nkassis 16y agoGlad that you're a hotmail user, oh wait that's not you ...
- ghb 16y agoI'm curious as to why lifestreaming never caught on: why entrust all your data to a single service (Facebook) when you can entrust specific data to specific services (photos to flickr, status to twitter, bookmarks to delicious, etc). This fragmentation produces specific competition for hosting particular data (this is already the case: Flickr, Smugmug, Picasa etc) which should keep hosts fresh and honest as they don't want to lose users. All lifestreaming did was aggregate all of this into a discoverable point with privacy controls. What happened?
- pnelly 16y agowe need an open source alternative BUT, what we really need to do is use facebook data on the open source alternative platform. So, someone can see activity feeds from their facebook account and from their facebook friends on this platform. It makes the transition to another platform smoother. Then, when facebook send their legal team to crush this, Use it as a means of publicizing the fact that "hey guys, facebook says it owns YOUR data and it doesn't want to share, but there is this really great open source alternative that you can sign up for"... of course, the message would be spread via facebook and we could all watch zuckerberg scramble to delete all these posts and links being passed around about how dirty facebook is. (I've actually noticed some of my posts about facebook on facebook deleted!!!) The virality of facebook could also be a chink in it's armor. People have far more power than any one entity when organized collectively. If anyone else is serious about it, I will personally offer my services to a project such as this. A truly open network would be a dream come true, and another great success of the internet age and further proof that success does not always have to be monetized. To quote Bill Hicks (to the marketers): "Stop putting a dollar sign on every damn thing on this planet!!!"