4 ms·
It's a great idea in theory, but a pile of shit in reality. What's the point in using third-party authentication if you get zero data from it? Unlike Facebook,
by primitivesuave 13y ago
It's a great idea in theory, but a pile of shit in reality. What's the point in using third-party authentication if you get zero data from it? Unlike Facebook, my goal is not to sell user data to the highest bidder, it's to have the user skip the steps where they enter their real name and confirm their email address.
- wankerrific 13y agoThis. Facebook is a glorified user registration system on mobile. As a developer, I have no incentive to use FB anonymous login.
- jawns 13y agoWhile it certainly seems like it does you no good, I can definitely see a legitimate use case for it. Suppose you're creating a site -- let's call it Hacker News -- that requires a user to log in, and all you care about is the part where they enter their username and password. From there, you're able to assign the user a unique ID and persist their preferences (e.g. header color) across sessions. It's not exactly a difficult project to roll your own login system, but Anonymous Login gives you the added advantage of being able to "upsell" users into providing more information, if they feel comfortable sharing it.
- nacs 13y agoThe anonymous login allows users to become less anonymous by providing real info if they wish to do so later. So you have the potential to get > 0 data. This would basically make it easier to access or try out all the FB-only-login apps without giving the app owner all the personal info.
- habosa 13y agohaving FB login as an option increases your conversion rate. The more ways someone can get an account, the more likely they'll find one they like (to a point).