6 ms·

This doesnt make much sense. If someone is worried enough about privacy - then why are they even logging in via their Facebook profile in the first place? Real

This doesnt make much sense. If someone is worried enough about privacy - then why are they even logging in via their Facebook profile in the first place? Realistically you would just use a throw-away email account and then no one knows. Secondly - as a developer - why would I want to accept anonymous logins? If I did - then I can just let them create a username + password with no email account instead?

DougBTX 12y ago
Looks like it replaces the pick-a-username and remember-a-password workflows with a single tap, lowering the bar for new users to start using the service. They can still favourite things, track data, get high scores, whatever the app is for, but delay handing over identifying information until it is actually needed, if ever. Interesting idea.
- laurencei 12y ago
  The thing is - we already have the Facebook (or twitter etc) single login option. However the are plenty of articles that say this form of sign up is not necessarily effective.[1] For this idea to take off - you need to assume the reason for the current lack of uptake is that users dont trust the 3rd party with the Facebook data. However I personally believe, and would have thought, that most people dont trust Facebook with the linked data, since they are learning more about you? [1] http://blog.mailchimp.com/social-login-buttons-arent-worth-it/ http://blog.mailchimp.com/social-login-buttons-arent-worth-i...
  - ryandvm 12y ago
    The problem with the existing Facebook single login is that it gives the user another, somewhat daunting, screen that says "Are you sure you want to give this app access to your contacts, email, identity, etc.?" I'm sure Facebook has found that a large percentage of users bail out of new signups at that screen. And frankly, the user should be bailing out there. Regardless of Facebook's sketchy policy changes, they have demonstrated that they will at least do what they promised with my personal data, but there's no reason that I should a new app/service the same level of trust. With "Anonymous Login" users don't have to worry that the app will be able to do nefarious things with their Facebook data.
    - tracker1 12y ago
      That's the website asking for that information... A website could simply ask for no special permissions. I've hit a few sites that I've signed in with github or google that haven't asked for intrusive permissions. I don't think it's really all that different.
      - deleted 12y ago
        [deleted]
      - yasth 12y ago
        Think of this as a special case (and even more limited) version of that, but with special reassuring text from facebook.
      - nucleardog 12y ago
        Facebook automatically includes "basic profile information and friends list" for any login. There is no way to request any less. A website asking for a friends list with no clear use case sounds suspicious.
  - simonw 12y ago
    You say there are "plenty of articles", but that MailChimp one is the only one I ever see cited. Do you have any other good examples?
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
      - deleted 12y ago
        [deleted]
    - jamiequint 12y ago
      Based on my experience working with a number of companies (n > 15) on onboarding flows, Email + Facebook signup (on the same form) is the most effective. This is trailed only slightly by offering only email signup. Most companies that offer Email + Facebook (on the same form) see a 70/30 split favoring email. I don't understand why any developer would use FB anonymous login when you can just use email which is equally as effective.
  - jon-wood 12y ago
    > However I personally believe, and would have thought, that most people dont trust Facebook with the linked data, since they are learning more about you? I think most people in the real world, outside our cozy tech bubble, trust Facebook pretty deeply. They give them their thoughts, their photos, their schedule, and their private messages to people. I'm not sure their really that concerned about Facebook also knowing that they signed into Candy Crush Saga XIV
- WA 12y ago
  The single-tap could be replaced with a single email field for signup. No username, no password. People try the service, if they like it, they can persist their data. Temporarily, they get emailed an auth link that lets them login to their account for a couple days.
  - yasth 12y ago
    Users don't want to give their email address because they (rightly) believe they will be spammed. Also a single tap is still often much easier than typing a full email address, especially on mobile.
    - acdha 12y ago
      > Also a single tap is still often much easier than typing a full email address, especially on mobile. This could be improved somewhat if iOS or Android had a way to autofill your email address on demand. Unless something's changed recently, the only way to do this now requires asking for permission to the entire address book which many people rightly consider a bad idea.
      - 21echoes 12y ago
        Android does -- declare a TextField's type as Email and it will auto-complete your email for you
        acdha 12y ago
        I was under the impression that still required a permission. If not, that'd be great since it really should be a distinct case because it's only relevant in a very user-controlled context.
  - shawn-furyan 12y ago
    I would consider email address "identifying information". I think if you're hesitant about signing up for a service because you're worried they might be the type of company that will waste your time (making you sign up before convincing you they offer something valuable), then you probably aren't in a place where you want to put the decision in their hands of whether or not to spam you incessantly until you unsubscribe.
yeldarb 12y ago
As a developer I want to use this to persist and sync data between devices. It provides a unique identifier I can use for the user before they trust my app enough to want to login. We have found that a significant number of users will just quit the app if presented with a "sign up or login" with Facebook screen at the beginning of the flow. With this, they don't have to give us any personal data and can start using our app right away. If they want to activate social features later it is really easy to upgrade their token without having to worry about merging accounts. Edit: regarding the user side, the problem for a lot of users isn't that they don't trust Facebook. It's that they don't trust the random app/website that is asking for their Facebook data.
- laurencei 12y ago
  "regarding the user side, the problem for a lot of users isn't that they don't trust Facebook. It's that they don't trust the random app/website that is asking for their Facebook data." Personally I feel it is the other way around. I guess we'll see how successful this is to see what people really think?
  - blueskin_ 12y ago
    Why not that they don't trust either?
- cryoshon 12y ago
  I don't trust Facebook or the random app/website asking for my data. I'd rather not be someone's product.
- wnevets 12y ago
  >We have found that a significant number of users will just quit the app if presented with a "sign up or login" with Facebook screen at the beginning of the flow. thats me 90% of the time.
  - acdha 12y ago
    Ditto – it's similar to the push notification / run in the background prompts on first run, where I have nothing invested in the app and don't even know if I’ll use it. I like this because it allows the developer to solve things like unique sync accounts and only ask me for more info after I've liked the app enough to want to do something like share it.
damoncali 12y ago
As much as I hate where this is going, it makes sense for a certain type of app. Apps where you need a login, really don't want it to be posting randomly/inviting friends, but in the end really isn't that important. It helps overcome the username/password signup hurdle AND it helps assuage fears of random Facebook posting. I'm sure it will be a hit with the next semi-skeezy dating app. For serious apps (business stuff), I don't see why you'd want this.
cwmma 12y ago
First social login is nice for a user, I also don't care enough about the app to sign up, have to remember what username plus another password (or more realistically, generate another password with lastpass, but oh your site doesn't like 80 character alphanumeric logins because you don't like the ampersand or you've limited it to 32 characters or whatever I've lost interest) maybe i need to verify the email to complete the login or something I don't know I've wandered off. Now it's not that I don't want them to know who I am, I'm ok when them knowing my email, I just don't trust them not too post on my wall or subscribe me to notifications or whatever (this is why the google social login is IMO nicer because you can clearly switch a box to make it not visible to anyone but you) Secondly as a developer social login is nice because A) users like it (see above) and B) you off load much of the work of having to deal with authentication and authorization.
Alex3917 12y ago
> Secondly - as a developer - why would I want to accept anonymous logins? Because you want the ability to ban people without them being able to create a new account, but you don't care who they are. (E.g. if you are running an online poker site.)

DougBTX 12y ago

Looks like it replaces the pick-a-username and remember-a-password workflows with a single tap, lowering the bar for new users to start using the service. They can still favourite things, track data, get high scores, whatever the app is for, but delay handing over identifying information until it is actually needed, if ever. Interesting idea.

laurencei 12y ago
The thing is - we already have the Facebook (or twitter etc) single login option. However the are plenty of articles that say this form of sign up is not necessarily effective.[1] For this idea to take off - you need to assume the reason for the current lack of uptake is that users dont trust the 3rd party with the Facebook data. However I personally believe, and would have thought, that most people dont trust Facebook with the linked data, since they are learning more about you? [1] http://blog.mailchimp.com/social-login-buttons-arent-worth-it/ http://blog.mailchimp.com/social-login-buttons-arent-worth-i...
- ryandvm 12y ago
  The problem with the existing Facebook single login is that it gives the user another, somewhat daunting, screen that says "Are you sure you want to give this app access to your contacts, email, identity, etc.?" I'm sure Facebook has found that a large percentage of users bail out of new signups at that screen. And frankly, the user should be bailing out there. Regardless of Facebook's sketchy policy changes, they have demonstrated that they will at least do what they promised with my personal data, but there's no reason that I should a new app/service the same level of trust. With "Anonymous Login" users don't have to worry that the app will be able to do nefarious things with their Facebook data.
  - tracker1 12y ago
    That's the website asking for that information... A website could simply ask for no special permissions. I've hit a few sites that I've signed in with github or google that haven't asked for intrusive permissions. I don't think it's really all that different.
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
    - yasth 12y ago
      Think of this as a special case (and even more limited) version of that, but with special reassuring text from facebook.
    - nucleardog 12y ago
      Facebook automatically includes "basic profile information and friends list" for any login. There is no way to request any less. A website asking for a friends list with no clear use case sounds suspicious.
- simonw 12y ago
  You say there are "plenty of articles", but that MailChimp one is the only one I ever see cited. Do you have any other good examples?
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
  - jamiequint 12y ago
    Based on my experience working with a number of companies (n > 15) on onboarding flows, Email + Facebook signup (on the same form) is the most effective. This is trailed only slightly by offering only email signup. Most companies that offer Email + Facebook (on the same form) see a 70/30 split favoring email. I don't understand why any developer would use FB anonymous login when you can just use email which is equally as effective.
- jon-wood 12y ago
  > However I personally believe, and would have thought, that most people dont trust Facebook with the linked data, since they are learning more about you? I think most people in the real world, outside our cozy tech bubble, trust Facebook pretty deeply. They give them their thoughts, their photos, their schedule, and their private messages to people. I'm not sure their really that concerned about Facebook also knowing that they signed into Candy Crush Saga XIV
WA 12y ago
The single-tap could be replaced with a single email field for signup. No username, no password. People try the service, if they like it, they can persist their data. Temporarily, they get emailed an auth link that lets them login to their account for a couple days.
- yasth 12y ago
  Users don't want to give their email address because they (rightly) believe they will be spammed. Also a single tap is still often much easier than typing a full email address, especially on mobile.
  - acdha 12y ago
    > Also a single tap is still often much easier than typing a full email address, especially on mobile. This could be improved somewhat if iOS or Android had a way to autofill your email address on demand. Unless something's changed recently, the only way to do this now requires asking for permission to the entire address book which many people rightly consider a bad idea.
    - 21echoes 12y ago
      Android does -- declare a TextField's type as Email and it will auto-complete your email for you
      - acdha 12y ago
        I was under the impression that still required a permission. If not, that'd be great since it really should be a distinct case because it's only relevant in a very user-controlled context.
- shawn-furyan 12y ago
  I would consider email address "identifying information". I think if you're hesitant about signing up for a service because you're worried they might be the type of company that will waste your time (making you sign up before convincing you they offer something valuable), then you probably aren't in a place where you want to put the decision in their hands of whether or not to spam you incessantly until you unsubscribe.

yeldarb 12y ago

As a developer I want to use this to persist and sync data between devices. It provides a unique identifier I can use for the user before they trust my app enough to want to login. We have found that a significant number of users will just quit the app if presented with a "sign up or login" with Facebook screen at the beginning of the flow. With this, they don't have to give us any personal data and can start using our app right away. If they want to activate social features later it is really easy to upgrade their token without having to worry about merging accounts. Edit: regarding the user side, the problem for a lot of users isn't that they don't trust Facebook. It's that they don't trust the random app/website that is asking for their Facebook data.

laurencei 12y ago
"regarding the user side, the problem for a lot of users isn't that they don't trust Facebook. It's that they don't trust the random app/website that is asking for their Facebook data." Personally I feel it is the other way around. I guess we'll see how successful this is to see what people really think?
- blueskin_ 12y ago
  Why not that they don't trust either?
cryoshon 12y ago
I don't trust Facebook or the random app/website asking for my data. I'd rather not be someone's product.
wnevets 12y ago
>We have found that a significant number of users will just quit the app if presented with a "sign up or login" with Facebook screen at the beginning of the flow. thats me 90% of the time.
- acdha 12y ago
  Ditto – it's similar to the push notification / run in the background prompts on first run, where I have nothing invested in the app and don't even know if I’ll use it. I like this because it allows the developer to solve things like unique sync accounts and only ask me for more info after I've liked the app enough to want to do something like share it.

damoncali 12y ago

As much as I hate where this is going, it makes sense for a certain type of app. Apps where you need a login, really don't want it to be posting randomly/inviting friends, but in the end really isn't that important. It helps overcome the username/password signup hurdle AND it helps assuage fears of random Facebook posting. I'm sure it will be a hit with the next semi-skeezy dating app. For serious apps (business stuff), I don't see why you'd want this.

cwmma 12y ago

First social login is nice for a user, I also don't care enough about the app to sign up, have to remember what username plus another password (or more realistically, generate another password with lastpass, but oh your site doesn't like 80 character alphanumeric logins because you don't like the ampersand or you've limited it to 32 characters or whatever I've lost interest) maybe i need to verify the email to complete the login or something I don't know I've wandered off. Now it's not that I don't want them to know who I am, I'm ok when them knowing my email, I just don't trust them not too post on my wall or subscribe me to notifications or whatever (this is why the google social login is IMO nicer because you can clearly switch a box to make it not visible to anyone but you) Secondly as a developer social login is nice because A) users like it (see above) and B) you off load much of the work of having to deal with authentication and authorization.

Alex3917 12y ago

> Secondly - as a developer - why would I want to accept anonymous logins? Because you want the ability to ban people without them being able to create a new account, but you don't care who they are. (E.g. if you are running an online poker site.)