4 ms·

Facebook blocks Scoble for downloading his contacts, sparks revolt

27 points by nickb 19y ago

ojbyrne 19y ago
Who cares? I don't mean to be flippant, this just seems like the definition of something that only matters to a lot of self-important bloggers.
- axod 19y ago
  I too don't quite understand the mentality of people who have 5,000+ 'friends'.
  - bayareaguy 19y ago
    Caveat: I've never used facebook other than once when I signed up in order to take a peek at the documentation for Thrift ( http://developers.facebook.com/thrift http://developers.facebook.com/thrift ). That said, my experience with Orkut is that it's next to trivial to end up with a bazillion friends. This is because friends never get dropped off your list and people outside your immediate circle often remember you when they see your name on someone elses list and consequently ask to be your friend regardless of the fact that you may not have spoken to them in a decade.
cstejerean 19y ago
what matters is that Facebook would disable your account for attempting to get your data out of it. For this and many other reasons I've deleted my Facebook account (and it wasn't easy).
- tomjen 19y ago
  If the data is on facebook servers, it is on private property and they have every right to decide who has access to their private property.
  - run4yourlives 19y ago
    I think the point is that it violates the spirit, if not the letter, of the whole "social network" idea.
    - pg 19y ago
      I think it violates a principle broader than that. I think everything you store in a web app, you ought to be able to get back out. As far as I know, Google meets this standard. I'm not saying that sites have to give users all the information they have about them, btw-- just that they should allow users to retrieve information they have supplied or been given by others. E.g. an email app should let you export (or at least not deliberatebly block you from exporting) emails you've sent and received. Contact info of people who've added you as friends seems in the same class as email sent to you.
      - icky 19y ago
        > I think it violates a principle broader than that. I think everything you store in a web app, you ought to be able to get back out. As far as I know, Google meets this standard. While visting there, I've seen at least one whiteboard with a list of principles from (IIRC) their CEO, with "Don't hold users' data hostage" underlined.
      - run4yourlives 19y ago
        > I think everything you store in a web app, you ought to be able to get back out. I think so as well, but given that the sanctity of data ownership is a rather new phenomena - for example, you wouldn't ask your bank for all your transaction history - I can give that they may not feel that they are obliged to return it.
        plinkplonk 19y ago
        "you wouldn't ask your bank for all your transaction history - I can give that they may not feel that they are obliged to return it." huh? Here in India you can ask any bank for your transaction history and they'll give it to you. You might have to go to the local branch and show id and wait while they print out the transaction history, but you'll get it for sure.
- pius 19y ago
  More relevant than ever: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=87337 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=87337
  - cstejerean 19y ago
    There's an easier way to quit. Create a new account with a separate email address (create a fake email address somewhere, use a fake name). Then add all the email addresses from your current account to your new one. When there are no email addresses associated with your account your old account is permanently deleted. You can then remove all your email addresses (except for the initial fake one). You will now have a blank facebook account that's not associated with your name and email address. The whole process takes less than 5 minutes.
    - theoneill 19y ago
      Someone should create a web app that does it. Imagine if you could just go to http://quitfacebook.org http://quitfacebook.org, enter your username and pw, and it would do what you described. Like a step beyond Greasemonkey.
    - pius 19y ago
      True, but the above link isn't about ease of quitting ... it's about doing your small part to fsck over Facebook. :P
tomjen 19y ago
Facebook is private property, so they can ban anyone they want (otherwise what is the point of the fourth amendment?)
- sethjohn 19y ago
  What is true 'de jure' may not be true 'de facto'. With technologies available to suck your information back out of Facebook (the new versions of which will presumably evade detection), and plenty of people happy to use them, the legalities of information ownership will be irrelevant.
- batasrki 19y ago
  OK, fair enough. But why does Facebook allow you to import data from other web services, like Gmail, but disallow you to export data from their database? If they're going to be petty about that, Scoble's pettiness is justified in my mind.
sethjohn 19y ago
Again, the future of the web is being written by petty acts of criminality. (aka civil disobedience, aka breaking stupid rules) Just as the entertainment industry will eventually have to adapt to the reality of file-sharing, regardless of the fact that the law is on their side...the future of data portability will be driven by technology development and people's willingness to break the rules, not by the Facebook TOS.
jakewolf 19y ago
He knew what he was doing all along. "That's part of my job to see how good their terms of service are, and how well enforced they are." http://scobleizer.com/2008/01/03/ive-been-kicked-off-of-facebook/#comment-1856083 http://scobleizer.com/2008/01/03/ive-been-kicked-off-of-face... Since when is breaking a contract part of one's job?
deleted 19y ago
[deleted]

27 points by nickb 19y ago

Who cares? I don't mean to be flippant, this just seems like the definition of something that only matters to a lot of self-important bloggers.

axod 19y ago
I too don't quite understand the mentality of people who have 5,000+ 'friends'.
- bayareaguy 19y ago
  Caveat: I've never used facebook other than once when I signed up in order to take a peek at the documentation for Thrift ( http://developers.facebook.com/thrift http://developers.facebook.com/thrift ). That said, my experience with Orkut is that it's next to trivial to end up with a bazillion friends. This is because friends never get dropped off your list and people outside your immediate circle often remember you when they see your name on someone elses list and consequently ask to be your friend regardless of the fact that you may not have spoken to them in a decade.

cstejerean 19y ago

what matters is that Facebook would disable your account for attempting to get your data out of it. For this and many other reasons I've deleted my Facebook account (and it wasn't easy).

tomjen 19y ago
If the data is on facebook servers, it is on private property and they have every right to decide who has access to their private property.
- run4yourlives 19y ago
  I think the point is that it violates the spirit, if not the letter, of the whole "social network" idea.
  - pg 19y ago
    I think it violates a principle broader than that. I think everything you store in a web app, you ought to be able to get back out. As far as I know, Google meets this standard. I'm not saying that sites have to give users all the information they have about them, btw-- just that they should allow users to retrieve information they have supplied or been given by others. E.g. an email app should let you export (or at least not deliberatebly block you from exporting) emails you've sent and received. Contact info of people who've added you as friends seems in the same class as email sent to you.
    - icky 19y ago
      > I think it violates a principle broader than that. I think everything you store in a web app, you ought to be able to get back out. As far as I know, Google meets this standard. While visting there, I've seen at least one whiteboard with a list of principles from (IIRC) their CEO, with "Don't hold users' data hostage" underlined.
    - run4yourlives 19y ago
      > I think everything you store in a web app, you ought to be able to get back out. I think so as well, but given that the sanctity of data ownership is a rather new phenomena - for example, you wouldn't ask your bank for all your transaction history - I can give that they may not feel that they are obliged to return it.
      - plinkplonk 19y ago
        "you wouldn't ask your bank for all your transaction history - I can give that they may not feel that they are obliged to return it." huh? Here in India you can ask any bank for your transaction history and they'll give it to you. You might have to go to the local branch and show id and wait while they print out the transaction history, but you'll get it for sure.
pius 19y ago
More relevant than ever: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=87337 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=87337
- cstejerean 19y ago
  There's an easier way to quit. Create a new account with a separate email address (create a fake email address somewhere, use a fake name). Then add all the email addresses from your current account to your new one. When there are no email addresses associated with your account your old account is permanently deleted. You can then remove all your email addresses (except for the initial fake one). You will now have a blank facebook account that's not associated with your name and email address. The whole process takes less than 5 minutes.
  - theoneill 19y ago
    Someone should create a web app that does it. Imagine if you could just go to http://quitfacebook.org http://quitfacebook.org, enter your username and pw, and it would do what you described. Like a step beyond Greasemonkey.
  - pius 19y ago
    True, but the above link isn't about ease of quitting ... it's about doing your small part to fsck over Facebook. :P

tomjen 19y ago

Facebook is private property, so they can ban anyone they want (otherwise what is the point of the fourth amendment?)

sethjohn 19y ago
What is true 'de jure' may not be true 'de facto'. With technologies available to suck your information back out of Facebook (the new versions of which will presumably evade detection), and plenty of people happy to use them, the legalities of information ownership will be irrelevant.
batasrki 19y ago
OK, fair enough. But why does Facebook allow you to import data from other web services, like Gmail, but disallow you to export data from their database? If they're going to be petty about that, Scoble's pettiness is justified in my mind.

sethjohn 19y ago

Again, the future of the web is being written by petty acts of criminality. (aka civil disobedience, aka breaking stupid rules) Just as the entertainment industry will eventually have to adapt to the reality of file-sharing, regardless of the fact that the law is on their side...the future of data portability will be driven by technology development and people's willingness to break the rules, not by the Facebook TOS.

jakewolf 19y ago

He knew what he was doing all along. "That's part of my job to see how good their terms of service are, and how well enforced they are." http://scobleizer.com/2008/01/03/ive-been-kicked-off-of-facebook/#comment-1856083 http://scobleizer.com/2008/01/03/ive-been-kicked-off-of-face... Since when is breaking a contract part of one's job?

deleted 19y ago

[deleted]