Comments for Facebook Connect Will Be Game-Changing...and Dangerous

Facebook Connect Will Be Game-Changing...and Dangerous

2008-07-25T16:19:03Z

With the news coming out of F8 this week, it was hard to not get caught up in the enthusiasm for Facebook Connect, the new authentication methodology which will allow you to login to third-party web sites using your Facebook ID and port your friend graph from Facebook with you. On the one hand, you have to admit this is revolutionary. The web will be transformed from the still (somewhat) closed system it is today, to a massively social experience - it's the "always logged-in internet." On the other hand, the company bringing this web to us is Facebook, the same people who had to be told by their users why Beacon was a huge mistake. Do you trust Facebook to control the next iteration of the web?

]]> Facebook Connect

As Facebook Connect grows and is adopted by more sites, it will push your social graph to the far corners of the web, out to places where it doesn't even exist today - that is, places like the corporate web sites whose own attempts at creating social networks of their own were a waste of money. These businesses never needed a social network - they need to tap into your social graph and Facebook Connect gives them the power to do so.

Through the seamless Facebook Connect integration, sites can access your Facebook account details and friend graph and move that data back and forth between their site and Facebook. For example, people commenting on a blog using the Moveable Type platform will be able to login via Facebook Connect. Their comment will link to their Facebook profile and the commenting activity itself will make its way back into your activity feed. On Digg, another site adopting Facebook Connect, you can login with your Facebook ID and your digging activity is returned to Facebook, too.

Why Facebook Connect Could Win This

A large majority of today's more mainstream users have a Facebook account and still, the site grows. Although MySpace still remains king in the U.S., Facebook is quickly closing that gap, having grown 40% over the last year. But worldwide, Facebook officially caught up to MySpace in April 2008 in terms of monthly worldwide visitors - around 115 million per site per month (source: Comscore).

Although Facebook Connect is just one example of this new trend involving the portability of our social graphs, it already has a leg up on both Google's Friend Connect and MySpace's implementation of OpenID.

With Google's Friend Connect - not even fully launched yet - they're relying on the power of their brand. But although the site is a household name now, that doesn't mean that everyone has a Google account or a friend graph there. Like Microsoft and their "Passport" (now Live ID) initiative, the largest source for collecting user accounts is via their webmail offerings. For those that don't use Gmail or any of Google's other customized services requiring a login, there's no value to Google's Friend Connect because there's no friend graph there. You would be creating an account to have the sake of the account. This doesn't appeal to anyone.

As for OpenID, as much as we're thrilled to see it finally making its way onto huge web sites like MySpace, it will still have to overcome the "user education" issue. A mainstream web user will not know what an OpenID is (and will often not take the initiative to find out). But they will be able to wrap their heads around Facebook Connect. "Login with your Facebook ID" - that's pretty much as straightforward as it comes. It's unfortunate, but you have to acknowledge the fact that if OpenID can't dumb down their concept enough for the "everyman," it may not be able to reign dominant across the web. Like Dick says on the Identity 2.0 blog: "...frankly -- typing in a URL is pretty geeky to most users."

Why Facebook Connect Could Be Dangerous

Unlike with OpenID, Facebook Connect put the power of the social web into the hands of one company. One private company. Not only that, but a company that's known for rolling out changes without so much as a warning to its users then having to react to the ensuing uproar.

Even the introduction of the Mini-Feed was protested upon launch. And Beacon - the advertisement system that sent data from external web sites back to Facebook, telling your friends about your purchases on 40+ partner sites - was literally a fiasco. It launched before there was a way to even opt-out.

In the past, user privacy on Facebook seemed always seemed to be an afterthought. Although their direction appears to be changing a bit now - recent updates to Facebook today make sure to cover how your privacy is going to be affected - it's only because they've learned to cater to their users' demands. It's harder to believe that it's because they genuinely care.

Facebook has always known that their value - that is, their monetary value - is selling off bits and pieces of your privacy to advertisers. The "real you" on Facebook is a holy grail for marketers. Now, with the power to spread that to sites across the entire web, Facebook will need to figure out how to cash in. In the process, they may again make another misstep. The problem is that this time it might not be something as innocuous as the video you rented at Blockbuster that finds its way back to your Facebook profile. As more of the corporate and business-oriented web adopts Friend Connect, the greater the chance for privacy intrusion.

Conclusion

What do you think about this new social web? Do you see Facebook Connect as having a chance to win this all? Or will it be Google Friend Connect or OpenID? Or perhaps all three can co-exist peacefully?

Comment from Todd on 2008-07-25

2008-07-25T17:17:00Z

People trusted Plaxo with their data back in 2005, and we all know how well that went. I can only speculate, but "The Real You", or "Facebook Connect" or "Plaxo 2008" whatever they call it smells like Ballmer puppeteering things in the background ahead of a larger stake purchase.

"We're sorry, but in order to continue using your Facebook Connect account you must first install the latest versions of the following; .NET 2.1 build 205a, Silverlight 2.0, Windows Media Player 12 and Microsoft Internet Explorer 8..."

Comment from jon on 2008-07-25

2008-07-25T17:28:06Z

with facebook connect, myspace data portability, openid, etc...those it make sense to ask users to register at your site? if so, when?

Comment from Dennis McDonald on 2008-07-25

2008-07-25T17:34:26Z

The devil is in the details. For example, a lot depends on how good (e.g., accurate, up to date, true, etc.) the "friend" data is that the "sharing" will occur with. See: http://www.ddmcd.com/connect.html

Comment from Robert on 2008-07-25

2008-07-25T17:41:31Z

I'm not so concerned about identity portability, that will mature eventually. But I am concerned for Facebook. The picture of Mark at the beginning of this article, with a million logos behind him, in a pose that suggests, "Heh isn't this great!" matches the undirected growth style of the platform. Though growing in popularity, it doesn't seem to be able to innovate beyond the idea of "more Facebook, more of the time,in more places is better." I have yet to see a "new idea" beyond the iterations on their core idea. I like Facebook, but it needs to mature in its business approach as it has its design, to remain healthy.

Comment from Jason Preston on 2008-07-25

2008-07-25T18:07:44Z

I think that privacy on the internet is largely an illusion anyway. The real problem is that the deal between services and consumers is still not explicit.

In exchange for giving us whatever value they give us, we agree to let them collect & siphon off the data we input. I get to use it and they get to use it, too. But I don't have to open my wallet.

I think that in the short term, Facebook Connect will do very well because it's extremely user friendly, but in the long term we're going to see the success of an ID/authentication/social graph thing that doesn't lock a user in to a particular site or service. But that's pretty long term still.

Comment from lloyd on 2008-07-25

2008-07-25T19:32:12Z

Good comment from Robert. I'm a fan of facebook, but they are very much a one trick pony like many people (mistakenly) claim Google to be. Until this, that is. I think FB connect will go down a storm. I'm building a few sites at the moment and with FB connect its just become that much easier for my users to register with my site (like they really want to type in another username and password anyway). I still dont understand why FB hasnt started a search engine of their own, or invited professional media content (like bebo) ... imagine if FB added a new FB application Facebook TV with professional TV content, the targeted tv ads would be great.

Comment from Aerospaced on 2008-07-25

2008-07-25T20:46:20Z

facebook = farcebook. Even Youtube has editable profile pages! Myspace is way better.

Comment from Zuckerborg on 2008-07-25

2008-07-25T20:46:57Z

What value exists for a developer/business who "owns" a bunch of Facebook IDs? At least OpenID gives you an email.

When will devs realize they are doing nothing more than building features (value?, definitely not businesses) for Facebook?

Comment from Mike Riversdale on 2008-07-25

2008-07-25T21:25:04Z

Hmm, seems someone wants to own the keys to the Internet ... dodgy stuff I'd say.

And already we're seeing web developers being sucked into the thought patter that it's "easier for my users to register with my site" without a thought for those users.

Facebook is a closed, walled environment into which you have to come and play and not the other way around. Not the Internet I want.
In fact isn't this the vision of AOL in its prime, Microsoft Network and all the other "privately owned estates" with walls, guards and rules. This might go a storm in America but it's not how the rest of the world lives [/sweeping statement]

Comment from ITrush on 2008-07-25

2008-07-25T22:51:15Z

Very interesting, thanks for the info.

Comment from Janet Tokerud on 2008-07-25

2008-07-26T00:41:53Z

I've been listening to Jonathan Zittrain lately and I really don't want a walled garden internet or non-internet. I thought we want to break these barriers down? I know that that old profit motive drives innovation on the one hand. But I want the game to get iterated some more if need be. I want the keys to my personal data. Please. And I want open platforms. Facebook needs to keep getting more cautious and concerned for the welfare of the planet not just their own bottom line.

Comment from xavier vespa on 2008-07-25

2008-07-26T03:58:58Z

I think it's great that the leading social network is looking for non-obtrusive ways to make money out of their service. + Banks and credit institutions are already doing it shamelessly. We've all been stripped of our "public privacy" a long time ago, so I don't really see the issue with Facebook Connect.

Comment from Daniel Heise on 2008-07-26

2008-07-26T14:59:53Z

I don't think Facebook will win this. I think Google will. I have a Facebook account but I rarely use it. Doesn't make my life easier, doen't help me in anything. No real value.
Google on the other hand gives me value. Helps me manage my e-mail, my feeds, my blog, my calendar, IM, maps, docs. I can organize my stuff with igoogle too. There's so much more value in Google products than in Facebooks "pseudo-products".
Plus I hate the Facebook banner ads on my page, it sucks big time.

Comment from Rubens Santos on 2008-07-26

2008-07-26T16:49:50Z

I think we need to consider not just the simple/limited and easy-to-implement alternative Google Friend Connect.

The next version of OpenSocial (v0.8, with RESTful api) will permit direct integration between third-party web sites and social networks (login at social network with OAuth).

Considering the number and size of social networks commited with OpenSocial (MySpace, Hi5, Ning, Orkut, etc.), this will be the real competitor for Facebook Connect.

Comment from Ray on 2008-07-26

2008-07-26T22:40:13Z

Yahoo also implements OpenID.

MySpace implements OpenSocial with their applications. I've found people on other social networks through people participating in applications. In the future, I can see how you could have a friend list spanning several social networks using OpenSocial the same way you can have instant messaging contacts from different providers today in one application.

Microsoft has been trying for years to implement "one logon" that people accept. It depends upon who you trust. For example, if you're one of Microsoft's competitors, when an application like the Outlook email client crashes, that email you were composing goes along for the ride with the crash dump sent to Microsoft. You're trusting Microsoft when you click the button to send the crash dump.

Comment from Morgan on 2008-07-27

2008-07-27T17:22:37Z

"The web will be transformed from the still (somewhat) closed system it is today, to a massively social experience."

A little hyperbolic, even for here.

I don't want to be logged in as the same person for every service, I like controlling who knows what about me. Even within Google I have to use both IE and FF so I can be logged in as different roles for different tasks. People understand logging in-- this is just a glorified cookie tracking system so FB can start making money of 3rd party websites their visitors go to. The ads on their site certainly aren't doing it.

Blah.

Comment from dave davison on 2008-07-27

2008-07-27T17:52:16Z

Yes, FB Connect is a potentially dangerous invasion of user privacy for the benefit of one company. It is possible for a counter approach to be developed that would link FB Connect a simple connection to a privacy protected "social sign on" like OpenID or Sxip - I think this offers a real opportunity to a social network service that can provide privacy protection to FB Connect users and I hope that other Social Network application developers realize how locked in to Facebook they are becoming and seek out alternative social nets for their users who want better privacy protection.

Comment from Anthony Mallgren on 2008-07-28

2008-07-28T20:27:15Z

I think Facebook has and continues to be overhyped. The social graph is already present in the internet. With the introduction of semantic technologies, Facebook is one step away from being a consumabled data source for any user would would like to provide their username and password to the parsing engine.

You could easily compare modern social networking sites with the early days of IM. There will always be your AOLs, ICQs, IRCs, Yahoos, MSNs, etc. Soon Trillian (figuratevely speaking) will come along and unify the social networking experience. The top-down approach for unifying social networking (i.e. building a platform to serve as the backbone of the internet) will never work, as it goes against the very nature of the internet. There will always be your linux type crowd who hates the norm. It is only when an interface can take on multiple personas that it will have the chance at dominating the world of social networking.

Comment from Alain Benedict Yap on 2008-08-01

2008-08-01T09:13:09Z

Crux of the mater is people get tired of signing up for every site that seems to be the next great one. It doesn't take a genius to see people flocking to every hyped beta site like rats to a piper. And facebook would soon have others gnawing at this 'connect' thing even as we are reading this.

Oh, and web privacy is a myth. Deep down, people wan't to be connected - just a matter of choosing whom. But then that's where trouble starts.

So can I add all of you as a facebook friend? :)

Best.
alain
www.mor.ph

Comment from Duncan Riley on 2008-08-01

2008-08-01T09:30:32Z

I don't see the fact that Facebook is privately owned as an issue. What I do see though as an issue is the creation of a monopoly, or presuming Google eventually gets serious in the space, a duopology of social graph conduits. Facebook wants to be everywhere, cementing an omnipresence that will make them difficult to dislodge by a new upstart and this may deliver that. The prospects of competition, and eventually real innovation dim.