It is not 'feature complete' yet, but you can try it out already @ http://apps.facebook.com/rssfeedit

There is a way to pull a page's rss feed using facebook, i can help people do it, i just need to work out a way now to enable posting these updates to my website if osmeone can help me,

Im lilmikey on digitalpoint,

Mikey

Wish Facebook could block things depending on user requirements, without just doing things carelessly. Twitter and FriendFeed will get lot of traffic because of this problem.

I won't ever post status messages to Facebook directly. Now I'm using Twitter to FB bridge, so that my Twitts will be posted on Facebook automatically. This will solve the problem temporary until Facebook management learn to behave themselves.

This wouldn't be violating privacy because it would only be their posts, not their fans, but for now it doesn't seem possible. Anyone have any ideas?

this is just a sad thing that facebook did.. hope they might want to reconsider it

This component can be even developed using PHP or JS, I just want to know the way to access a public facebook page posts. The end output needs to be like a live stream of posts running on my website showing posts of that public facebook page ..

Thanks
Chirag Mehta

Update your Twitter randomly according to your intrest Or, from Rss Feed Or, from your own tweet message list Or, Any combination of the above three http://feedmytwitter.com

http://EmailCharger.com

It's difficult to discern any practical suggestion or solution in this section:

"Facebook hasn't responded yet to our request for an official comment, but Facebook software engineer, Ari Steinberg, explained in an unofficial comment on the Activity Streams discussion group, 'We're certainly not opposed to enabling you to export your own content (in fact, we're always trying to work on ways to make that easier), but exporting all your friends' content to a totally public place without their permission isn't cool.'

But it was really useful. Sometimes privacy is at odds with innovation, and while we would never want to say that privacy is illegitimate - we're not happy to see it shut down major potential avenues for innovation either."

In the same breath that you acknowledge the sanctity of a user's privacy, you lament the platform-limiting consequences of that privacy. Okay, so what now? The article never transcends its breathlessness to make an actionable argument. It's like sighing that there's no national database of U.S. citizens (such a database would spur innovation), while acknowledging that many citizens don't want to exist in such a database (privacy is important), and then clicking Publish. We don't have the luxury of shipping wishes and sighs.

The article seems to be aware that to achieve its goals, Facebook would need to either override user privacy or remove privacy. But it is unwilling to make this argument directly, and in that absence it manages to be only incendiary and impractical. Those are the easiest articles to write, but they are not the articles that spur meaningful change in the world.

"perhaps sending items through the feed that say merely that "Your friend John updated his staus, click here to log in to Facebook and read it.""

I don't see any point in subscribing to an rss feed that tells me just that, it doesn't serve the purpose of it being more convenient because I would still have to log in to Facebook and read it. Might as well not subscribe.

This isn't a privacy issue anyway. The only way someone's status updates show up in my newsfeed is if that person has accepted my friend request, thus clearing me to view thier updates. If I choose to view that via an rss reader rather than logging on to FB (workplace restrictions often prevent this), what's the difference exactly? Each URL is unique, it's not like public feedlists are going to show it and allow random's to subscribe to it.....just FB being irritating (advertising dollars here we come!)

Here is an example: I use facebook to share pictures of my kids with other members of my family and some close friends. One of the nice things is that facebook is a protected place where not everybody has access to this information. The idea that those pictures would be embedded in public RSS feeds just because one of the people I have on my network has an installed that app is NOT fine.

The right solution is what friendfeed offers with the concept of public and private groups.

I think that facebook stands on solid ground when it comes to protecting the privacy of their users. What is much more questionable is the stupid 24 hour limit they put on the data. The 24 hour has nothing to do with privacy. It is just a selfish limit facebook has decided to limit the type of interesting things third party applications can do. Here again, if you compare Facebook with Friendfeed, you see a very clear difference. I hope that friendfeed continue to work on their quest of simplifying the user experience to offer a real alternative to facebook!

Facebook would loose millions or even billions of page impressions per month because nobody needs to sign in to stay informed or control the virtual ego.
This would trigger news like with StudiVZ last year. After the included javascript for the photos and lost several hundred millions pages views per month and in the news was written " growth is slowing down" etc.
But like Amazon did it in the last years: They did everything which is necessary to satisfy users needs.

The should open it but only with the possibility to control if my news are show on the RSS of friends or inside "the wallet garden" only

The big picture here is transparency versus closeness.

It's unclear to me what the solution is; Twitter on the one hand trusts (or at least defers to the judgement of its users) whereas Facebook makes the decision for its users.

It's a difficult tension to ride. I'm sympathetic to your desire to get an unencumbered feed from Facebook — and if they weren't such a big and juicy source of rich and timely information — would suggest looking for someone else to step in (here's looking at you, FriendFeed) to provide an equally compelling (and consistently marked up!) feed of user data.

From the Subscriptions Help Page:

How do I subscribe to my Facebook Notifications?

If you would like to create an RSS Feed for your Facebook Notifications you can do so by going to your Inbox and selecting the Notifications tab. On the following page will be the option to "Subscribe to Notifications" on the right. After clicking "Your Notifications", Facebook will generate an RSS Feed that you can save to your bookmarks folder and view in your browser. You will now have an auto-updating RSS Feed that alerts you of important things on Facebook involving your account (i.e. Wall posts, photo tags etc).
[...]
How is this different from News Feed and Wall?

The Atom feed or RSS feed of your friends' notes, statuses, or links or an individual user's notes, statuses, or links contains that content only, whereas News Feed contains stories about photo postings, relationship changes, etc. Also, your News Feed won't show a story every time one of your friends posts a note to Facebook; your News Feed only contains the stories we think you'll be the most interested in. The RSS or Atom feeds of a user's notes or your friends' notes, for example will contain every note posted. And finally, even though most web browsers display Atom or RSS feeds readably, you'll typically want to use a news aggregator to keep track of them.