The Great Wall of Facebook

http://www.wired.com/techbiz/it/magazine/17-07/ff_facebookwall?currentPage=all

by jncraton • 17 years ago

83 39 17 years ago

wired.com

wallflower• 17 years ago

Robert Scoble has an interesting perspective on the ambitions of Facebook.

"Phase 1. Harvard only.

Phase 2. Harvard+Colleges only.

Phase 3. Harvard+Colleges+Geeks only.

Phase 4. All those above+All People (in the social graph).

Phase 5. All those above+People and businesses in the social graph.

Phase 6. All those above+People, businesses, and well-known objects in the social graph.

Phase 7. All people, businesses, objects in the social graph."

http://scobleizer.com/2009/03/21/why-facebook-has-never-list...

CodeMage• 17 years ago

Interesting read. However, there's one reason why Facebook and similar social networking applications fail for me, and I'm wondering just how many (or how few) people have the same problem. Consider Scoble's words:

You pull out your iPhone or Palm Pre or Android or Blackberry or Windows Mobile doohickey and click open the Facebook application. Then you type "sushi near me."

It answers back "within walking distance are two sushi restaurants that more than 20 of your friends have liked."

So far, there hasn't been a single social app I tried that managed to give me useful information like that. Why? Because they don't offer me a good way to differentiate and they don't learn. For these apps, all contacts in my network are the same and there's no way to teach them otherwise. On Facebook, I'm "friends" with:

1) People I see daily at work and we're friendly to each other.

2) People I've met in the past few years and we've been friendly back then but now were out of touch.

3) People from my ground school and high school, whom I haven't seen in more than 20 years.

4) A few relatives.

5) A few people with whom I have a lasting friendship.

Depending on what kind of "friend" my contact is, I would treat their recommendations of sushi restaurants differently. The same thing happens to me on the Goodreads site. I've found many great books there, but every time I had to search for hours.

I suppose it's just a matter of time before someone finally does it right, but I just wanted to point out what I find to be missing. And I'm really wondering whether other people feel the same or I'm just too damn picky...

jncraton• 17 years ago

I agree that current social networking applications fail at real world search at the moment, but what is preventing Facebook from adding a search component which searches the broader internet and uses information about your friends, interests, and activities to provide better results? It seems like Facebook has access to a boat load of information about you that Google doesn't have.

Google has lots of information about past searches, browsing history, etc, but it lacks personal information such as the organization you are currently working for or your favorite TV shows and bands (or in the case of many of us, our favorite blogs and programming languages).

inerte• 17 years ago

I don't know if Facebook has this feature (probably), but on Orkut you can assign friends to Groups, like Family, Co-Workers, Best Friends, etc...

It would probably solve your problem if an option to "Only consider the opinion of these Groups" were present. Of course, we'll fall into the problem of how noteworthy their opinions are depending on the subject. While I would trust my middle brother expertise on digital cameras, the youngest in the house is a chef, so each one should weight differently.

Something so complete will never happen (never is a dangerous word), because that would require other people to constantly input information like "I trust Gustavo's opinion on digital cameras", and even that isn't enough, because my brother is a professional photographer, and isn't the best person to ask if you want a cheap camera.

So, I don't think any of these "other people you know liked XYZ" will manage to give you things that you'll probably like (I enjoy different types of japanese food than my brother, for example), but they will help you socialize more. You'll at least know that your friend went to some restaurant, and tell him later about your experience.

elai• 17 years ago

There are apps like that. I've worked on a facebook/iPhone app exactly like that. Problem is that they don't get popular. It's the social game apps and similar trivial things that do well on facebook & social networks. You got to realize what people use facebook for. And there is a bit of a chicken and egg review db problem there. You got to get 20 of your friends to start using the "Food" app hardcore.

jmtame• 17 years ago

His killer point is right here:

Yes, we’re having another baby. But look at what did NOT happen on Twitter: not a single diaper company contacted us yet. Not a single maternity clothing company. Not a single car company (yes, we’re going to buy a new one soon). Not a single camera company (already bought a new one for this occassion). Not a single insurance company (I need more). Not a single bank (I need to start saving for another college student). Not a single stroller company (need a new one that can hold two). Not a single vitamin company (Maryam is going through her prenatal vitamins at a good clip). Not a single shoe company (Maryam needs new shoes for pregnancy, and Milan is growing fast too).

That will NOT last.

Husafan• 17 years ago

Another obstacle I think Facebook will eventually run into is the fact that social graphs, to me at least, seem fairly static. I am not a celebrity, and for me, literally ALL of my Facebook friends are people I know in real life.

While it is interesting to learn new tidbits of information about them, I am also very aware of the fact that, for instance, none of them live in Mountain View. If I decided I wanted to move there, the first thing I would do is turn to Google to learn about real-estate, utilities, getting a driver's license, etc. I don't quite see how placing the constraints of a social graph on top of a search for unknown information will make that search more useful. When stepping into uncharted territory, I don't want artificial limitations on what I find.

Periodic• 17 years ago

One of the odd things about the social graphs for me is that I have multiple distinct social graphs that overlap little if at all. I expect there are many people that want to really be sure they are keeping their work, personal, and family lives separate.

For example, my high school friends probably hate my updates about programming and computer topics. And honestly I don't care much about their trip to the river.

On the other hand, my more professional friends (who I don't interact with on twitter) could care less that I'm walking the dog but are happy to chat about programming.

For that reason I have multiple communities: Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, HN. They each have different social graphs and I discuss different things with each of them. Facebook's is trying to connect to these other sites to connect usernames to Facebook profiles, but I'm not sure I want all that going back to the same place.

sachinag• 17 years ago

I don't think I've ever seen Facebook go after Google so aggressively before - the "surveillance society" language actually made me whistle under my breath.

brown9-2• 17 years ago

I thought that some of the potshots that Facebook engineers took at Google engineers sounded a bit radical, not to mention just... rude.

I'm sure that Facebook works on and solves some interesting problems, but to act like what they do is harder than what Google has accomplished? C'mon now.

I've yet to read an article about Facebook in which Zuckerberg doesn't come off like a jerk

krav• 17 years ago

Regardless of their ambitions, it's fun for me to see companies in different verticals go after each other. That's where interesting innovation can happen. This is far better to read than another "Google search-engine killer."

Locke1689• 17 years ago

The difference between Google and Facebook for me: I trust Google (to a certain extent). I trust Facebook in no way. Google's policies have generally showed that they're concerned about privacy and their targeted ads produce information relevant to you, without sharing it with the advertisers. I'm confident that if I give Google my email service, they won't sell my email address to spammers or any of the info in my emails unless forced, etc, etc.

Facebook has never shown itself to be trustworthy. They continually try and control their users data. They made it extremely difficult to delete an account before. Most of their ad providers seems sleazy and trying to trick you. Their stupid 3rd party apps get who knows how much access to your profile, completely unregulated by Facebook. Not to mention them secretly changing terms of service and the like.

I feel comfortable with Google. I never feel comfortable with Facebook.

gaius3• 17 years ago

They made it extremely difficult to delete an account before.

That's an interesting point. How you ever tried to delete your search history at Google? One of the main differences between the two that I see is that everything Facebook knows about you, you have to explicitly tell it. Google quietly logs everything you search for and you don't even notice.

thwarted2• 17 years ago

Deleting your search history at Google is like three clicks (Web History | Remove Items | Clear entire Web History ) -- however, I've never done this, since I like being able to browse my search history. Now, of course, Google could be keeping the data around even though you've elected to delete it, or may be attempting to anonymize it to use it for a different purpose, but that's another issue.

basugasubaku• 17 years ago

Don't forget Facebook likely tracks things like whose profiles you view and other activity. It's no secret they attempt to rank your friends to determine whose updates you are more likely to be interested in, etc (some bugs have revealed this, google for "facebook stalk list").

In that sense they quietly log things that you may not even notice. Facebook can know a lot more about you than just what you explicitly write in your profile.

dave_au2• 17 years ago

I felt comfortable with Google up until the Reader fiasco and how they dealt with it.

That said, I'm significantly less comfortable with Facebook.

danw• 17 years ago

What was the Reader fiasco?

raphar• 17 years ago

I cant agree more. Why I say I cant trust Facebook? Would you trust a company that spams you, with the intent of you signing up? I receive at least once a month a mail from a facebook.com address. The mail contains some people names (mostly female, coincidence?) saying that this persons have profiles at facebook and that they are friends of mine (I know no one). Perhaps theres some guy with my same name. Either case this an annoying marketing technique!

pd1. I can post the mails if you want. pd2. These are not the standard direct invitations that I also receive from them via some friend of me.

azharcs• 17 years ago

What I really find interesting in this article is how some of the Facebookers are already considering Google as a Big Brother of Online world and in most cases, It is. I think Google is to Today's startups what IBM was to 70's & 80's Startups and Microsoft was to 90's Startups, a Gigantic and Monopolistic enemy to fight against.

they(Google) don't think Facebook's staff has the brainpower to succeed where they have failed. "If they found a way to monetize all of a sudden, sure, that would be a problem," says one highly placed Google executive. "But they're not going to."

This is the same kind of Arrogant and cocky attitude which made IBM irrelevant in PC market, Microsoft irrelevant in Online market and Maybe Google in Advertising. History repeats Itself every decade, atleast in Technology.

carbon8• 17 years ago

"Google is to Today's startups what IBM was to 70's & 80's Startups and Microsoft was to 90's Startups, a Gigantic and Monopolistic enemy to fight against."

That argument makes no sense, especially in comparison to facebook. Google is a set of disconnected services that you can take or leave. You don't like google search or gmail or google maps or google news? Go ahead and use something else. For any service that doesn't require immediate personalization, you don't even need to sign up ever. Even if every single person you interact with uses google search or gmail, it doesn't matter because you have no obligation to use it. As a developer, if you hate google and don't want to use anything by the company all you have to think about is SEO, most of which is basically common sense and regular marketing on non-google sites. Why would you possibly even need to consider "fight[ing] against" google unless you were directly competing?

In contrast, Facebook explicitly wants to be THE monolithic dominating force on the internet. You can't even use it without signing up and joining the whole Facebook thing. If everyone you know is using it, you end up missing out; it's basically vendor lock-in for your entire social life. And as a developer, interacting with Facebook in any meaningful way means dealing with Facebook every step of the way.

Monolithic platforms like Facebook are truly awful. Facebook is defined by locking people into the platform while Google joins together disparate web services and competes on quality and brand recognition. Google has its problems, but Facebook's problems are right at the core of everything it does.

RK• 17 years ago

Facebook explicitly wants to be THE monolithic dominating force on the internet. You can't even use it without signing up and joining the whole Facebook thing.

It is the new AOL.

I'm still waiting for the "Internet" of social networking sites to come along and make Facebook, MySpace, etc. things of the proprietary past.

johnnybgoode• 17 years ago

I'm not a big fan of either of these companies, so I find myself agreeing with the criticisms from both sides. In today's environment, advertising can obviously be tremendously profitable, and advertising is what the businesses of both Facebook and Google boil down to. But the idea of pushing more and more largely useless crap on people doesn't really interest me, even if it's profitable. (But then, what most people do on Facebook all day doesn't really interest me, either.)

ziadbc• 17 years ago

"Nobody has the data we have." is somewhat hyperbole. Gmail has more info about me than Facebook will anytime soon. I am confident that Facebook will build a great business. However, this article read like something cooked up by PR firm wanting to paint Facebook vs Google as the next Apple vs. IBM. It's a half baked analogy at best.

dant• 17 years ago

I agree. Facebook's data on me is not of a particularly good quality. Most of my "friends" are former colleagues or school friends. I wouldn't trust any of them to recommend a restarunt any more then I would trust 300 anonymous reviews on an independant restarunt listings site.

dsil• 17 years ago

One thing I'd never heard before: at least 9 percent of facebook's staff used to work for google

iamelgringo• 17 years ago

I suppose that I'm kind of an old fart, because Facebook reminds me powerfully of AOL. They are both walled gardens.

While at one point AOL was powerful and rich enough to purchase Time Warner. AOL still hangs on, a shell of what it once was. The main difference, is that AOL had a clear monetization strategy: it charged its users for access. And, it made craploads of money because it simplified computers and getting online for millions of people.

Facebook does a similar thing. It allows people to do interesting things with their computers without having to worry about the dark and scary bits of the internet.

Us older people remember the devastation that occured when AOL unlocked the gate it's walled garden to let people access the internet at large. It's know as the eternal September. Finally, when AOL's users got tech savvy enough to use the wild internet without AOL's hand holding, they left in droves.

I suspect similar things are going to happen to Facebook users. I could be wrong.

natrius• 17 years ago

Some call it a walled garden; some call it privacy settings. I hear the "walled garden" criticism all the time, but I've never really understood it. What would make Facebook not a walled garden to you, while still giving users control of what information they want to share with which people?

diN0bot• 17 years ago

wait, if facebook becomes the internet, will i be marginalized for not having any friends?

hans• 17 years ago

Wouldn't it be nice if the need for a centralized, advertising-driven web business were removed from our social graph(s)? It would not take much for a distributed, node based plugin system to house personal sites and friends lists etc. Then we wouldn't feel so constrained by one monolithic corporation that inherently is going to have pressures concerning business revenue, government influence, executive dynasty, et al. My guess is long term we will take ownership of ourselves back.

jodrellblank• 17 years ago

It would not take much for a distributed, node based plugin system to house personal sites and friends lists etc.

Do you know, I think Opera might agree with you here. Except now they've started it, everyone's laughing at them.

The Great Wall of Facebook

Related Stories