Skip to main content

How I Learned To Stop Worrying and Love The Facebook Changes

Like any TechCrunch-reading web nerd, my first reaction to the "Open Graph" Facebook changes was whiny and furious. How dare they slap my name on every site that's desperate to tap into their user base? If I wanted my name on those sites, I would have signed up for them! And if I wanted to share my info from those sites with my Facebook friends, I would have individually signed in to each and every one of them, giving that site explicit permission to share with the same people I was sharing with on places like Facebook and then dealt with dozens of different settings arrangements!

Maybe you can see my thought path on this issue changing there. If not, it's come to this: not only is the change not a big deal, but it's what we've been looking for from the web for years.

Yes, I was surprised when I went to the Washington Post front page and was greeted with a list of the articles my Facebook friends had shared. Yeah, it was a little discomforting to go to Yelp and see my "friends activity", some of which was from high school friends that I hadn't seen in decades. But then it cleared up: these are all people that I've already approved as my friends. Why should I have to do it yet again? My name isn't showing up to strangers; it's showing up to my friends, who I had already consented to share with. At the least, it's made the web even more convenient, but more than that, it's expanded the sharing web so hugely that it's difficult to even comprehend right now.

This is exactly the kind of thing that we've wanted from the web; what we've wanted companies to do for years: make a single identity and a single group of friends that are managed in one place and then spread throughout sites with multiple purposes. It's what Open ID wanted to do. Yes, it's a lot of power for one company, but this isn't the government we're talking about. At the absolute worst, it's like a cult where you actually can leave at any time, with the only downside being some hassle from your friends.

I would not fault anyone for deleting their Facebook account and being done with the whole thing. The concern is understandable. But before you back away entirely, and before you get outraged about these Facebook changes, think of this: your name is likely all over search results on the web, and you have no control over it. Your visits are being tracked anonymously by dozens of web statistics software. Your financial information is a single password (and likely a crappy password) away from anyone who wants it. Like a germaphobe who obsesses over toilet seat covers, you have a LOT greater things to worry about than this.

If you're up for arguing this, I'm all for it in the comments. And by the way, the comments are powered by Disqus, a service that's been around for years, where a single login with have you logged into to thousands of sites around the web.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why are we still judging work done by time spent?

Every morning, when I fill in the hours on my work's electronic timesheet, I'm struck by how odd it is that we're still judging our work by the time spent on it. It's odd because it's old-fashioned. In the paper and phone world, you could really only do work when you were at work. But we do work all the time now. I check my email when I first wake up. Does that mean I start my day at 6:30 am? Should that be reflected on my timesheet? How about when I respond to an email or check Basecamp when I'm on the bus? Does my work day start then? How about when I look at Google Analytics at night or think about email newsletters when I'm in the shower (which I'm somewhat ashamed to admit I did this morning)? On the other side, if someone finishes the work that they're meant to do, why should they feel like they need to stay at work until 5:00, just because that's the official time of the work day? I don't think anyone would argue that time spent ...

Some scattered thoughts on the money of digital music

If you haven't already read Digital Audio Insider's interview with Camper Van Beethoven's Jonathan Segal ¹, it's a must read for anyone with even a slight interest in digital music and the money of the industry. Segal has tons of thoughts on just about every aspect of digital music, but best of all, he brings in these thoughts as someone whose initial music industry experience was in the days of purely-physical media, when "pirating" meant copying something onto a blank tape. My main takeway is general and obvious but an important reminder: we are in a transition time for music, and what it will become is anyone's guess. I think Segal's take on merchandise and live performances taking the place as artist's primary source of income as "asinine" is too harsh to be true, but I do think that we're in such a state of transition that any shot at predicting artistic income in the future is completely in the dark. Such predictions are really ...

Sentiment Measurement Beyond Metrics

You know, headlines like that one really put me on the fence, balancing between "Ooh! Metrics!" and "Wow, no wonder people think it's boring and geeky." ANYWAY...today I'm definitely in the former camp, in the sense that it's exciting because it's a philosophical puzzle: how can you solve a problem that can never really be solved? Yesterday, I commented on Avinash Kaushik's post where he asked, "If you were to measure the success of a company’s social media efforts how would you do it?" My answer: For social media, the obvious metrics still hold: referrals and conversions from referrals. But being from a nonprofit background, where the higher-ups are often skeptical of social media, the real metrics are the words. There’s nothing more valuable than the tweet that says "I love that {your org} is on Twitter" or the time you respond to a comment on Facebook addressing a wide concern about your organization or when you comment ...