Wir sprechen Online.

Gerrit Eicker 08:48 on 24. April 2010 Permalink
Tags: .EN ( 3,425 ), Amazon ( 96 ), Aol. ( 38 ), APIs ( 82 ), Apple ( 124 ), eBay ( 30 ), F8 ( 14 ), Facebook ( 641 ), Facebook Open Graph ( 29 ), Facebook Open Graph API ( 9 ), Facebook Open Graph Protocol ( 11 ), Google ( 648 ), Integration ( 122 ), IT ( 1,958 ), Markets ( 596 ), Media ( 621 ), Microsoft ( 111 ), Myspace ( 64 ), Net ( 2,755 ), Nethnology ( 1,119 ), Personal Profiles ( 26 ), Personalisation ( 47 ), Privacy ( 239 ), Profiling ( 20 ), Publishing ( 640 ), Quotes ( 584 ), Reviews ( 36 ), Security ( 85 ), Semantic Search ( 9 ), Semantic Tagging ( 8 ), Semantic Web ( 12 ), Social Graph ( 49 ), Social Media ( 1,080 ), Social Networking ( 619 ), Social Networks ( 445 ), Social Profiles ( 10 ), Twitter ( 655 ), Web ( 3,322 ), Yahoo ( 90 )   

• 

  Gerrit Eicker 08:58 on 24. April 2010 Permalink | Reply

  pC: “A question for you. When was the last time you surfed the net? Can you remember when you just clicked around looking to discover new sites or a site to occupy your time? Now ask yourself when was the last time you sat on your couch or laid in bed clicking the remote looking for something to watch on TV. Finally, how long do you regularly spend on Facebook? How much time do you spend checking out your Wall, your friends’ Wall and hopping from profile to profile checking people out? … Everything that the net was 5 or more years ago, Facebook is today. … Facebook is putting out trojan horse after trojan horse and no one seems to care. The only thing FB has not done is create a mobile operating system ala Android/iPhone as a platform for applications. … There is no doubt that this is NOT the direction that Facebook wants to go. They want to remain independent. But just as Apple and Google quickly turned from friend to foes, Facebook will soon be the object that both of those companies see in the rearview mirror. I don’t see either Apple or Google as being suitors to buy Facebook. That isnt their style. On the other hand, its straight out of the Microsoft playbook. If you cant beat them or outlast them, buy them.”

  TC: “The fact of the matter is that Facebook is one of the most powerful forces on the web and they’re now using that position to introduce a new platform that will yes, help them. Shocking, really. A company that wants to do something that will benefit itself. But I do believe that Facebook, at least in part, believes this will also make the larger web better too. But that’s not going to be good enough for some, because it’s not fully open. Nevermind that plenty of these fully open solutions always being advocated never make it off the ground for one reason or another. … Of course, then publishers don’t have to use Facebook’s Like button. But they will — I can think of nearly 500 million reasons why. Love it or hate it, that’s the way it is. It’s not good versus evil. It’s not black versus white. It’s a million shades of gray, as always.”

  VB: “Concerns are already rising among users around overly sharing of personal information. ComputerWorld’s IT Blogwatch bloggers spotlight several concerjs, including the automatic opt-in to share your information when visiting websites through Facebooks new open graph feature.”

  TNW: “There has been a lot of chatter, since Facebook’s F8 announcements, about how the company will be the downfall of Google. Or, in some cases, the chatter is about how it will push Google to do what it does in a different manner. … Face it, you wouldn’t dream of doing investigation for a research project using Facebook search. That is of course, unless that research were more appropriate to what Facebook does. … The question that arises, though (especially given the power behind the social graph API), is how long this situation will remain as it is. Will Google eventually have to step up its game directly to combat Facebook? It’s possible. Not likely, but possible.”

  RWW: “Facebook Open Graph: The Definitive Guide For Publishers, Users and Competitors. … The bits of this platform bring together the visions of a social, personalized and semantic Web that have been discussed since del.icio.us pioneered Web 2.0 back in 2004. Facebook’s vision is both minimalistic and encompassing – but its ambition is to kill off its competition and use 500 million users to take over entire Web. – Whether we like it (pun intended) or not, we have to understand what this move means. … With this release, Facebook asks users if they are willing to trade off privacy for personalization. To be clear, no personalization is ever possible without users telling a system about their tastes. What Facebook is asking for is necessary in order to then create personalized Web experience. Whether users want this sort of thing is a different question, but assuming that you want to know more about your friends you will. … So any site that already has social networking built in has to decide to abandon that before jumping into the Facebook Open Graph. The even worse problem is the ownership of ratings and comments. Are publishers really ready to give that up? … This is aggressive and brilliant move by Facebook – and Twitter, Google, Yahoo, MySpace, AOL, eBay, Amazon and others, except for Microsoft, should be really worried. … Technically speaking, what Facebook has done is elegant and correct. From markup, to plugins, to API, all of it is modern and awesome. The missing bit is that Facebook appears to be the only repository of data in this equation – and that makes the whole offering seriously closed. … One of the most exciting parts of the Facebook announcement to me personally is the possible breakthrough in semanticizing the Web. … Facebook made a major chess move. It might have checkmated its competitors, or perhaps it might have to lose another piece like it lost Beacon. Whichever is the case, right now there are deep implications for Facebook and its competitors, publishers, users and the Web at large. What Facebook has announced cannot be ignored and can not be undone. Everyone needs to figure out the next steps and understand what to do.“

• 

  Facebook Privacy III. « Wir sprechen Online. 09:25 on 12. May 2010 Permalink | Reply

  […] Privacy III. Daitch: Facebook can not be trusted. Orwellian takeover of a single platform is a dystopian future; http://j.mp/b9EFBm […]

• 

  Diaspora « Wir sprechen Online. 09:24 on 15. May 2010 Permalink | Reply

  […] A life after Facebook? Diaspora, the Anti-Facebook project rockets to $120K in online donations; http://j.mp/crsP0C […]

• 

  Facebook: Global Leader « Wir sprechen Online. 07:37 on 8. July 2010 Permalink | Reply

  […] Global Leader Facebook is cementing itself as the global leader: quadrupled in Germany, to 19 million users; http://j.mp/dhA5mP […]

• 

  Facebook: the Social Utility « Wir sprechen Online. 07:14 on 28. July 2010 Permalink | Reply

  […] the Social Utility A continuing contradiction: Facebook is widely criticized and yet millions can not resign; http://j.mp/dCsqoe […]

• 

  Facebook USA: 1 in 4 Page Views « Wir sprechen Online. 23:20 on 19. November 2010 Permalink | Reply

  […] Hitwise: Facebook represents 1 in 10 US Internet visits and close to 1 in 4 page views, +60% since March; http://eicker.at/1h […]

• 

  Deep Social Graph « Wir sprechen Online. 17:13 on 11. April 2011 Permalink | Reply

  […] Facebook dominates our idea of the social graph: but will it also claim the deep social graph? http://eicker.at/DeepSocialGraph […]

• 

  Microsoft and Facebook vs. Google « Wir sprechen Online. 14:58 on 24. June 2011 Permalink | Reply

  […] Williams: Why the Microsoft-Facebook-alliance really is a threat to Google; http://eicker.at/MicrosoftFacebook […]