[OpenID] Discouraging "anonymous" OpenID users

[Johannes Ernst]

I don't mean to imply that Facebook is in any way anti-OpenID. (I  
can't say they are pro either -- I simply don't know)

Right now, I think they are doing the right thing IMHO: putting  
together a set of technologies that make sense for them as a business,  
and delivering them as a product. Given that the whole stack they are  
doing does not (yet?) exist in freely available specs, they are using  
their own, which is very understandable.

Whether it will turn out to be a proprietary-vs-free "battle" (as some  
of the press coverage last week seemed to indicate) remains to be seen.

Certainly I'd be interested in looking at what they have in their  
stack that does not exist yet in OpenID (or elsewhere) and perhaps  
seeing whether we can find like-minded individuals to put together  
some open specs doing the same thing via a new OpenID working group,  
for example?

Clearly, a lot more sites should have a need for the same set of specs  
as Facebook does -- and they'd probably prefer something neutral such  
as developed within the OpenID foundation.


On 2008/07/27, at 23:14, SitG Admin wrote:

>> I think this is the essence of why Facebook thinks they are very  
>> attractive as an identity provider: the accumulated "social  
>> capital" around the identities.
>
> There are some unofficial "Facebook apps" that provide OpenID using  
> the API they've set up; Facebook hasn't crushed these, so I think  
> it's fair to assume they aren't *opposed* to OpenID.
>
> Maybe if they can be shown that OpenID is a way to actually *use*  
> that "capital" (not much good having money if you can't *spend* it,  
> or loan except between other users of your private bank), making  
> their offered identity more valuable and in turn attracting more  
> users, they'll be persuaded to adopt OpenID officially :)
>
> -Shade