<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
tom wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:4893FF47.8070606@barnraiser.org" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Couldn't agree more Eran.....
I feel like the community is a little like a rabbit staring into the
proverbial headlights over this. I see no reason to either look up to
Facebook or attempt any copy of Facebook closed technologies.
Social networks come and go (sixdegrees=hype1:1997,
friendster=hype2:2002). One of the reason that Facebook is experiencing
limited competition is that the real "social network cashcow" is in
mobile networks. Let me throw this at you:
Facebook users click on an advertisement 0.04% of the time - yes, just
400 clicks in every 1 million views one of the lowest returns on the web
today.
Source:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://valleywag.com/tech/advertising/facebook-consistently-the-worst-performing-site-242234.php">http://valleywag.com/tech/advertising/facebook-consistently-the-worst-performing-site-242234.php</a>
eMarketer forecasts that over 800 million people worldwide will be
participating in a social network via their mobile phones by 2012, up
from 82 million in 2007.
Source: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.emarketer.com/Report.aspx?code=emarketer_2000489">http://www.emarketer.com/Report.aspx?code=emarketer_2000489</a>
Now if anybody wants to focus on mobile OpenID, OAuth integration and
making it very simple to overlay open formats (such as a social
networking syndication format) by making our extensions documented to
look more like a developers API I am listening;)
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Open Social and Portable Contacts are attempting this (with
synchronization on people list formats).<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:4893FF47.8070606@barnraiser.org" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
Tom
Eran Hammer-Lahav wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">A few facts:
Facebook Connect could have been built on top of OAuth.
Facebook did not participate in the Open Web Foundation launch – Dave
Morin was involved as an individual.
Facebook has been talking about their desire to open and learn more
about open specs for a year now, with nothing to show for it.
Facebook has been invited and engaged in conversations with the
community with nothing but a waste of time to show for it.
---
The fact that on the same day they announce support for the OWF, they
also announce a product that is ignoring all the work done by this
very same community they claim to be supportive off, is to me, a
mockery. I would be happy to be proven wrong but for a year now seen
nothing to make me believe it.
EHL
*From:* <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:general-bounces@openid.net">general-bounces@openid.net</a> [<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:general-bounces@openid.net">mailto:general-bounces@openid.net</a>]
*On Behalf Of *Dick Hardt
*Sent:* Friday, August 01, 2008 3:40 PM
*To:* Paul Trevithick
*Cc:* <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:david@sixapart.com">david@sixapart.com</a>; OpenID
*Subject:* Re: [OpenID] Musing on FaceBook, OpenID and the next
mountain to climb
Hi Paul
While Facebook could take the silo approach, they are interested in
seeing how open standards could be used. They participated in the Open
Web Foundation launch and when I was at their office earlier this
week, they expressed serious interest in OpenID. See my blog post
(which had to be run by them as it was an NDA meeting).
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://identity20.com/?p=155">http://identity20.com/?p=155</a>
Given the state of OpenID tech right now, I do not think it could be
used to solve what they wanted to solve in a way that would deliver
the clean user experience they desired -- but I would be happily
proved wrong! ( I do think they could have used OAuth though)
As I mention in my post, this is an opportunity for the community to
work with Facebook.
Myself, I think the technology needs to be enhanced and evolved so
that it has features that Facebook Connect does not have in addition
to the existing features.
If the community just sits back and says that all the bits are there
-- just use them -- then this community is no different from other SSO
communities that have told the creators of OpenID that they were
reinventing the wheel.
-- Dick
On 1-Aug-08, at 2:09 PM, Paul Trevithick wrote:
The problem is that this isn’t a technical issue. FB currently has no
business incentive to use open technologies that, among many other
things, would allow users to be able to retrieve and store their own
profile data and friends lists (as currently violates the FB TOS).
They are still enjoying the virtuous cycle of the closed mega silos:
more users begets more users. OTOH FB will open up if and when there’s
a reason to do so. But for now, and for a good while, I’d say FB isn’t
a good prospect for open, user-centric technologies.
Paul
On 8/1/08 3:28 PM, "Allen Tom" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:atom@yahoo-inc.com"><atom@yahoo-inc.com></a> wrote:
David Recordon wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Is there really anything that Facebook did that couldn't be
accomplished with OpenID Authentication 2.0 and OpenID Attribute
Exchange?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">Facebook Connect has a nice set of libraries/apis that RPs can just drop
in relatively easily on their site. The JS libraries implement much of
the sign in flow (displaying inline sign-in forms as well as a
permissions screen) which means that the FB Connect user experience is
consistent across all RPs.
They also seem to have implemented Single Sign Out, because signing out
of FB seems to also sign you out of the RP.
Additionally, FB Connect also authorizes the RP to write to the user's
FB News Feed, so there's an authorization component as well. The
authorization seems to expire when the browser session is closed, so
it's not quite like OAuth.
And finally, FB Connect requires that the RP pre-register with FB to get
an api key which presumably allows FB to authenticate the RP, and also
gives FB the ability block the RP if necessary.
Unlike the OpenID/OAuth/AX services currently in the wild, the FB
Connect stack is highly integrated, with built in privacy controls and a
standard UI. But as you correctly stated, I believe most, if not all, of
the stack could have been built upon open standards.
Allen
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:general@openid.net">general@openid.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general">http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general</a>
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:general@openid.net">general@openid.net</a> <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:general@openid.net"><mailto:general@openid.net></a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general">http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general</a>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:general@openid.net">general@openid.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general">http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>