September 9th, 2006
Facebook Discovers the Limits of Web 2.0 Sharing Ideology
According to Web 2.0 ideology, all sharing is good, by definition. Users will run to embrace any feature that increases their ability to share information with their community. Sharing. Community. It’s all so warm and fuzzy — what could be wrong? But Facebook discovered the hard way that there are limits to Web 2.0 sharing ideology.
Mark Zuckerberg, the creator of Facebook, has published an open letter apologizing for the feed features that overstepped Facebook users’ comfort level with sharing. He also announces new features that give users more control over their privacy (although not the ability to turn the feeds off entirely).
The Facebook privacy backlash should be a stark lesson for every Web 2.0 company and social/sharing/community ideological advocate. Yes, the web is making us more open, more networked, more social, more community-enabled. And this is all good.
But it’s a scary world out there. Especially after 9/11 and high-profile privacy incidents like AOL’s data release, we all feel vulnerable. There is a downside to openness and sharing that we need to manage. We need assurances that we will be safe (even if we’re really not). And we need control over our personal space.
The lesson for Web 2.0 social software developers is (duh) that the USERS ARE IN CONTROL. They feel ownership not only over their content, but over the platform as well. When you empower users with your software, it means that you can’t go changing it without the users’ consent. Facebook made the mistake of thinking that they were in control of the software. But they’re not — they’ve already ceded control to their users. And without the users, they have nothing.
When you live by 2.0 ideology, then you are bound by 2.0 ideology.
Powered by 
Design by 
The announcement in the journal Science that a comatose woman’s brain showed consistent activity while being scanned following verbal cues, sets the stage for the next Terri Schiavo case. When being told to imagine she was… [Technorati logo] Publishing 2.0 - Scott Karp on the Convergence of Media and Technology : Facebook Discovers the Limits of Web 2.0 Sharing Ideology According to Web 2.0 ideology, all sharing is good, by definition. Users will run to embrace any feature that increases their ability to share information with their community. Sharing. Community. It’s all so warm and fuzzy
Whose Laundry Is It Anyway? Part 1: Saving Face{book} Check it out: http://techaddress.wordpress.com/2006/09/10/whose-laundry-is-it-anyway-part-1-saving-facebook/
“Publishing 2.0: “Facebook Discovers the Limits of Web 2.0 Sharing Ideology” (1 day ago)
Scott Karp comments on Facebook’s news feeds and the outcry that followed
with sharing. He also announces new features that give users more control over their privacy (although not the ability to turn the feeds off entirely). The Facebook privacy backlash should be a stark lesson for every Web 2.0 company and social/s…Read more at http://publishing2.com/...
对于 Facebook 9æ—¥å‘出的é“æ‰ä¿¡ï¼ŒScott Karp 在他的 Publishing 2.0 è¿™æ ·è¯´ï¼š ä½ å¼€å‘出一个平å°ï¼ŒæŽˆæƒç»™ç”¨æˆ·ä½¿ç”¨ï¼Œé‚£ä¹ˆä½ å°±ä¸åº”该在用户没有授æƒçš„å‰æ下对他的内容进行控制，å¦åˆ™ç»“æžœå°†æ˜¯ï¼Œä½ æ— æ³•æŽ§åˆ¶ä½ çš„ç”¨æˆ·ï¼Œè€Œå¯¹Facebook è€Œè¨€ï¼Œæ²¡æœ‰ç”¨æˆ·ï¼Œå°†ä¸€æ— æ‰€æœ‰ã€‚
[…] this type of user revolt (see Facebook user revolt, etc.) will become increasingly common for “empty vessel” platforms that depend on […]
any of the parties involved to believe that Flickr could have remained an island unto itself after the Yahoo acquisition. And Flickr staff have given perfectly rational reasons for all of the changes that they made. BUT, this type of user revolt (see Facebook user revolt, etc.) will become increasingly common for “empty vessel†platforms that depend on users for all of their content and who pass out a lot of (albeit heartfelt) Kool-aid about community. When you buy software, you feel a certain sense of entitlement
any of the parties involved to believe that Flickr could have remained an island unto itself after the Yahoo acquisition. And Flickr staff have given perfectly rational reasons for all of the changes that they made. BUT, this type of user revolt (see Facebook user revolt, etc.) will become increasingly common for “empty vessel†platforms that depend on users for all of their content and who pass out a lot of (albeit heartfelt) Kool-aid about community. When you buy software, you feel a certain sense of entitlement
Hi!
I run a Customer Service department for a US based company dealing with Desktop software. We are a small team with four members. We’ve faced many issues when it comes to sharing and collaboration of messages. We sit at different locations and find it difficult to work with the same e-mail accounts. There had been instances when same e-mail got more than one reply from different people, and some of them just go unattended. Does anyone of you know a web-based tool (web 2.0 services) which could be a solution to the situation? Any suggestions are welcome!