One "Like" Button to Bring Them All and in the Darkness Bind Them
Seen on TechCrunch: Facebook is about to release a "like" button for the whole internet. Facebook want's to deploy its "Like" button. I have seen various comments about that, ranging from "they want to copy Digg" to "That's awesome", and none makes me really happy. I don't think you guys really get it. Hidden meaningJust because the button is labeled "Like", which has a very strong positive connotation, doesn't mean it's only meant for you to tell your friend you like it.
What's hidden behind the "Like" label is a much longer sentence: "Redirect the content to our website and diffuse it, it's a win-win, you get to communicate and we get a metric ton of data to mine in a single click and tons of traffic, plus the content and all your friend's comments."
Comments: get them and you'll be everywhereWe are currently facing the problem of multiple entry point for online content. If you share to five websites, you will have to monitor them all to reply to the comments.
I have discussed this issue here, while wondering:
I have already written about this topic here, I self-quote :
Facebook as more or less exactly the same approach about comment gathering, and goes even further with Open Graph. In short, it does all the things I've stated earlier, and the unique entry point is, of course, Facebook itself, via its API. That is: from anywhere there is a discussion, now mostly everywhere on the web. What being everywhere means
Every piece of shared content is redirected to your site, if people want to comment it, they need to do it with your tools. It means more content, more comment, more data to mine, more people joining in and... more exposures to your adds and games, the money has to come from somewhere. Why is it bad?Whoever believes in open standards and whoever not liking being tracked online already know what I am going to write:I do not want my online identity/behavior to be owned by a non neutral entity that can, if it get the monopole, just tell me "Use us or cease to exist online" The generalization of proprietary standards is dangerous for the openness of the web. An example? Facebook's now patented news stream is based on the open protocol Activity Stream . So what solution, then?The salmon protocol and PuSH are two systems ready to be integrated, relatively simple to understand, that could give birth to some independent services allowing us to unify comments. Coupled to OpenID, if handled correctly, there is a possibility for all of us to have an identity that's independent from any commercial service.
What's hidden behind the "Like" label is a much longer sentence: "Redirect the content to our website and diffuse it, it's a win-win, you get to communicate and we get a metric ton of data to mine in a single click and tons of traffic, plus the content and all your friend's comments."
Comments: get them and you'll be everywhereWe are currently facing the problem of multiple entry point for online content. If you share to five websites, you will have to monitor them all to reply to the comments.
I have discussed this issue here, while wondering:
And there is no way I can aggregate that. Or is there one? After having thought about it for a little while, the ideal solution would be a unique ID and/or entry point for curated data, something ressemblig Disqus, but for all uploaded content. If we could link single pieces of curated info to a unique ID, all metadata reffering to it would become easy to access.
I have already written about this topic here, I self-quote :
The knee-jerk reflex of sharing content and point of view through a status update could be the perfect vector of a web-wide comment gathering system. In 140 characters, native, and in Twitter's database, of course.
Facebook as more or less exactly the same approach about comment gathering, and goes even further with Open Graph. In short, it does all the things I've stated earlier, and the unique entry point is, of course, Facebook itself, via its API. That is: from anywhere there is a discussion, now mostly everywhere on the web. What being everywhere means
Every piece of shared content is redirected to your site, if people want to comment it, they need to do it with your tools. It means more content, more comment, more data to mine, more people joining in and... more exposures to your adds and games, the money has to come from somewhere. Why is it bad?Whoever believes in open standards and whoever not liking being tracked online already know what I am going to write:I do not want my online identity/behavior to be owned by a non neutral entity that can, if it get the monopole, just tell me "Use us or cease to exist online" The generalization of proprietary standards is dangerous for the openness of the web. An example? Facebook's now patented news stream is based on the open protocol Activity Stream . So what solution, then?The salmon protocol and PuSH are two systems ready to be integrated, relatively simple to understand, that could give birth to some independent services allowing us to unify comments. Coupled to OpenID, if handled correctly, there is a possibility for all of us to have an identity that's independent from any commercial service.
