NewsCloud writes "After tonight's Breaking Open Facebook with Free Open Source Software, TechCrunch reports Google plans to announce an open API for social networking tomorrow. "OpenSocial is a set of three common APIs, defined by Google with input from partners, that allow developers to access core functions and information at social networks: 1) Profile Information (user data) 2) Friends Information (social graph) and 3) Activities (things that happen, News Feed type stuff)" Says Om Malik: "OpenSocial attacks Facebook where it is the weakest (and the strongest): its quintessential closed nature...Even if you take Facebook out of the equation, the task of writing and adapting widgets for the every increasing number of social platforms was going to be turn into a colossal mess.""
"It is going to forestall Facebook's ability to get everyone writing just for Facebook," said a person with knowledge of the plans who asked to remain anonymous because he was not authorized to speak on behalf of the alliance. The group's platform, which is called OpenSocial, is "compatible across all the companies," that person said.
"Facebook got the jump by announcing the Facebook platform and getting the traction they got. This is an open alternative to that," the person also said.
For the potentially reading-impaired at development sites, I will paste in my contents on yesterday's story about Breaking Open Facebook... I like Facebook, but since ms' hands are all over them now, I feel strongly that there MUST be a counterweight to that juggernaut. Facebook would have been better off had the kid taken Google's money. Instead, he went with fame or something imagined with ms' name. Too bad. Apparently, Google is locked out of (or not interested in) forcing their way into co-investor statu
Should have kept that API a little more private. You never know viruses you'll contract sharing it with all those anonymous users on the P2P sites/apps.
by Anonymous Coward
on Wednesday October 31 2007, @08:47AM (#21183041)
I told a charming, beautiful young woman she could plug into my public API...
Think about what you insinuated for a moment, then understand why you got slapped. Next time you should offer to plug into HER public API. That way at least you'll know what you're getting slapped for.
Seriously what was [***] thinking? That young lady was going to have to go out and buy some sort of external, strapped on, interface.... talk about awkward.
the thing which has always put me off social networking is that they are so uncompatibale with each other, and you can bet your bottom dollar that if you are on one system, someone else will be on the other. I just wish someone would clone facebook (and/or myspace,bebo etc) and release it under the AGPL.
It's not the code, it's the actual hosting, servicing, maintenance. Anyone can clone the code of facebook fairly easily, some people have, but actually running it as a viable website is a totally different thing.
Even if you were to clone it, you would still have the issue of fractured userbases, as well as inertia - people will stick to whatever they are already on. To me, this seems to be very similar to the differences between messaging clients. Where I grew up, AIM was the only protocol anyone ever used; but people in different places use other protocols (from what I understand MSN is much more popular in Europe, etc.). Then along came clients with the ability to speak any of the protocols.
I think the solution to myriad social networking sites is not more social networking sites, but rather a standard communication and search protocol that they all can share, at least for basic information. This could allow Facebook users to connect to MySpace users, send messages, etc. Each site could retain its peculiar features, but basic communication could be established.
I think the solution... is not more social networking sites, but rather a standard... protocol that they all can share
It's always bothered me that these sites more or less do the same thing. A new/better one comes along and people move there even though it is pretty much the same as the old one. Then I have to enter my profile info again - something I really hate doing. Centralizing all the information bothers me too. A "service scraper" would be a good solution, but I've always been tantalized by t
I'm not so sure about that. At least from my perspective. I am in at least 5 social networking interfaces, and I find Facebook to be the most fun and flexible and more. Maybe because it has more gizmos/widgets. But, I think that I kept adding because either one met social needs and the other met geek needs. Once another combined both, I went to it, and then to the next, without dropping any of them. I've recently been wondering how useful it might be if Slashdot picked up some of Facebook's portal-like featu
From the second link: "With the Facebook platform, app developers build to Facebook-proprietary languages and APIs such as FBML (Facebook Markup Language) and FQL (Facebook Query Language) -- those languages and APIs don't work anywhere other than Facebook -- and then the apps can only run within Facebook. In contrast, with Open Social, app developers can build to standard HTML and Javascript, and their apps can then run in any Open Social container."
One of the biggest reasons "MySpace haters" like myself pr
You are missing the point. If you have an open standard for a social networking protocol, that means you can make the client whatever you want. If you want plain, original facebook like interface, you get a client that shows just that. When you load it up, it only asks for the basic information from the people you are connected to. You highlight the problem with too much flexibility within a CLOSED client. With an open client, its like gaim or pidgin, it connects to all the protocols, but the message box loo
Except that in this case, the app returns pure HTML/JS that is "embedded" in the container. Thus it can easily override whatever styling guidelines that container uses.
Even if you take Facebook out of the equation, the task of writing and adapting widgets for the every increasing number of social platforms was going to be turn into a colossal mess.
So...you're introducing yet another platform to worry about?
Anyone else getting annoyed with all the no-profit, go-nowhere project announcements coming out of Google every other week?
I think you missed the point that all of the other platforms are confined to their own userspaces whereas this new platform is ONE(open)API that can be used across all platforms.
this new platform is ONE(open)API that can be used across all platforms
OK, now I get it: it's like Esperanto. This will be HUGE. I remember all the confusion people had thirty years ago when we had to worry about things like "English" and "French". The addition of that last little language solved EVERYTHING!
I *get* what Google is trying to do here. However, since the majority of Facebook's users couldn't care less if the apps they're using are open, I'm not really sure what the point is...
It's not about Open in its Open Source meaning - it's about Open in its Open Standards meaning. OpenSocial is a standard that applications can be written to which will allow them to run on any web platform that supports it. So far that looks to be lots of smaller platforms (Ning, Orkut, etc), but together they add up to a fair chunk of the market.
The big question is whether Facebook can be pushed into supporting this API...
And since Microsoft and Google are quickly becoming huge rivals, Google is behind this, and Microsoft just injected a huge sum of money into Facebook... I'd say the odds are slim to none.
However, since the majority of Facebook's users couldn't care less if the apps they're using are open, I'm not really sure what the point is...
In the end, the users are what makes Google money but they aren't the ones that Google is really trying to market to here. Popular social networking sites are a marketers dream. Google wants an open API so that it can crawl and offer up data to those that want to advertise to this wide open market. Facebook is pretty closed when it comes to what they offer by API
Step one - applications that work in a social network. e.g. Facebook apps. Step two - applications that work on lots of different social networks using certain common features. This is where OpenSocial is taking us. Step three - applications that work across multiple social networks, so that they can include your contacts from Facebook, Livejournal, Slashdot and LinkedIn. Step four - roll-your-own sites that allow you to provide your own basic social infoamtion (using FOAF, OpenID, etc.) so that you don't need to be a member of a social site to produce or consume social network information.
We're a way off yet - but it looks like we're moving in the right direction.
Nuh uh, they all chat me and they tell me everything I want to hear and love everything I love and are into everything I'm into and they all are sexual goddesses, and one day I will totally meet one of them in RL.
This is exactly what social networking needs -- a way to make it open and interoperable like Jabber, rather than you-have-to-be-on-the-same-system-as-your-friends like AIM. I hope they succeed. Hopefully they'll get MySpace on board - that'll make a few chairs fly in Redmond.
What if what attracted me to use Facebook in the first place is the fact that only those whom I authorize can view my profile data? How are they going to achieve that with an open platform? If they require authorization, for example, then the users need to be using that open platform as well, and by extension, all users need to be using that open platform. Guess what you have then? Another Facebook!
Distributed and secure don't have to be mutually exclusive. Social graphs could be built with signed public keys and friends could exchange private keys to access profile data. With the right APIs this could be made largely invisible to the user.
could some one explain what the compatibility issues is. I mean granted being and anti social basement dweller, I've never used a "Social Networking" site but aren't they just like a mix of a crappy blog and geocities. What is there to be compatible with.
Need to get cracking! (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
*A gold star to the person that figures it out
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
*A gold star to the person that figures it out
Re: (Score:2)
Or at least it's not supposed to be. I've heard tell of hacked versions of Eliza that were actually spyware.
(One version of this story attributes this nasty hack to the young Robert Morris, in the days before the internet worm.)
One Word... (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
NYT: Google and Friends to Gang Up on Facebook (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
I like Facebook, but since ms' hands are all over them now, I feel strongly that there MUST be a counterweight to that juggernaut. Facebook would have been better off had the kid taken Google's money. Instead, he went with fame or something imagined with ms' name. Too bad. Apparently, Google is locked out of (or not interested in) forcing their way into co-investor statu
Social API, pthtptpptpththt! (Score:4, Funny)
When I told a charming, beautiful young woman she could plug into my public API, I got slapped!
Gee, thanks for nothing, social networking...
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Social API, pthtptpptpththt! (Score:5, Funny)
Think about what you insinuated for a moment, then understand why you got slapped. Next time you should offer to plug into HER public API. That way at least you'll know what you're getting slapped for.
Amateurs.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Clone facebook (Score:3, Insightful)
I just wish someone would clone facebook (and/or myspace,bebo etc) and release it under the AGPL.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Clone facebook (Score:5, Insightful)
Even if you were to clone it, you would still have the issue of fractured userbases, as well as inertia - people will stick to whatever they are already on. To me, this seems to be very similar to the differences between messaging clients. Where I grew up, AIM was the only protocol anyone ever used; but people in different places use other protocols (from what I understand MSN is much more popular in Europe, etc.). Then along came clients with the ability to speak any of the protocols.
I think the solution to myriad social networking sites is not more social networking sites, but rather a standard communication and search protocol that they all can share, at least for basic information. This could allow Facebook users to connect to MySpace users, send messages, etc. Each site could retain its peculiar features, but basic communication could be established.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
It's always bothered me that these sites more or less do the same thing. A new/better one comes along and people move there even though it is pretty much the same as the old one. Then I have to enter my profile info again - something I really hate doing. Centralizing all the information bothers me too. A "service scraper" would be a good solution, but I've always been tantalized by t
Re: (Score:2)
I've recently been wondering how useful it might be if Slashdot picked up some of Facebook's portal-like featu
Incompatible interfaces (Score:2)
You mean just like instant messaging?
Marc Andreessen has a great write-up about it here (Score:5, Informative)
This is kind-of a follow-up to his in-depth thoughts on the Facebook platform [pmarca.com] that I found really useful, too.
Re:Marc Andreessen has a great write-up about it h (Score:3, Interesting)
"With the Facebook platform, app developers build to Facebook-proprietary languages and APIs such as FBML (Facebook Markup Language) and FQL (Facebook Query Language) -- those languages and APIs don't work anywhere other than Facebook -- and then the apps can only run within Facebook. In contrast, with Open Social, app developers can build to standard HTML and Javascript, and their apps can then run in any Open Social container."
One of the biggest reasons "MySpace haters" like myself pr
Re: (Score:2)
You highlight the problem with too much flexibility within a CLOSED client. With an open client, its like gaim or pidgin, it connects to all the protocols, but the message box loo
Re: (Score:2)
Are you part of the problem? (Score:2, Flamebait)
So...you're introducing yet another platform to worry about?
Anyone else getting annoyed with all the no-profit, go-nowhere project announcements coming out of Google every other week?
Re: (Score:2)
Like Esperanto? (Score:2)
OK, now I get it: it's like Esperanto. This will be HUGE. I remember all the confusion people had thirty years ago when we had to worry about things like "English" and "French". The addition of that last little language solved EVERYTHING!
Open source.... why bother? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Open source.... why bother? (Score:5, Insightful)
The big question is whether Facebook can be pushed into supporting this API...
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
In the end, the users are what makes Google money but they aren't the ones that Google is really trying to market to here. Popular social networking sites are a marketers dream. Google wants an open API so that it can crawl and offer up data to those that want to advertise to this wide open market. Facebook is pretty closed when it comes to what they offer by API
OpenSocial attacks Facebook (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
A step in the right direction (Score:5, Insightful)
Step two - applications that work on lots of different social networks using certain common features. This is where OpenSocial is taking us.
Step three - applications that work across multiple social networks, so that they can include your contacts from Facebook, Livejournal, Slashdot and LinkedIn.
Step four - roll-your-own sites that allow you to provide your own basic social infoamtion (using FOAF, OpenID, etc.) so that you don't need to be a member of a social site to produce or consume social network information.
We're a way off yet - but it looks like we're moving in the right direction.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
if Google copise MSFT and MSFT copies Google ... (Score:3, Insightful)
Startups.
Re:if Google copise MSFT and MSFT copies Google .. (Score:2)
I don't think I need to answer that for you.
so... (Score:4, Insightful)
as in, a kind of distributed login system between community sites?
so i create a profile on site A, and my friend on site B, and i can read and write stuff on his, and him on mine?
im so tired of having to write those profiles all the time as friends jump to the community of the month...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It would be so nice to combine them all somehow. Hot chics need to know I'm out here.
Re: (Score:2)
they hang out in clubs and similar instead, getting free drinks and things from the patrons of the place...
Re: (Score:2)
I need to take a dance lesson or something.
Lead by example! (Score:2)
Brilliant! (Score:2)
What about privacy? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I could be stupid but ... (Score:3, Insightful)
Federation (Score:2)
There is a limit to how far you can go with individually separated information silos such as Facebook and MySpace.