Comments on: Facebook and the Death of Networks http://fstutzman.com/2009/03/05/facebook-and-the-death-of-networks/ Thoughts about information, social networks, and privacy Fri, 06 Jan 2012 21:54:51 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: fred http://fstutzman.com/2009/03/05/facebook-and-the-death-of-networks/comment-page-1/#comment-10716 fred Sun, 08 Mar 2009 23:14:05 +0000 http://fstutzman.com/?p=1566#comment-10716 Sure. One survey I ran at UNC last fall (employing SRS), as well as a student honors thesis. Of stuff already in print, see: Lampe, C., Ellison, N. B., and Steinfield, C. (2008). Changes in use and perception of facebook. In CSCW '08: Proceedings of the ACM 2008 conference on Computer supported cooperative work, New York, NY, USA, 2008 (pp. 721-730). ACM. Lewis, K., Kaufman, J., and Christakis, N. (2008). The Taste for Privacy: An Analysis of College Student Privacy Settings in an Online Social Network. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(1), 79-100. Sure. One survey I ran at UNC last fall (employing SRS), as well as a student honors thesis. Of stuff already in print, see:

Lampe, C., Ellison, N. B., and Steinfield, C. (2008). Changes in use and perception of facebook. In CSCW ’08: Proceedings of the ACM 2008 conference on Computer supported cooperative work, New York, NY, USA, 2008 (pp. 721-730). ACM.

Lewis, K., Kaufman, J., and Christakis, N. (2008). The Taste for Privacy: An Analysis of College Student Privacy Settings in an Online Social Network. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(1), 79-100.

]]> By: Jeff Kubina http://fstutzman.com/2009/03/05/facebook-and-the-death-of-networks/comment-page-1/#comment-10711 Jeff Kubina Sun, 08 Mar 2009 22:04:26 +0000 http://fstutzman.com/?p=1566#comment-10711 Fred, I think you covered the points and expected affects well. Overall I think a small portion of Facebook users will make optimal use of the new features (unless Facebook makes a gross error is setting the defaults for the options). I suspect most users are content with building their networks via the friends-of-friends method or via their email-contacts list; is there any research that would support the idea that a lot of users find these methods too constraining? Also, you state "there is (and has been) a clear migration towards friends-only profiles in Facebook", which I also believe to be true, but do you, or do you know of anyone, who has collected hard statistics to support that? Fred, I think you covered the points and expected affects well. Overall I think a small portion of Facebook users will make optimal use of the new features (unless Facebook makes a gross error is setting the defaults for the options). I suspect most users are content with building their networks via the friends-of-friends method or via their email-contacts list; is there any research that would support the idea that a lot of users find these methods too constraining?

Also, you state “there is (and has been) a clear migration towards friends-only profiles in Facebook”, which I also believe to be true, but do you, or do you know of anyone, who has collected hard statistics to support that?

]]> By: Bertil Hatt http://fstutzman.com/2009/03/05/facebook-and-the-death-of-networks/comment-page-1/#comment-10474 Bertil Hatt Fri, 06 Mar 2009 11:08:31 +0000 http://fstutzman.com/?p=1566#comment-10474 Many things about what you wrote — let me bullet-point (Oh, when my former consultant self comes back, that's bad): * Thanks for pointing at that press conference; * Thank you so much for your analysis — and the word context collapse (I had a hard time translating the idea to English); * I'm personnally glad of that move: I want to share the academics links I enjoy with the world, but not all my information, and revised control should improve that; * Regarding the rest of us: studies conducted at my lab (SocioGeek, in French, translation project on their way, more information available upon request; and yes, there are tons of methodological issues) doesn't show more privacy as much as more control, and 'Friends only' in pretty much the only control Facebook has been suggesting; a significant portion of people tend to know about it; many more are interested, and might neglect the complexity of the thing: Facebook offering better suited control (by context of activity element rather then type of media) would certainly be welcome, and increase users' management, both opening and closing; * Don't use "Open": it's so polysemic, that it's border-line tautological: is Facebook encouraging sharing with other Facebook member (the usual meaning of 'Public') or making available to any site, through RSS feeds that do not need the hardly implemented authentification process? * More generally —as I've been arguing for more then two months now, up to a seminar Wednesday at the OII— any "opening up" by Facebook (short of DiSo, i.e. letting befrend people from other SNS without opening a account there) will lead to a larger market share for them: all this provides great convenience for users, but those short-term; unless Facebook accepts to release that control and let non-members intefer (and based on their business model, I doubt they will — at least, not without a fight bigger then any other previously seen) the site is headed for massive monopoly head-aches. Many things about what you wrote — let me bullet-point (Oh, when my former consultant self comes back, that’s bad):

* Thanks for pointing at that press conference;

* Thank you so much for your analysis — and the word context collapse (I had a hard time translating the idea to English);

* I’m personnally glad of that move: I want to share the academics links I enjoy with the world, but not all my information, and revised control should improve that;

* Regarding the rest of us: studies conducted at my lab (SocioGeek, in French, translation project on their way, more information available upon request; and yes, there are tons of methodological issues) doesn’t show more privacy as much as more control, and ‘Friends only’ in pretty much the only control Facebook has been suggesting; a significant portion of people tend to know about it; many more are interested, and might neglect the complexity of the thing: Facebook offering better suited control (by context of activity element rather then type of media) would certainly be welcome, and increase users’ management, both opening and closing;

* Don’t use “Open”: it’s so polysemic, that it’s border-line tautological: is Facebook encouraging sharing with other Facebook member (the usual meaning of ‘Public’) or making available to any site, through RSS feeds that do not need the hardly implemented authentification process?

* More generally —as I’ve been arguing for more then two months now, up to a seminar Wednesday at the OII— any “opening up” by Facebook (short of DiSo, i.e. letting befrend people from other SNS without opening a account there) will lead to a larger market share for them: all this provides great convenience for users, but those short-term; unless Facebook accepts to release that control and let non-members intefer (and based on their business model, I doubt they will — at least, not without a fight bigger then any other previously seen) the site is headed for massive monopoly head-aches.

]]> By: Mike http://fstutzman.com/2009/03/05/facebook-and-the-death-of-networks/comment-page-1/#comment-10424 Mike Thu, 05 Mar 2009 23:13:57 +0000 http://fstutzman.com/?p=1566#comment-10424 holy crap, 11 trillion photos? holy crap, 11 trillion photos?

]]>