Report from the Data Sharing Summit #2
Its great to see Arrington and others wake up to the battle that’s waging not only over dataportability, but also over the basic rights of user’s data. This is something I’ve been screaming about for years and why we did the Bill of Rights for Users of Social Media (which Michael is a co-author of.)
Yesterday’s exclusion of Google Friend Connect by Facebook is not just a move to protect user’s data, as much as a slap in the face to Google - who has recently been exposing their true strategy.
Its clear that Google is redefining this battle and making a land grab for ALL the social graphs out there - not just the social graphs from Orkut or Gmail. Facebook continues to use privacy as their chief excuse why they won’t give us control over our data.
One key statement Dave Morin made is in Facebook Friend Connect release - is the notion of ‘dynamic privacy’.
I really like the idea of a privacy model which represents what happens when people move their data around. Privacy should not be a static concept, but rather something that changes as people change and which supports the notion of friends ‘opting in’ to letting others move their data around.
One of the topics we discussed at yesterday’s Data Sharing Summit2 was the notion of a relationship layer (started by Bob Blakely of the Burton Group.) Only by representing the relationship between people can we guarantee that their privacy will be maintained. We also need to start thinking about building into our architectures and designs the notion of OUR data - which is the shared stuff between us.
None of the major social media or networking systems out there has relationships as part of their equation or seem to understand the difference between my data and our data.
Though short on details, Facebook’s dynamic privacy notion DOES seem to me to be a step in the right direction. With all their screaming about privacy, its great to see Facebook step up to the plate. Now we just need to see some code.
Arrington states that none of the current major platforms have plans to release the user’s data - and he’s correct. This is why we started an effort yesterday to keep track of and compare the various platforms implementation details in the areas of access to user’s data, privacy TOS (terms of service), specifically WHAT data IS exposed, and several other criteria.
The idea is to list out all the major platforms (Amazon, AOL/Bebo, Facebook, Google, Microsoft, MySpace, Yahoo, SixApart, etc.) along the top and then compare these platforms to a number of different criteria. This matrix chart could then be used to keep track of these battles and issues in a normalized manner - as they evolve and morph over the next 12-18 months.
This matrix of comparative features picks up from where Stacy Higginbotham started the other day. Thanks Stacy. So we used our Data Sharing Suimmit2 as an opportunity (since we have representatives from many of the major platforms) to start to map out just exactly WHAT standards each platform supports, what standards they’re proposing themselves, what policies and access they provide, etc.
Here’s David Recordon (of OpenID and SixApart) filling in info on SixApart’s platform. We had Angus Logan from Microsoft, Kevin Marks from Google, Ben Metcalfe from MySpace, someone from AOL, Amazon and others - all representing their platforms - filling in this matrix chart - which we’re planning on putting up on the web.
The trick will be to get authoritative representatives of each platform to update the various criteria and issues we’d like to compare and keep track of - over time. This matrix will be available to all - so that we can have a normalized view of what’s going on in these continuing battles.
Daniela Barbosa of the dataportability.org effort will maintain and manage the matrix chart. Daniella’s day job is at Dow Jones and she’s been instrumental in getting this kind of knowledge out to the real world.
I also introduced folks to OpenDD and we’re anxiously awaiting an implementation from Curverider.
Needless to say Joseph Smarr (of Plaxo) was there yesterday - with reasons to be smiling. Joseph insisted that Comcast Interactive is a separate unit of Comcast and that they would be setting up shop out in the Valley - leveraging their recent purchase of Plaxo - as a start.
Joseph also insisted (as he is ALSO a co-author of the Bill of Rights) that Comcast would maintain the integrity and privacy of their user’s data.
I myself an excited about the possibility of sharing my favorite TV Shows I watch on my Comcast box - to the world.
No Replies