ROFLMAO. Talk about nailing it on the head.
via @Akula
taking joy in the popping of the social media bubble & other web 2.0 silliness
These are posts that have to do with both existing technology in general and with new technology that is just beginning to break.
Boy do we have some pretty strange concepts of what privacy is when it comes to the Web, or rather we seem to be misunderstanding exactly what privacy is.
No this is not a post in defense of Facebook and their anal attitude about controlling the flow of information. Nor is it a post extolling the virtues of new projects like Diaspora or other Facebook replacements (in their dreams maybe) who are selling themselves by tauting their belief in your right to privacy.
This post isn’t about either of those things because we’re talking about the wrong thing. This so-called uproar over what Facebook has been doing with its Open Graph and social plugins has nothing to do with privacy. It is all a case of verbal and ideological misdirection.
Look, privacy is a nice ideology and plays well in the headlines and courtrooms but when it comes to the Web and especially the Social Web using the word privacy is a misnomer. Privacy, or rather private are those things in our lives whether they be thoughts or conversations that exists within a certain set of parameters.
What happens in our bedrooms is considered to be private. What happens within the four walls of our homes is considered private. Conversations with our doctors, our lawyers is considered to be private. What is said in a confessional is considered to be private between you, the priest and God.
So. How many words does it take to totally confuse everyone?
2121 words, and one really screwed up movie analogy, is all it takes.
At least that is how many it took for MG Siegler today in a post today at TechCrunch where he tried to explain …. ….. well ….. I’nm not really sure what he was trying to explain.
I think he was trying in some long-winded fashion why he thinks that Facebook’s changing privacy settings are the right thing to do (oh boy another Scoble everything should be open adherent) it’s just that they went about doing it the wrong way.
He suggests that it is a complicated situation because Facebook is trying to become Twitter and Twitter is trying to become like Facebook.
Wha?
Hmmm … somehow I don’t think it is all that complicated. Let me put it in bullet form to make it easy for you.
Let’s see that’s 250 words and one less stupid ass movie analogy – not bad
There is no getting around it – Google sucks when it comes to the Social Web, or in marketing speak – Social Media.
Unlike the other leaders in the field Google’s efforts have either been complete flops or just disparate efforts scattered around the Web. Even in those efforts that have gained a modicum of success, if it can even be called that, there is always a feeling of blandness, of always just missing the target.
In a way this is understandable. One has to remember that Google was built around the whole concept of the power of the algorithm and built by engineers and developers with an extreme eye to minimalism in everything it did. There is nothing wrong with this approach if all you are going to be is a search engine and ad platform but being social needs more than being able to calculate page load times down to the millisecond, or debating which shade of blue right down the the hex number is better.
Everything Google does is bland, faceless and yes – boring. This is the perfect approach of course for the true geeks and early adopters but the exact opposite of what the masses who are becoming involved in Social Media want, or are expecting.