Forgot your password?

typodupeerror
Social Networks Open Source News

Could Open Source Render Facebook the Next AOL? 293

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the can't-happen-fast-enough dept.
joabj writes "Now that Facebook has amassed more than 500 million users, a growing number of open source social networking developers are wondering if Facebook's photo sharing, status updates and other features wouldn't work better as Internet-wide standardized services. At the OSCON conference last week, the head of Identi.ca, an open source Twitter-like microblogging service, likened today's social networking services to the enormously proprietary online services of the early 1990s, like AOL or Prodigy. He suggested that just like SMTP and Sendmail standardized what were previously propriety e-mail services, so too could open source social networking stacks, like OStatus, render walled garden services like Facebook obsolete."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Could Open Source Render Facebook the Next AOL?

Comments Filter:
  • Seriously (Score:2, Interesting)

    by alinuxguruofyore (1117973) on Thursday July 29 2010, @09:22AM (#33067938)
    Yes, and just like Sendmail prevented Microsoft from a $1 Billion a year messaging platform (Exchange) and Linux prevented Microsoft from a $15 Billion a year Server platform. *yawn* Nothing to see here, please move along.
  • Re:Too late (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Spad (470073) <slashdotNO@SPAMspad.co.uk> on Thursday July 29 2010, @09:24AM (#33067962) Homepage

    I will not sign up for a Facebook account unless something serious changes with regards to privacy and security. However, I *would* sign up for a service that allowed communication with Facebook users, so that I can more easily keep in touch with people, without exposing myself to all the Facebook crap that I want to avoid.

    Such a service would provide a gateway through which people could move away from Facebook if they don't like it without having to deal with the problem of losing access to all their friends and profiles.

  • Makes sense (Score:3, Interesting)

    by MonsterTrimble (1205334) <`monstertrimble' `at' `hotmail.com'> on Thursday July 29 2010, @09:36AM (#33068126)
    I honestly think I could work pretty well. Basically a distributed client side setup with the big things that facebook does and (for the most part) does well: Share stuff with people you know - statuses, comments, messages, photos. Build something like a Pidgin/Yahoo messenger client which can pull status & wall feeds from friends who are online and from common friends who have updated information on friends who are not online. For photo sharing, have an interface with one of the big photo sites (or all of them) for photos.
  • by damn_registrars (1103043) <damn.registrars@gmail.com> on Thursday July 29 2010, @09:39AM (#33068170) Homepage Journal
    No, Facebook will render Facebook obsolete. A lot of people are spending less time on their now than they did before. The novelty is wearing off, and eventually people won't care about it at all. It will eventually be replaced not by one single thing but by a variety of better things, including actual human-to-human interaction.
  • by eldavojohn (898314) * <my/.username@@@gmail.com> on Thursday July 29 2010, @09:54AM (#33068368) Journal

    Unfortunately part of the Terms of Service of the Facebook API prevents storage of data received through the API on a remote source.

    I never said to use the Facebook API.

    For a mental exercise let's imagine (and really maybe Perl is the better choice here) that I made a Ruby gem called SocialWalker or something of the sort and basically I used mechanize [rubyforge.org] to log into Facebook after getting the user's credentials. Then the application connects to my webservice that sends the latest selector strings (harvested from the latest Facebook interface by hand with SelectorGadget [selectorgadget.com]) and also Nokogiri [nokogiri.org] to quickly scrape off all the information and date/time stamps [railscasts.com]. I think the pictures would be a different kind of effort but completely feasible.

    At that point, the user could save it in some documented open social file format that any application can read ... it would probably be a tree directory with a bunch of XML files and images. Maybe they want to put that into Diaspora and I would have a way that the system would autopopulate their diaspora with this archived data? Maybe they want to do their own thing with it? Maybe I could spend time doing this for Facebook and MySpace and Friendster and whatever you send me a link to?

    Yeah, I might not be able to spider your posts on your friends walls and maybe I won't be able to get some information and maybe the new system won't let you back timestamp things so that data has to be put in the comments on your new photo albums.

    Maybe Google could be petitioned to create this system instead of some developer who prefers to get drunk on the weekends instead of liberating social network users? Google is the god of scraping and caching after all.

    But it would look like nothing more than one user looking at all their history one last time ;) No API ToS violations needed.

  • Re:Too late (Score:4, Interesting)

    by jridley (9305) on Thursday July 29 2010, @09:58AM (#33068406)

    Totally doesn't hold up. Back when MySpace was big, I don't think I knew more than 2 or 3 people with MySpace pages. It was pretty much exclusively a teen/college hangout.

    These days the only people that I know who do NOT have Facebook pages are people without internet connections at all (lots of my family) and people who are security curmudgeons (like me). Even people who barely get on the internet use Facebook. Lots of people only even have an internet connection so that they CAN use Facebook.

  • Re:Too late (Score:5, Interesting)

    by zr-rifle (677585) <zedr@zedr . c om> on Thursday July 29 2010, @10:02AM (#33068446) Homepage
    You can communicate with your friends without exposing your personal information to Facebook:
    1. Register an account with a false name and leave it devoid of any personal content.
    2. Add your friends telling them it's you, without revealing your complete name
    3. Download the Pidgin IM (gratis & libre) client and use it to message your friends
    4. Delete all your browser cookies relative to Facebook
    5. ???
    6. PROFIT!!!

    Just don't be too revealing about yourself in your instant messages :)

  • by timeOday (582209) on Thursday July 29 2010, @10:06AM (#33068494)
    Did that save Usenet from being marginalized by proprietary web boards? Look at the iPhone, with a centralized "app store" and a separate app for everything, displacing the idea of interoperable web services accessible from any Internet device. Do we see a network of bazaars where we can put items for sale on web pages using a markup so they are searchable, or one big monolithinc website, ebay? Even email is being marginalized by texting and twitter (which are essentially services, not standards) and gmail (which is still email but centralized on a massive scale and with no need for pop and smtp in many cases, when two users on the same webservice email each other). The vast majority of IP addresses aren't even permitted to originate email any more, being in black holes and/or blocked by the ISP.

    Sadly, ALL the momentum is AWAY from shared protocols and interoperation, and towards centralized, smoothly integrated services.

  • Yes, it could. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by HeckRuler (1369601) on Thursday July 29 2010, @10:20AM (#33068674)
    Yeah, I've had this idea as well. Because Facebook is simple. It's a webpage with text and pictures uploaded by users that has interfaces with others' web page. Rather then facebook or myspace, an open source alternative that people would run on their own. Websites with "user" uploaded content are, you know, old hat, so this boils down to protocols to deal with interaction between sites. And remember, this IS the social portion of social networks.

    so what are all these interactions that need protocols:
    -Establishing networks of trust, friendship, and hate. That whole "friends request" thing.

    And that's essentially the only one that's required to make an open source distributed social network like facebook. Everything else is, not trivial, but it's been done. If it can be made cheap and simple enough (that itself a monumental task), then the masses could use it. But they won't, as inertial will keep them in facebook.
    The rest is just features:

    -Poke. It's one freaking message.
    -Post on another wall/picture/whatnot. It's been done.
    -Search through others pictures for tags of you.
    -Set up events, invite people.
    -Establish groups of people. The owner would host of course, but transferring ownership could be interesting.
  • Re:Too late (Score:5, Interesting)

    by imakemusic (1164993) on Thursday July 29 2010, @10:20AM (#33068676)

    I assume you're talking about Facebook instant messaging. Facebook have since changed their chat to use XMPP which means that most multi-protocol messengers can use Facebook chat. You still need to have a facebook account to use it though, so it doesn't really help Spad. I guess you could register an account and not enter any details...

  • Re:Too late (Score:3, Interesting)

    by commodore64_love (1445365) on Thursday July 29 2010, @10:30AM (#33068824) Journal

    You seem to have a lot of hatred for AOL, but I remember when it was called Quantum Link (see link) and offered in the mid-80s a web type interface before the web existed. It also provided the earliest Online Sims games (called Club Caribe). And although I preferred to use FIDOnet and Usenet, AOL did have decent forums for asking questions. Those posts were answered by a national audience, which was a huge step-up from the local BBSes.

    My memories of AOL are generally positive, and I still use them today. $7/month is a hard-to-beat deal for net access.

    http://www.qlinklives.org/ [qlinklives.org]

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 29 2010, @10:43AM (#33069012)
    So when's the OS community going to tackle eBay? With all the dissatisfaction voiced about eBay, I haven't seen any viable OS threats. Am I missing something?
  • by Revotron (1115029) on Thursday July 29 2010, @10:48AM (#33069096) Homepage

    A lot of people don't use anything else but Facebook. A vast majority of the people I know and want to connect with are on Facebook because it's easier for them and everybody they know is on it, as well. It's an endless cycle.

    Why would I give up living in a walled garden just to venture out into a vast desert?

  • by jmyers (208878) on Thursday July 29 2010, @11:09AM (#33069410)

    Relating Facebook to its features and applications and how they could be replaced is missing the point. Facebook is all about the contact list. People will not move away from it and lose their contacts and seamless communication. i.e. importing the contacts somewhere else just adds complexity.

    Like all things FB will eventually die but it will take some killer app that no one has seen yet, not just duplication of features.

    Another way it may die is through a really bad event like major identity theft or a really nasty virus that causes people to flock away from it. Or possibly a bad DDOS attack that brings it down for an extended period.

  • Re:Too late (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 29 2010, @11:42AM (#33069868)

    What are they gonna do, cancel your Facebook account?

  • Re:Too late (Score:3, Interesting)

    by 0100010001010011 (652467) on Thursday July 29 2010, @11:48AM (#33069996)

    Definitely not too late.

    My Parents are now on facebook. As are all of their friends, which is great for them and reconnecting (VS something like classmates.com). However when they let anyone register it turned it into Facebook's own Eternal September. "Likes" and "Groups" are thankfully replacing the stupid forwards that people send out.

    I'd say 1/4 of LameBook [lamebook.com] and FailBook [failbook.com] posts are because you friended a parent and they commented on stuff. The groups are nice, but a pain to setup as are controls of who can see what. I want an entire sandbox (without the pain of having to create an entire separate account).

    You bet your ass I'm going to be looking for the next best thing, as are any college students that would have fit the original Facebook demographic. My facebook page is going to stagnate as I move on just like my MySpace page did when I moved to FaceBook as did my Geocities page when I moved to MySpace.

  • Re:Too late (Score:2, Interesting)

    by FlyMysticalDJ (1660959) on Thursday July 29 2010, @07:25PM (#33077730)

    I said communicate with friends, not "friends". I doubt that more than 10% of those 254 "friends" give a shit about your last vacation, and maybe 25% of that 10% give a shit about your BBQ.

    If that is your experience, then I suspect your life is sad and lonely. I can tell it's already bitter since you've degenerated into swearing.

    Seriously? You're calling a guy sad and lonely because he only has two dozen people to tell about his vacation and 6 good friends to come to a BBQ at his house? That seems a little extreme. I doubt that anyone truly has time to connect deeply with 254 people.

The meek are contesting the will.

Working...