Facebook Censors Certain Email
May 22nd, 2008 | by Brad King |
Image via Wikipedia
A few days back, Google introduced an open data portability protocol that would allow your personal information to be moved from site to site with little hassle.
The idea — which Facebook and Myspace also introduced — is to make it easier for people to move on the Web. It’s the first step in creating truly ubiquitous reputation systems that allow for more reliable communication online.
The problem: unless the system is open, your information could be controlled by one company — or a consortium of companies.
And controlling that data is worth a potential gold mine, which is why those three companies are scrambling to create the most open — yet proprietary — system.
The underlying goal is positive. We need to have a reputation system not only because it enables an ease-of-use across networks, but also because it allows the late-adopters a certain comfort level with the Web.
But data portability in one place brings up a very concerning idea: who owns you?
Privacy and security aren’t my bag at all. I assume that anything I write or send online is going to be end up in places I don’t want it. I’m not happy about that, but I also trust the marketplace will be self-correcting on these issues.
There are moments of pause, though. The folks at ReadWriteWeb have a disturbing post that details Facebook’s spam filters automatically deleting emails that contain references to two other social networking sites.
That’s bad in principle, but more concerning in light of the fact that the company is hoping to become the dominant player in data portability. If I turn my information over to Facebook and — for instance — the company decided to place limitations on where I want my data to go, I have to wonder what recourse I have.
Is it my data? Can Facebook simply choose to ignore the fact that I would like my data to go to site A because it’s objectionable to their system?
I would hope there is an Opt-In function that would allow me to override the company’s protocols. More to the point: I would hope that the company would be required to allow me to do that.
If not, data portability in a centralized location will do exactly opposite what it purports to do: ease communication online.
