Posts Tagged facebook
An open letter to Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg
Posted by Matt in Social Networks on December 3rd, 2009
It’s been a little over four years since I joined Facebook in the fall of 2005, shortly after beginning college. Facebook had just opened it’s doors to the general public after being exclusivly available only to those having .edu email addresses from major universities. I recognized it as then as just a fad, but potentially a major tool for connecting with friends, family, and colleagues. I quickly established my profile and encouraged my peers to register and do the same. It didn’t take long to begin building my social network on the ReadWrite web and it’s been nothing but upward from there–at least, as far as number of friends goes.
Unfortunately, the rest of the experience hasn’t been so rosy. Facebook says they’re improving the privacy experience in the coming weeks by removing regional networks and simplifying how the privacy controls work. I’m all for this action, because I believe that the current privacy model is, at best, confusing, and at worst just plain broken. But in reality, these new privacy controls are the least of my concerns. Facebook has it’s problems, sure, but one major issue are the advertisements that bombard users on every page of the site. They range from just plain annoying to visually assaulting, often times less than wholesome. The advertisement engine reads various profile details like gender, marital status, age, hobbies and interests, groups, pages, and more. It then targets various ads at users matching certain demographics and social data.
It’s not just disturbing, it’s downright scary.
What happens to the information collected by these ads? Does any of my personal data ever make it back to the hands of these 3rd parties? Is Facebook always recording my clicks and attempting to make predictions based on those? Since Facebook is based on a “friends” model, wouldn’t it make sense that I should have to approve or “friend” the types of advertisements that I see on the site? I realize that Facebook needs to make money, and I’m certainly not against allowing advertisements to augment a service provided to me free of charge. But I, instead, want to be able to choose which kinds of ads are shown while I’m logged into the site in addition to controlling what types of information these advertisements have access to. Not only that, I believe offensive ads should not be forced down my throat and I should be the one to decide which ones are offensive.
So, Mark and the staff at Facebook, please listen to me and users like me. Give us a choice as to what types of ads we see once you roll out the new privacy settings. Give us options to control how targeted the ads can be. Extend to us the hand of good will and truly improve the privacy and user experience that 350+ million users see each and every day.
We will all thank you for it.
————————————————–
On a related note, users fed up with seeing all those ads should switch to Mozilla’s Firefox browser and install the AdBlock Plus extension, which effectively eliminates the ads on the site. This won’t help protect your privacy, but it will remove visual clutter from your life. It’s quite worth the 5 minutes it’ll take you to switch!
advertisements, facebook, mark zuckerberg, personal data, privacy
The Collapse of Facebook
Posted by Matt in Social Networks on October 25th, 2009
When a builder sets out to construct a skyscraper, he does not simply bulldoze the land, dig some holes, and start building. He relies on architects, structural engineers, designers, and artists to provide him a complete set of blueprints. Ones that will ensure that the building doesn’t collapse 10, 20, or even 30 years after completion. The building is designed with beauty, stability, and purpose. If it lacks beauty, no one will want to look at it; if no stability, nobody will use it for fear of collapse; if no purpose, it may sit vacant and empty indefinitely.
So is a company. No corporate entity exists without a purpose, collapses in on itself without a good foundation and stable management, and is shunned if it provides no aesthetic potential in the eyes of its users. Yes, the title of this entry may be a bit sensational and rather unbelievable on the whole, but may I suggest that it is indeed a great possibility in the not-so-distant future. Maybe not next year or even five years, but without serious changes from within, I believe that Facebook will eventually experience a serious meltdown–a casualty of its own existence.
There’s no doubt that Facebook had one of the highest growth rates of any web company in the relatively recent past. Since its inception in 2004 as a sort of “online yearbook,” it grew from only a handful of users to more than 300 million. That’s a huge amount of growth for a company not even 6 years old. Growth that explosive must be carefully managed lest the company’s infrastructure grow so rapidly that you end up with a structure that looks more like spaghetti than an organizational hierarchy. I can’t comment directly on Facebook’s organizational charts, but I hypothesize that the company may be in need of some restructuring based on the following points.
Poor Design and Structure
Facebook’s design and website structure have degraded over the past two years. If you used Facebook around 2 years ago, you’ll recall a site structure that was easy to navigate, it was simple to find contact information, adjust privacy settings, keep track of happenings in your friends’ lives, etc. The type of information displayed in the news feed was easy to sort through and interact with. Since then we’ve been through at least two relatively major redesigns of the site. I still sometimes have to hunt through menus and buttons in order to find exactly what I’m looking for. Even the news feed update on Friday, October 23rd has caused more confusion than it has clarity. I honestly can’t figure out how it’s supposed to work (and I’ve read the general announcement).
I know that some people just hate change, and I promise that I’m not just another one of those naysayers. I generally welcome change when it improves the user experience and provides additional value; however, I think you’ll find that many of the site’s users will agree that the past two updates have accomplished neither. The site really does need a makeover, but until the company can bring in some experts in usability and Human Computer Interaction (HCI) and get things back on track, I fear that future updates may continue to add complexity and subject users to further confusion.
Substandard Customer Service
Honestly, I’m not sure where Facebook finds its philosophy on customer service, but I would submit them as an example of bad customer service. I can cite at least two poor experiences in interacting with Facebook staff. The first concerns the aforementioned design changes. I participated heavily in the beta program and also spoke loudly regarding the design choices along with many others. I saw a couple changes take place as a result before public release, but still most of the suggestions from many testers were largely ignored (or at least it seemed that way). Facebook just knows better than its customer base? I can’t understand why any company would take this tactic.
The second instance of a poor experience was the result of a recent job fair at my graduate institution. Facebook brought representatives to the fair and I stopped by to inquire about possible internships and/or future employment. After chatting briefly with a representative, I left the booth with the distinct feeling that I was of no interest to them. We hadn’t even gotten into talking about job qualifications and employment openings. I was simply handed a 4×5 card with some information on it and cold shouldered to the side. Bad move, guys.
Perhaps Facebook should consider the company Comcast, who uses its Twitter account to interact with customers, smooth over any potential problems, and answer questions. It seems that Facebook is more interested in simply talking about itself than it is interacting with customers. They need to be proactive about getting involved and calming dissatisfied users. Sure, maybe we aren’t paying anything to use their service, but that is absolutely no excuse to provide substandard customer support. If you operate a business, you assume the responsibility of keeping your customers happy whether they pay you or not.
Final Thoughts
Facebook isn’t dead…yet. Nor, really, are there too many up and coming contenders to its social network dominance; however, take a close look at MySpace. Even though their website interface and userbase were completely awful (and you’d be hard pressed to find many who disagreed), they were the #1 social network for quite sometime…before Facebook, which even in its current state is far more usable than MySpace ever was, overtook them. Social Networking is here to stay, but if companies like Facebook aren’t careful, they’ll end up like the now defunct car brand, Saturn: old and obsolete.
The strongest buildings have the best foundations provided by the best architects and engineers. Facebook revolutionized the social networking industry, but I sense a structural weakness within the corporation. Only time will tell whether it’s a fixable problem, or whether the structure will simply collapse under its own weight.
Facebook and Facial Recognition: An Obvious Marriage?
Posted by Matt in Social Networks on October 1st, 2009
The science of recognizing a face and the intelligence to recognize the same one twice. Or a million times. That’s one of 2009’s crowning technological achievements. Oh, sure, there have been facial recognition algorithms around for years, but up until this year, we haven’t had that feature on a mainstream consumer level. Within the past year, we’ve seen point-and-shoot digital cameras receive the ability to focus on individual faces in a frame and some of those cameras can even detect whether or not you’re smiling (and summarily refuse to snap the photo!). Standalone desktop applications like Apple iPhoto and Google Picasa will now scan your entire photo library for faces and once you’ve given the software some training, it’ll auto-detect and tag the mugs of family, friends, and maybe even your dog. In fact, Google’s online photo catalog software, Picasa Web Albums, has been doing the same thing for awhile as well. It’s a feature that makes cataloging photos much, much easier. No longer must you rely on finding an exact folder or using a non-smart desktop search tool to find the person you’re looking for. As long as you can remember their name, you can find their face.
For as long as most of us can remember, Facebook has allowed photo tagging. Upload your photos, click a cross-hair across a person’s face, and type in their name. If they’re using Facebook, it’ll link directly to their profile page and notify them that their face is now floating around the ‘net for any of their friends to see. A cool feature, very informative, and a stalker’s dream. But one thing that’s been bugging me for awhile is: why stop there?
Facebook, no doubt, has tens of petabytes worth of data stored across its servers and much of that is photo related. People upload terabytes worth of photos every day. Why isn’t Facebook using all that meta information to make your life easier? Imagine uploading 75 pictures of you and your friends from last week’s party. Facebook would then analyze each photo, tag everyone it recognizes from your friends list, and give you a confirmation page to adjust any of the tags. My guess is that the system wouldn’t even require training from the user as it could pull aggregate data from profile pictures and other tagged photos in order to make the whole process incredibly quick and easy. The question isn’t if they could do this, it’s why have they not?
Two reasons come immediately to mind, the first being that of privacy concerns. Suddenly you’ve turned Facebook into a huge searchable photo database that could make any law enforcement officer’s day by providing thousands of images and demographics of people not available in government or criminal databases. You’d also be presenting yourself as a target for some dangerous information leakage if Facebook were ever breached. This concern, I believe, is mostly without a logical base. Users continue to manually tag friends anyway and unless you disable the tagging system altogether, privacy will always be a concern.
The second potential issue is one of raw processing power. For instance, it took my beefy ThinkPad about 4 hours to sort through my collection of approximately 25,000 photos. That’s one dual core CPU’s near best effort since the average processor utilization was somewhere around 70%. I’m guessing Picasa was leaving some of the CPU free so that the machine didn’t slow to a complete crawl. Imagine then the billions of photos stored across Facebook servers. The company would need to create a system to process every single photo containing a face, match already associated tags, and create a massive database containing the results. This process would require not only a lot of time, but much additional storage space as well. Fortunately, storage is cheap these days–unfortunately the required number of extra CPUs and RAM modules are not.
As a side note, there was a Facebook Application released in the not-too-distant past allowing users to scan their photos for faces, but my guess is that without widespread use (and some major venture capital), the corresponding company and software didn’t get too far.
Ultimately, I think facial recognition is something that Facebook should and will eventually add to it’s service. My guess is that this feature is already in the works; however, Facebook usually holds close its cards until they’re ready for some sort of official release plan. Keep watching Facebook for any new information, and of course, you’ll find the details here as well when the announcement does arrive. My prediction? We’ll see something emerge by the end of 2010.
Cross your fingers…
apple iphoto, facebook, facial recognition, google picasa, photo library
Simple formatting in Facebook chat
Posted by Matt in Social Networks on June 3rd, 2009
While perhaps obvious to some, there are a couple commands you can use to add simple font formatting to the messages you send via Facebook chat. While there’s nothing fancy just yet, I suspect the platform will slowly evolve to contain other formatting options as time goes on.
Here’s what I’ve got so far:
- For bold text, enclose words in asterisks. (e.g. *this will become bold text*)
- For underlined text, enclose words with underscores (e.g. _this text will be come underlined_)
I’ll be sure to update this post as more options become available. In the meantime, enjoy using your new found knowledge!
bold, facebook, font, formatting, italic
Facebook: being like everyone else isn’t always cool
Posted by Matt in Social Networks on March 24th, 2009
Maybe all the bad publicity is overstated, but since nearly 2 million Facebook users have stated their displeasure at the site’s recent redesign, I think perhaps something’s amiss.
In the summer of 2008 Facebook spent quite a while working on a complete site revamp with some new features, re-arranged interface, and so on. They previewed many of those new features to some general public testers (myself included) and got quite a bit of feedback that ultimately resulted in some very nice changes to the site’s structure (in addition to solving some nasty bugs). One of the biggest advantages to that redesign was that it unified the site across the board. Ever since Facebook launched it’s Developer Platform a couple of years ago, custom applications, which often create a lot of clutter, began appearing in user profiles across the site. Facebook realized that this was a problem and sought methods for restoring the platform’s user-friendliness and generally clean, web 2.0 appeal. In my opinion, they succeeded (even though there were a few disgruntled users at first.)
Unfortunately, this time around, I think Facebook is wrong in what they’ve done. Almost overnight they released a brand-new way of interacting with friends, browsing the site, and uploading content–the new features are often extremely confusing, especially at first. My initial visit to the redesigned site brought a mix of feelings; I knew it was different and that it would take some time to figure out exactly how everything worked, but a couple weeks later I really don’t feel like I have a good grasp on things.
The one word that comes to mind when I open the new Facebook is “clutter.” There is stuff everywhere. My sidebars are filled with links, people I may know, photo updates, and I’m not even sure what else. It’s anyone’s guess as to how content is selected for those content areas. Then there’s the center/main content region. I get updates from all kinds of sources–applications, wall posts, photos, videos, notes, and the list goes on. It’s supposed to resemble some type of “real-time” feed or something (not getting the real-time part), but essentially I feel repulsed at all the information overload. It’s just way too much.
Then, how do I updatemy status (the proverbial cornerstone of all things Facebook)? But wait, it’s not really my status anymore. It’s “published content” (whatever that means) which makes me think of a blog, book, or newspaper. Certainly not the traditional “status update” we’ve had from day one. I think they’re trying to adopt the Twitter-like way of doing things, but that’s just not part of Facebook’s traditional culture. I update Twitter all the time, Facebook–a few times a week–and that’s how I like it. I don’t expect Facebook to be the catch-all for all of my social networking needs. Diversity of web services is a good thing (in my opinion) and I’d like to see them respect that.
You can’t always listen to what your users want, because everyone wants something different. So you have to listen carefully, select the good ideas, and then execute them as flawlessly as possible. I think Facebook dropped the ball this time and needs to drastically reconsider the recent update. I’m a proponent of change, but it needs to be change with a definite direction and purpose. They’ve got the purpose: be like or better than “everyone else.” Now perhaps they just need a direction. The current “middle of the stream” approach just isn’t cutting it.
Listen to your users, Facebook. I think they’re serious this time.