Dealing With the Eventual Collapse of Social Networks

taskforce writes "There are good reasons to think web services like Facebook won't be around forever. If Facebook ever were to go down there would be potentially huge costs to its users. We can all take individual steps to protect our data and social network, but is there anything we can do to our economy to mitigate the costs of the failure of these services? The Red Rock looks at the role open source, open standards, consumer cooperatives, and enterprise reform can play. The author concludes that all is not lost, and that there's a lot we can do to reduce both the cost and frequency of failure." His suggestions are pretty radical: "The first is draw up an Open Data Bill and pass it into law. This would (where applicable) mandate the use of open standards by firms, and also mandate that all data held about a user is downloadable by that user, in an open standard. ... The second is to reform the corporate structure of larger companies to include some directors elected by consumers, rather than just shareholders. Not all the directors, like in the Cooperative Group, and not even a majority, but just a small portion of the board — say one third."

Comments

backup your date to multisources

[Nyder]

You should treat every website like it might not be around forever.

If you store your photo's on facebook and don't have backups if it elsewhere, then you deserve what you get, if Facebook closes down.

Nice idea to have an "Open Standard" to get our data, but I don't see this happening.

Re:backup your date to multisources

[Anonymous Coward]

Photos? My photos are on my hard drive.
I think what people are worried about is all the trinkets they've racked up in those social games.

Friend-face

[Orne]

Somehow Facebook is too big to fail, but MySpace can flitter off into the night without people caring? When we finally approach the end of the natural life of Facebook, people will transition into whatever the next big social media gathering site will be, little by little until Site A is empty and Site B is the new hot stuff. It's not going to happen overnight, no "rush to the exit", and definitely no need to legislate a "fix".

Re:Friend-face

[rueger]

Hate to break it to you, but you - yes YOU grantspassalan - rely on those "laws" every single day. You know, the ones that don't allow your nieghbour to start a lead smelter beside your house, the ones that try to ensure that your drinking water is safe, the ones try to keep your kids from being enlisted by child pornographers.

Or do you mean those crazy ass regulations that say that household current should be 110v AC, gasoline should have a reliable octane level, and your bottle of Tylenol shouldn't include arsenic?

Or do you mean that crazy ass court system that tries and convicts criminals, and that allows you to defend the ownership of your property and ideas, and to defend your reputation from libel?

And yeah, government does have a role in regulating corporations specifically because we've seen time and time again that corporations will not act in the best interests of society as whole, will screw over their customers and clients, and will do pretty nasty stuff someone isn't watching over their shoulder.

Re:Friend-face

[azalin]

This would be an interesting point for a privacy discussion and maybe some regulation. What is your data, who owns it and what can be done with it? Is it just another asset of the company that can be sold or shared at will (at least from the legal standpoint) or is it part of a "contract" (sort of) between user and company needed to provide a service. What happens if the company is sold, goes bankrupt or decides it no longer cares about playing nice?
In some countries (ie Europe especially Germany) the regulations are rather clear about most points though probably not all. The user owns his data and can demand a copy of all personal data and may request it to be deleted as well. There are a few exceptions and some room for improvement but basically this is the way I'd like it it to happen.
I provide temporary access to my data and ad viewing eyeballs in exchange for a service. If you don't provide this service anymore (or if I cease to want it) you loose any right to use it. Of course there may be some necessary delays (ie. data won't be deleted until all open payments are settled).

Access to data is a right "rented" with the provision of service. If the service is no longer provided or needed, any right to access or keep the data should be void.

Re:Friend-face

[EdIII]

Oh I don't know about that. A society with no regulations at all will fail just as quick as an overly regulated society. Are we striking a fair balance? Probably not.

Sure, there is some really stupid shit like hate crime laws, and cyber bullying laws to prevent hurt feelings on the intarwebs. However, there is also some pretty smart stuff like food and safety regulations (most of it) and putting on your farking seat belt and wearing a helmet.

Credit reporting agencies are mandated to give you all of your information. You can also access your entire medical record. That sounds pretty reasonable right? You would think you would not need a law for it... but apparently you do otherwise companies would deny you information because it creates an avenue for unjust profit.

An open standard might be going a little far because of how vague that might be, but it could as easily just be plain text. I don't think it is unreasonable to require a company to disclose upon request all information they have stored about you.

It might get problematic in separating any data that relates to trade secrets, proprietary processes, and 3rd party interactions, but I think it is sound in spirit.

In this case it sounds like the idea is not so different than number portability laws for telecoms. Perhaps the author wants people to have a legal entitlement to access and migrate any data held by one company to another? That's no so unreasonable is it?

The only way around it that I can see is that Facebook would have to outright claim copyright for all submissions, which might not go over well.

Trademarks property of their respective owners. Comments owned by the poster. © 2012 All Rights Reserved. Geeknet, Inc

That's at the bottom of Slashdot. Even though I own the comments, I cannot peruse or download all of my posts that Slashdot may have stored. It would be pretty nice to have that, and if Slashdot cannot be moved to provide it, a regulation to motivate that sounds good to me.

After all, the basic spirit of the idea is that you are provided free access to anything you own, and that includes any data collected about you... not such a bad idea to pushing forward as a basic legal entitlement in the early years of our Digital Age, IMO.

Mod Points

[AndrewStephens]

Sometimes I wish Slashdot would let me download my mod points in an open format and use them on another web site. I have some Facebook posts in mind that need down-modding.

I've solved this problem (mostly) in my head

[Anonymous Coward]

Anything I put on a social network, I consider it "lost". I treat it like conversation. Growing up, there was never any expectation that my conversations would be archived. I treat social networks like that. Yep, Slashdot postings too. Once in a while I'll get some +5 that I think is worth saving, but even most of those aren't worth it. Even the several blogs or sites I've had over the years don't hold up very well over time.

Let's face it. Most of us aren't Shakespeare. Most of us have pretty boring lives. How do you know if you *do* have an interesting life? Somebody else starts a page for you. So that solves the problem right there. Just do nothing on social networks, and let somebody without a life do it for you.

Now, all of this is a separate issue from being able to "back down" your data. I have to admit I haven't done that with my Flickr pix. It's my one weakness. I really need to at least download the pix and burn them all one one CD. I have the raw data, but the selection of what was "post worthy" and the comments and metadata are the real problem. I'll take care of it one day, or my unremarkable life will end before somebody does it for me.

And now, to drive the point home, I'll post this AC instead of using my Karma +2 bonus account that I've had for 10 years.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

You do not have a FaceBook page

[AndrewStephens]

This goes for all social networks (including Slashdot) but I will use Facebook as an example:

You do not have a FaceBook page.

No you don't.

Facebook has a page on you, which you update for them for free. You are a product that Facebook produces for its customers. The customers of Facebook are the advertisers, not you. This is not necessarily a bad deal for you. You get to show people Facebook's page about you, and derive pleasure from interacting with Facebook's pages about your friends. All for free.

But don't get upset when Facebook decides to improve things for its customers, because they can (and should) put them first. Facebook owes you nothing.

Regulating social networks seems like an exercise in frustration. What counts as a social network? Does my blog count? Do I need to let users download all their comments in an "industry standard format"? Do MMO's count? Can I download my +5 firesword?

Re:wow

[Black Parrot]

I guess I am the only person on the planet who never got a facebook account

Me too!

Hey - we should be friends, and maybe use the internet to keep track of what other like-minded people are doing.

What if they sell it?

[Anonymous Coward]

If Facebook goes the way Myspace is heading, then the biggest risk is they'll sell your every private data to ChoicePoint, the NSA, and everyone else who fancies taking a look. They can't commercialize it now because people would leave the site, (at least not openly, but if those wiretap memos going around are true, secretly they already are). But once the company has no future and can openly piss off its users, then it becomes not problem selling that to every data mining company out there.

The end of Facebook?

[Futurepower(R)]

Facebook's reputation with the mainstream media is rapidly getting worse. Facebook is getting a bad reputation partly because of articles like these:

Worst company: Facebook was a semi-finalist in the April 2012 competition to be voted the worst company in the United States .

Facebook follows its business rules? Not always. The April 7, 2012 Wall Street Journal story, Selling You on Facebook, says:

"Facebook requires apps [mobile phone software applications] to ask permission before accessing a user's personal details. However, a user's friends aren't notified if information about them is used by a friend's app. An examination of the apps' activities also suggests that Facebook occasionally isn't enforcing its own rules on data privacy."

There's more like that in the article.

Facebook tracks every web page you visit that has a Facebook button (using Javascript). For example, if you visit the Oregonian Newspaper web site, Facebook tracks every story you visit, even if you don't click on the "Like" button. There are ways to prevent that (using Firefox with the NoScript add-on), but most people don't know about them.

Companies pay people to click on Facebook "Like" buttons. The number of Facebook "Likes" doesn't give any indication of popularity.

On December 9, 2011 it was necessary to click on a Facebook "Like" button to be allowed to see Fry's Electronics ads.

Do 86,688 people (on April 9, 2012) really like Firestone Complete Auto Care, or did the company offer something to be "liked"?

A few problems with Facebook: Richard Stallman wrote a short list of things wrong with Facebook.

How much information does Facebook keep? Read the December 13, 2011 article, Twenty Something Asks Facebook For His File And Gets It - All 1,200 Pages.

What do people in other countries think? The May 14, 2010 article, Facebook is not your friend gives one idea.

The June 15, 2011 article, The End of Facebook, and the June 14, 2011 article, Is this the beginning of the end for Facebook? give others.

Most people don't understand the problems that may occur. For example, consider the March 28, 2012 article, Teacher's aide says 'no access' to her Facebook; now legal battle with school.

This April 4, 2012 article would be funny if it weren't so sad: Woman arrested for assault based on Facebook photo. Quotes:

"Aston ... was charged ... based solely on a Facebook photo and a generic description offered to police by the victim's boyfriend."

Defending herself required a "... court appearance and several thousand dollars in legal bills."


Open source will prevail. E