OM: "My web without Facebook Connect"

#1

Post by dell9000 » Sat, Feb 26, 2011, 4:32 PM UTC

OM: "My web without Facebook Connect"
gigaom.com

Re: OM: "My web without Facebook Connect"

#2

Post by jdp23 » Sat, Feb 26, 2011, 4:57 PM UTC

Whether or not it's fair, most people will blame Facebook in a situations like this. Unless they can get security issues under control, they're in for an increasingly rough time ... one more reason I think they're waaaay overvalued at $70B.

Re: OM: "My web without Facebook Connect"

#3

Post by icco » Sat, Feb 26, 2011, 5:09 PM UTC

I liked the article, but I'm curious about the title choice. Why prepend it with 'OM:'? Because the domain is shown on the right, do I really need two sources of authenticity?

Re: OM: "My web without Facebook Connect"

#4

Post by bhatau » Sat, Feb 26, 2011, 5:14 PM UTC

icco wrote: post #3

I liked the article, but I'm curious about the title choice. Why prepend it with 'OM:'? Because the domain is shown on the right, do I really need two sources of authenticity?

There are other authors who contribute to the same blog.

Re: OM: "My web without Facebook Connect"

#5

Post by racbart » Sat, Feb 26, 2011, 5:19 PM UTC

Anyone with some IT background should be familiar with a single point of failure concept. This is why I personally don't use FB Connect, OpenID, etc. If anything goes wrong with your single global login process, you're in trouble. It doesn't matter whether it was your fault or your provider's.

When I create web products, I don't hesitate that much. If people want it and if it can increase signup conversion, then let's roll with it. But I don't use that as an user. A good password manager is more than enough for quick and convenient logging in.

Re: OM: "My web without Facebook Connect"

#6

Post by Vivtek » Sat, Feb 26, 2011, 5:22 PM UTC

I'm not sure FB is a single point of failure - Twitter signin seems to be nearly as prevalent. In fact, you could probably do something about identity by leveraging these separate identities into one, so that if you lose one (like Om) you wouldn't be separated from your online identity. (Not to mention you could reclaim the failed point based on your other identity components.)

That's vague, but seriously - a "single" point of failure is a business opportunity waiting to happen.

Re: OM: "My web without Facebook Connect"

#7

Post by neutronicus » Sat, Feb 26, 2011, 5:24 PM UTC

I won't use any service that require FB Connect.

Re: OM: "My web without Facebook Connect"

#8

Post by rokhayakebe » Sat, Feb 26, 2011, 5:29 PM UTC

I love OM, but if he has no web without FB, than he has some serious issues. Maybe it is really time to realize there is a life away from our computers.

Side note: I am glad HN does not have a FB login rule.

Re: OM: "My web without Facebook Connect"

#9

Post by nickbp » Sat, Feb 26, 2011, 5:29 PM UTC

From the user perspective, I don't use Facebook Connect because I don't think a third party site should be given access to any of my Facebook information, nor should Facebook know what other sites I visit.

I'd much rather they all stay ignorant of one another.

Re: OM: "My web without Facebook Connect"

#10

Post by tosh » Sat, Feb 26, 2011, 5:54 PM UTC

Vivtek wrote: post #6

I'm not sure FB is a single point of failure - Twitter signin seems to be nearly as prevalent. In fact, you could probably do something about identity by leveraging these separate identities into one, so that if you lose one (like Om) you wouldn't be separated from your online identity. (Not to mention you could reclaim the failed point based on your other identity components.) That's vague, but seriously - a "single…

I also don't think that facebook connect poses a single point of failure. If it becomes one then it is not the fault of the identity provider but the fault of the relying party, so if he only uses services that only offer auth via fb, or he did not connect his accounts with other identity providers then he should not complain right?