I would rather drink piss like Bear Grylls than log in with Facebook
1–10 of 129 posts
Re: I would rather drink piss like Bear Grylls than log in with Facebook
#2Actual Headline: "Tiny Review and the Perils of Facebook Login"
Realistic Headline: "Tiny Review and the Perils of only offering Facebook Login"
Re: I would rather drink piss like Bear Grylls than log in with Facebook
#3What you don't see is that Bear Grylls travels with 5 support vehicles and a helicopter and spends his nights in a hotel. I'd be very surprised if he was actually drinking piss on camera, his whole schtick is fake.
Re: I would rather drink piss like Bear Grylls than log in with Facebook
#4Hmm good points. Also, what if you create an account with Facebook, and then later decide to deactivate your Facebook, what happens to that account you just created?
Re: I would rather drink piss like Bear Grylls than log in with Facebook
#5What always shocks me is that if you have a traditional sign-in method, people will be more likely to Facebook Auth. Well, that's been the case for me. People enjoy the ease of logging in with Facebook, but are weary of its repercussions.
Also, I would love to see more sites that Facebook Auth to just asking for e-mail address permission and that's it. Just simply as a log-in tool..
Re: I would rather drink piss like Bear Grylls than log in with Facebook
#6Hmm good points. Also, what if you create an account with Facebook, and then later decide to deactivate your Facebook, what happens to that account you just created?
When I use Facebook Auth in my applications, I create a''User'' account with the clients e-mail address and a nil password. My users can then use "Password Recovery" to get a password for traditional login.
Re: I would rather drink piss like Bear Grylls than log in with Facebook
#7Actual Headline: "Tiny Review and the Perils of Facebook Login" Realistic Headline: "Tiny Review and the Perils of only offering Facebook Login"
Agreed, the headline comes from a real email from one of our users. It's just one of many pretty direct responses to (only) fb auth (I'm the author)
Re: I would rather drink piss like Bear Grylls than log in with Facebook
#8What always shocks me is that if you have a traditional sign-in method, people will be more likely to Facebook Auth . Well, that's been the case for me. People enjoy the ease of logging in with Facebook, but are weary of its repercussions. Also, I would love to see more sites that Facebook Auth to just asking for e-mail address permission and that's it. Just simply as a log-in tool..
Initially we had a 2-step process: ask for email permissions only during signup, and for post permissions later when you actually wanted to share something. Unfortunately this confused our users even more - they didn't understand why they had to FB-auth twice. I guess that many don't actually read the list of permissions (although a short list is better than a long list).
Re: I would rather drink piss like Bear Grylls than log in with Facebook
#9Hmm good points. Also, what if you create an account with Facebook, and then later decide to deactivate your Facebook, what happens to that account you just created?
Not much - you can always login by granting FB permissions again, and you'll return to the same account. FB just provides you with a facebook id that you use to lookup the user in the db.
Re: I would rather drink piss like Bear Grylls than log in with Facebook
#10What always shocks me is that if you have a traditional sign-in method, people will be more likely to Facebook Auth . Well, that's been the case for me. People enjoy the ease of logging in with Facebook, but are weary of its repercussions. Also, I would love to see more sites that Facebook Auth to just asking for e-mail address permission and that's it. Just simply as a log-in tool..
I wouldn't be surprised if people think that offering only FB login means you're trying to exploit on FB specifically, but if you have self-login as well it means you're not trying to force them into it.