Say I am running a social network. I want to allow my users to give access to their own damn data to third parties. I want them to be able to use third party chat UIs.
Now, how do I do it in a non-evil way? I am presuming here that everyone agrees that should be possible to make that work.
Apparently Facebook did it the wrong way. Why?
If the argument is "Users who agreed to this integration did not know what they were doing because the permission dialog was not clear enough", then I have a couple questions:
- What was the permission dialog like, really? Does anyone have a source for this?
- Why does the New York Times not go into this? I mean, if that is the issue, it seems kind of important?
- Reading the latest Times piece, does anyone feel comfortable arguing that the reader will understand what is apparently the issue - the permission dialog was not clear enough? Or is it more likely that the reader is left with the vague notion that Facebook just dumped all user's private messages over to a bunch of other companies?
Now, how do I do it in a non-evil way? I am presuming here that everyone agrees that should be possible to make that work.
Apparently Facebook did it the wrong way. Why?
If the argument is "Users who agreed to this integration did not know what they were doing because the permission dialog was not clear enough", then I have a couple questions:
- What was the permission dialog like, really? Does anyone have a source for this?
- Why does the New York Times not go into this? I mean, if that is the issue, it seems kind of important?
- Reading the latest Times piece, does anyone feel comfortable arguing that the reader will understand what is apparently the issue - the permission dialog was not clear enough? Or is it more likely that the reader is left with the vague notion that Facebook just dumped all user's private messages over to a bunch of other companies?