Skip to main content

Google Plus exposes the Achilles Heel of Facebook


Last week I’ve got an invite to Google plus last week (thanks @iein) and had a chance to play around with it.  We have gone through many waves of social networks. Friendster, Orkut, MySpace and every new social graph addressed a major annoyance of the previous one.

I used Friendster and Orkut for a bit, but both of those didn’t catch people’s attention enough to keep them sharing information every day. MySpace saw real mass adoption but it completely failed with its design. I remember being frustrated with people’s pages, the auto playing videos, bulletins that were over run by club promoters and the rest of cheap design. Then came Facebook and it addressed some of the things that MySpace refused to fix.

For me Facebook was a big winner because you had to prove your affiliation to a certain college. You also didn’t have crazy designs on people pages. You didn’t have limitations on pictures and you had the news feed. MySpace reacted to those features way too late and it was probably afraid that it was going to lose some of its users if it became more strict and less customizable.

Now we are seeing people’s frustration with Facebook. The number one frustration is privacy. If you let people into your network they are free to see everything. If you don’t then they feel like you don’t want to associate with them.

People have gone around this issue by creating several profiles. Some just stopped sharing personal information altogether. Facebook has continuously erred on the side of overexposure of your data. Overexposure of your personal life is what kept people who are in your circle coming back therefor Facebook had no reason to fix it.

Google Plus holds a promise to fix the oversharing mess. Alexia’s Tsotsis’ article describes the difference between Facebook social networking and real world social networking. Facebook better react quickly or soon I will only share my personal info only on the network that promises to keep it to my inner circle of trust. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

SDET / QA Engineer Interview Checklist

After interviewing and hiring hundreds of engineers over the past 12+  years I have come up with a few checklists.  I wanted to share one of those with you so you could conduct comprehensive interviews of QA Engineers for your team. I use this checklist when I review incoming resumes and during the interview.  It keeps me from missing areas that ensure a good team and technology fit.  I hope you make good use of them.  If you think there are good questions or topics that I have missed - get in touch with me! SDE/T or QA Engineer interview checklist from Mike Borozdin If you like this checklist you might want to check out these posts: Emotional Intelligence in Software Teams   and  Good-bye manual tester, hello crowdsourcing!

Code versus Configuration

At Ethos we are building a distributed mortgage origination system and in mortgage there is a lot of different user types with processes that vary depending on geography.  One of our ongoing discussions is about how much of the logic resides in code vs. being in a workflow system or configuration.  After researching this topic for a bit, I have arrived at a conclusion that the logic should live outside of code very infrequently, which might come as a surprise to a lot of enterprise software engineers. Costs of configuration files and workflow engines First thing that I assume is true is that having any logic outside of the code has costs associated with it.  Debugging highly configurable system involves not only getting the appropriate branch from source control, you also need to make sure that the right configuration values or the database.  In most cases this is harder for programmers to deal with.  In many FinTech companies where the production data is not made readily acce

Intuitive Programming - Comments

Comments are a topic of vibrant discussion.  Ever since programmers could leave some text in the program that was ignored by the machine the debate started: “what’s a good comment, what’s a bad comment, why comment?” There are endless instructions to programmers that say many of the following things: 1) Describe your function! 2) Don’t write in the comment what you wrote in the code. 3) Tell people why you are doing what you are doing. What I think has been missing from this discourse is the audience for comments and through those audiences there is intent.  The code is being read, skimmed or analyzed by people and tools.  So what are the audiences and reading modes? 1) Maintaining and enhancing the code 2) Skimming through the entire module or file to figure out what the overall structure is 3) Reviewing the test files to check out the test coverage and edge cases 4) Seeing the docstrings of functions while being in a separate file altogether 5) Reviewi