Demo of social network portability while preserving privacy - Social Network Portability

Message from discussion Demo of social network portability while preserving privacy

NickLothian

More options Aug 24 2007, 11:30 am

From: NickLothian <nick.loth...@gmail.com>

Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 08:30:17 -0700

Local: Fri, Aug 24 2007 11:30 am

Subject: Re: Demo of social network portability while preserving privacy

  Reply to author
  |
  Forward
  | Print
  | View thread
  | Show original
  | Report this message
  | Find messages by this author
  

On Aug 25, 12:14 am, Anthony Romano <domina...@gmail.com> wrote:

> So how does this solve the problem of social network portability then?

Well obviously it isn't as convenient for developers as a database.

But... I'm very concerned about the privacy implications of building
this database.

Everyone's heard the stories of how emplyers are checking out possible
employees on Facebook. This system will not only find them on
Facebook, but find their user id on that new Playboy social network
for college students (http://www.techcrunch.com/2007/08/22/new-playboy-
social-network-built-on-ning/). That's not a good thing to do to
people..

> If I sign up for a new social network, how could it possibly find out
> who on that network I'm friends with without asking the filter each
> and every member it knows?

Slowly.. or in parallel.

There are other scenarios, too: If you store bloom filters indexed by
firstname, lastname then someone can search for someone they already
know and the system can reduce the confirmation requirements if the
bloom filter says they are known to each other.

The alternative is worse from the users point of view: Suddenly, their
employer - who they have added on LinkedIn - can find them on every
other network, AND automagically become friends with them... I don't
particularly have anything to hide (no dodgy drunk college pics for
me), but I hate that idea.

Everyone here reads Danah Boyd, right?
http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2007/08/10/loss_of_context....
if you don't.

Nick

Reply to author Forward