Tim Berners-Lee has dubbed Facebook a threat to the universality of the world wide web.

Next month marks the twentieth anniversary of the first webpage – served up by Berners-Lee at the CERN particle physics lab in Geneva – and in the December issue of Scientific American, he celebrates the uniquely democratic nature of his creation, before warning against the forces that could eventually bring it down. "Several threats to the Web’s universality have arisen recently," he says.

He briefly warns of cable giants who may prevent the free flow of content across the net. "Cable television companies that sell internet connectivity are considering whether to limit their Internet users to downloading only the company’s mix of entertainment," he says. And then he sticks the boot into social networking sites, including Mark Zuckerberg's net behemoth. "Facebook, LinkedIn, Friendster and others typically provide value by capturing information as you enter it: your birthday, your e-mail address, your likes, and links indicating who is friends with whom and who is in which photograph," Berners-Lee writes.

"The sites assemble these bits of data into brilliant databases and reuse the information to provide value-added service—but only within their sites. Once you enter your data into one of these services, you cannot easily use them on another site. Each site is a silo, walled off from the others. Yes, your site’s pages are on the Web, but your data are not. You can access a Web page about a list of people you have created in one site, but you cannot send that list, or items from it, to another site."

This echoes the complaint Google made earlier this month as it banned Facebook from tapping Gmail's Contacts API. Mountain Views won't allow netizens to export email addresses to Facebook unless it reciprocates. But Berners-Lee goes further.

"The isolation occurs because each piece of information does not have a URI," Berners-Lee continues, referring to universal resource identifier. "Connections among data exist only within a site. So the more you enter, the more you become locked in. Your social-networking site becomes a central platform — a closed silo of content, and one that does not give you full control over your information in it. The more this kind of architecture gains widespread use, the more the Web becomes fragmented, and the less we enjoy a single, universal information space.

"A related danger is that one social-networking site—or one search engine or one browser—gets so big that it becomes a monopoly, which tends to limit innovation." The threat here is not Friendster. It's Facebook, which now boasts over 500 million users worldwide.

Berners-Lee urges the adoption of more democratic services, including Facebook alternatives GnuSocial and Diaspora as well as the Status.net project, which gave rise to a decentralized incarnation of Twitter. "As has been the case since the Web began," he says, "continued grassroots innovation may be the best check and balance against any one company or government that tries to undermine universality."

Entitled "Love Live the Web," the Scientific American piece goes to promote the use of, yes, open standards. If you don't use open standards, Berners-Lee says, you create "closed worlds." Like Apple's iTunes. "Apple’s iTunes system," he says, "identifies songs and videos using URIs that are open. But instead of 'http:' the addresses begin with 'itunes:,' which is proprietary. You can access an 'itunes:' link only using Apple’s proprietary iTunes program.

"You can’t make a link to any information in the iTunes world—a song or information about a band. You can’t send that link to someone else to see. You are no longer on the Web. The iTunes world is centralized and walled off. You are trapped in a single store, rather than being on the open marketplace. For all the store’s wonderful features, its evolution is limited to what one company thinks up."

He also bemoans the proliferation of net-connected apps on the Apple iPhone and other smartphones. "The tendency for magazines, for example, to produce smartphone 'apps' rather than Web apps is disturbing, because that material is off the Web. You can’t bookmark it or e-mail a link to a page within it. You can’t tweet it. It is better to build a Web app that will also run on smartphone browsers, and the techniques for doing so are getting better all the time."

Dredging up Comcast's BitTorrent busting, he then warns against threats to so-called net neutrality. This includes Google for the FCC filing it laid down this summer in tandem with US telco giant Verizon. "Unfortunately, in August, Google and Verizon for some reason suggested that net neutrality should not apply to mobile phone–based connections," he says.

"Many people in rural areas from Utah to Uganda have access to the Internet only via mobile phones; exempting wireless from net neutrality would leave these users open to discrimination of service. It is also bizarre to imagine that my fundamental right to access the information source of my choice should apply when I am on my WiFi-connected computer at home but not when I use my cell phone."

Eric Schmidt now says that Google's proposal omitted wireless simply because this makes it easier to reach a compromise with the likes of Verizon on wireless lines. Wireless net neutrality, he indicates, will come later. But Berners-Lee is right to be, shall we say, skeptical.

He also warns against Phorm-style snooping and governments that restrict free speech on the web. But ultimately, he's optimistic. "Now is an exciting time," he says. "Web developers, companies, governments and citizens should work together openly and cooperatively, as we have done thus far, to preserve the Web’s fundamental principles, as well as those of the Internet, ensuring that the technological protocols and social conventions we set up respect basic human values. The goal of the Web is to serve humanity. We build it now so that those who come to it later will be able to create things that we cannot ourselves imagine."

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/11/20 ... et_to_web/

We've got a lot of FB users here, I'd be curious to know what you make of that, or just the general gist of his arguments

I gave FB up a long time ago.

I never really used it much, most of it just seemed to be wasting my time when I could catch up with friends properly by seeing them or sending them a proper email.

I've covered this before - I freely admit that I don't have the willpower to quit Facebook for real. I've deactivated 4 times in the past (for a max of 3mths at one point).

I think he's spot on. Walled gardens are no good for anybody, but crucially, they're also bad for privacy AND innovation and competition. I look forward to Diaspora, but I suspect it will be a nerdy thing to begin with. That said, do we really need "social media" that's the next big question. It's been 5yrs now, what's happens next?

A virtual social network?

Oh, yeah, a pub. Your round I think.

That'd be nice, wouldn't it? My local is a little too local though and Truro is a little too pretentious.

Give it a few years, we'll all have virtual reality avatars and we'll be meeting in online pubs. With virtual beer. The tech can make the room spin after you've had a few, but no hangover!

Is it? I only ask as there may be a slim chance of a move down that way in the next 6 months to a year (possibly). I'll need pointers on good places to go if we do.

I still have my FB account but am ridiculously selective as to who I accept. I have rejected literally a dozen friend requests. It only represents a very small part of my life and so is not really a clue as to my real connections. I prefer the phone and email instead of FB, though do message people occasionally through it. Overall though I hate the lack of privacy it offers. So there is nothing private on there about me.

I've only been in one pub in Truro recently, and it was as chavtastic as any pulling pub / club in Essex - just with less annoying accents

Maybe if we do make the move then we'll be heading out into the sticks then rather than chavving it up.

It's a town of two halves. One half is chavtastic as JJ describes. The other side thinks it's better than that and is largely the cool kids and public sector workers. Avoiding both can be done, but it's not easy. Falmouth's a lot better. But let's be honest, when it's cold and dark, the only things to do here are drink, drink and get drunk! So a certain amount of chavism is inevitable, county wide!

If you want a cheap way to stay down here for a week(/end) and explore, I could do you a deal on one of my lodges. Of course, if you just fancy a pint, that's cool too.

+1. A mate and I used to spend hours each day on FB - updating status, poking friends, and the "main business" of checking out birds. Then exams came along. I stopped using FB and concentrated. Passed my finals. Friend who kept distracting himself from FB failed and had to repeat the year.

After I stopped using facebook, I tried going back but TBH I just couldn't care less.

O'rly? I may just take you up on that. The past couple of years we've been going down in May/June time and renting out holiday cottages with some of the GF's family who come over. I can see us doing the same this year maybe.

First time was in Flushing (got the ferry over to Falmouth, quite liked it there actually) and last year was Mevagissey which now seems to have been washed away

Meva's still there, don't panic! It was hairy for a couple days, but they'll have it fixed soon enough. We're on a hill with the bay on one side and the creek on the other, so all the water runs away (and often takes half the road surface with it!) But I've got an absolutely stunning morning today, and it's really beautiful

ICO looks into NHS sharing data with Facebook

The UK's data watchdog has asked the Department of Health for an explanation of its data-sharing agreement with Facebook.

The NHS Choices website features Facebook's "Like" button. That means that when users access the health information site while logged into Facebook, data about which page they're visiting is passed back to the social-networking site.

The data sharing was highlighted by Mischa Tuffield, a software developer with identity protection firm Garlik, who claimed logging out and clearing cookies is still not enough to avoid Facebook's eye.

There are few things more sensitive to an individual than their health information

The Information Commissioner's Office has now asked the DoH for an explanation.

“There are few things more sensitive to an individual than their health information," the watchdog said. "We have contacted the Department for Health to find out whether any details of individuals consulting the NHS Choices website are available to third parties."

The ICO hasn't started a formal investigation into the issue, with a spokeswoman explaining the conversation between the two bodies was in "very early stages".

Political pressure

The department is also facing parliamentary pressure, with an early day motion filed by Labour MP Tom Watson earlier this week suggesting the DoH may have breached the Data Protection Act.

Watson also wrote an open letter to Andrew Lansley, the secretary of state for health, asking him to reconsider the data sharing.

"Imagine for example, if you or a close colleague had an embarrassing ailment, say genital warts," he wrote. "The current settings of the site allow third-party applications to know that you have visited the part of the NHS site that lets you know how to treat genital warts."

"I urge you to take steps to ensure that third-party websites should not have access to such information," he added. "This could be simply achieved by ensuring all third-party interaction is run on an opt-in system, rather than the current opt-out model."

The ICO said it was told the DoH would also be issuing a "full clarification" of its agreement with Facebook and other web firms in response to the motion.

Despite the pressure, the DoH has so far not removed the Facebook Like button, and has no intention of doing so, a spokesman said, explaining that it was instead looking for ways to make its privacy policy more clear to users.


Read more: ICO looks into NHS sharing data with Facebook | Security | News | PC Pro http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/security/36 ... z16bY7C8D8

Thought I'd bring that to your attention