11 ms·

I would rather drink piss like Bear Grylls than log in with Facebook

237 points by melissamiranda 15y ago

pdenya 15y ago
Actual Headline: "Tiny Review and the Perils of Facebook Login" Realistic Headline: "Tiny Review and the Perils of only offering Facebook Login"
- dikbrouwer 15y ago
  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)
gaius 15y ago
What 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.
- benatkin 15y ago
  Irrelevant. They aren't talking about Bear Grylls the person, they're talking about Bear Grylls the meme. The meme is well-established even if its origins are based on rumors.
- ithought 15y ago
  You would prefer to see a grown man die on TV? Your comment is wrong and false. He doesn't spend every night in a hotel, the shoots are between 5 to 7 days. Some he stays outside all night, the other supporting shots he stays in a hotel. He risks his life in significant (and foolish) ways every episode. Climbing and swinging on rope vines over 1,000 foot drops are not faked. Hunting by hand, cleaning and cooking animals, or eating them raw is not faked. Sure he has assistance and safety precautions but that's reasonable.
  - smokinn 15y ago
    Just because you don't have a massive support crew doesn't mean you're going to die. I'd recommend you check out a series called Survivorman: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorman http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorman It's a guy who goes out into the wilderness to survive with nothing but some basic gear and a couple of cameras and tripods. Less flashy but way more realistic.
    - sofifonfek 15y ago
      Two different shows, one is about showcasing techniques in extreme situation and feature an ex british special forces with a heavy background in adventuring while the other is about putting one guy alone in a survival situation for a few days featuring a regular guy who has personal interest in survival. Though they're not with him, Les stroud also has a support crew and a way to contact them in case of life-threatening emergency.
      - smokinn 15y ago
        No he doesn't. Most episodes he says that he has to get out on his own. If he missed his rendez-vous search and rescue teams kick into action to go out and find him. There was one particular episode where he had to find some natives to get him out because he was dying of dehydration. He got sick and had diaharrea and no one was there to help him.
  - gaius 15y ago
    What he does is dangerously misleading. Eating an animal raw knowing you are literally seconds away from a fully-equipped support vehicle if you get food poisoning is a world apart from eating an animal raw where you really are a week away from medical help. In the latter case, the balance of risk is very different and you might choose to go hungry (diarrhea -> dehydration -> death). You might as well watch Rambo for "survival skills" as that charlatan.
AznHisoka 15y ago
Hmm 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?
- ghayes 15y ago
  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.
  - melissamiranda 15y ago
    Smarty pants. This is a good way to think ahead.
- dikbrouwer 15y ago
  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.
ghayes 15y ago
What 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..
- dikbrouwer 15y ago
  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).
- rhizome 15y ago
  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.
  - billybob 15y ago
    This is how I perceive Spotify. I can't sign up for it because I deleted my FB account. FB as the only option makes me think they must want to datamine me as hard as possible.
    - FaceKicker 15y ago
      I don't really understand what Spotify is thinking with the FB-only login. I get that it's free advertising and data for them, but it seems like there's probably a very large percentage of potential users who are uncomfortable with spamming each one of their FB friends every time they listen to a song (not to mention "guilty pleasure songs" that people would be embarrassed to listen to knowing that everyone will see it).
jsavimbi 15y ago
> nurture a community of real, authentic users. This is utter BS and the author knows it. The last people you want to fill the role of early adopter are the people of Facebook. Nurture, foster, incubate. That's lazy business people speak for not actually doing any work of note and spending more time networking and that all-consuming fundraising so they can actually hire someone to do the work for them and pay them squat. You know, living the dream that made them go to B-school in the first place. Facebook-only? That's what lazy people do.
- melissamiranda 15y ago
  Off base. Facebook login was implement to prevent a Chatroulette problem (nudity and profanity). The Internet Fuckwad theory: normal person + anonymity + audience = total fuckwad (http://www.quora.com/What-is-the-Greater-Internet-Fuckwad-Theory http://www.quora.com/What-is-the-Greater-Internet-Fuckwad-Th...) explains why anonymity allows bad behavior. The decision had nothing to do with laziness, and everything to do with encouraging real identity on the app.
  - jsavimbi 15y ago
    No, it's not. Facebook is a ready-made constituency for anyone smart enough to figure out an OAuth plugin. I mean, why would you waste time recruiting and curating a community when you have a population of 500 million to choose from? It's generic and any explanation otherwise betrays the true intentions of the author. You need to recognize it when you read it.
  - ghayes 15y ago
    Agreed that anonymity brings trolls. What about low-friction sharing that Facebook Auth brings? How did this play into your decision? You said earlier that you used to ask for that authorization AFTER asking for login auth?
    - dikbrouwer 15y ago
      Yes, asking for FB permissions twice was tripping over our users however. What seems to work right now: login with Twitter or username/password, and add FB auth later when a user wants to share. This apparently doesn't feel the same as allowing FB on signup. Makes sense?
AlexandrB 15y ago
I don't care about apps using my Facebook data (what little there is). I don't trust Facebook not to use data from/about apps that I use. That's why I would never use my Facebook ID to log in to anything. Actually I can come up with a better summary: I don't trust Facebook
- melissamiranda 15y ago
  Just curious, why don't you trust Facebook? Did you trust them at one point in time? What made you lose your trust? I'm a designer so it's interesting to me what's behind all the Facebook hate.
  - dekz 15y ago
    I don't trust Facebook. I don't even have Facebook. It may not be due to some current form of business practice (selling data) but the potentiality of all my attributed aggregated data being released/sold/made available. Doing facebook only auth only shows the company doesn't share the same privacy values as me and therefor I cannot trust them either.
    - melissamiranda 15y ago
      Thanks for sharing this. I had no idea people felt this strongly about their data. In user testing, I picked up that people are afraid of apps publishing to their walls, or worse, friends' walls behind their back. I got that people don't trust developers with their Facebook credentials because of the abuses in the past, but what you're saying is that you don't trust Facebook itself. Thank you - now I know this going forward.
      - jilebedev 15y ago
        Another perspective: people wear hats. We cater the hat to the audience we're addressing. This isn't just a web phenomenon - we've crafted our identities in the real world for thousands of years in order to manipulate the target audience in some fashion or another. For that reason, it's not a smart idea to link a single human to a unified web presence. Facebook login makes sense in its convenience, but in reality, it grates against something that's pretty important to a lot of people: how they present themselves in front of an audience.
zak_mc_kracken 15y ago
Create a fake, empty Facebook account, use it everywhere to log in. Problem solved.
- melissamiranda 15y ago
  Ok, that makes 2 of you who have fake Facebook login accounts to login. Anyone else?
  - mappu 15y ago
    Two people out of (currently) 47 comments. The number of people using this technique is probably statistically significant (i know lots of my friends have multiple facebook accounts under pseudonyms for similar reasons).
  - OneBytePerGreen 15y ago
    My account is semi-fake, with a real pic and a few friends, but my birthday in 1920. It's great, except for those annoying "Never too old for love" and "Mature Singles" ads.
- arjn 15y ago
  Not really. I don't want to have any kind of FB/Twitter/etc. account. I hate being forced to use it and that has kept me from using several apps/services
jseims 15y ago
What gets me is it's 2012 and we still have to keep solving account management over and over. It's a big bucket of word dealing with multiple signup methods, resetting passwords, profile pictures, etc. I wish there were an open source project that unified best practices (in various tech stacks).
- melissamiranda 15y ago
  Open ID tried and failed. What I see now is more developers creating their own registration auth. Even if they lose on signup conversions vs. 1-click Fb or Twitter, they avoid duplicate account mixups.
  - 18pfsmt 15y ago
    Most of the discussions on HN surrounding privacy and FB usually have several mentions of a creation of a 2nd acct (as you've seen), but also mention Mozilla's BrowserID project: https://browserid.org/ https://browserid.org/
  - smsm42 15y ago
    Why OpenID failed? I see more and more services - including ones I use literally every day - using it.
- sofifonfek 15y ago
  Having to deal with registration and account management is a choice, not a necessity. From bugmenot to mytrashmail, examples of websites not having to solve account management are numerous. The registration is often a barrier preventing people from using your service, and it's not even mandatory to have user management [1]. [1]: https://jobpoacher.com/blog/blog/2012/02/13/what-craigslist-did-right-user-management-without-passwords/ https://jobpoacher.com/blog/blog/2012/02/13/what-craigslist-...
daimyoyo 15y ago
I have found a compromise that works well for me when I'm asked to login with facebook. I have created an account that exists solely for situations like this. That way I can use whatever site or app I want and its not connected to me.
- melissamiranda 15y ago
  Interesting. Anyone else out there have a second Fb account just to login?
  - jsavimbi 15y ago
    Of course not; it's all about real identity, innit?
  - human_error 15y ago
    Me. I never use my real facebook account to login other sites.
  - Selvik 15y ago
    Me, but they have your data anyway cause of your ip. It's more so that they won't suddenly start posting my spotify playlists or whatever.
    - icebraining 15y ago
      If they did tracking based on IPs, they'd get some pretty screwed up results. My university alone has hundreds of FB users behind a dozen IPs or less. Even my home alone has two.
      - Selvik 15y ago
        Yeah, but you're probably the only one who's account is connected to both of those and some other places you've been at various times. Or? (I don't really know what I'm talking about.)
- ben0x539 15y ago
arjn 15y ago
I would too. I've not been on Facebook since 2007 and it annoys me to see a growing number of web-sites/apps using FB for login. (Same complaint for twitter)
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
waleedka 15y ago
Before blaming the 50% drop-off on Facebook, you should measure the drop-off of the ID/password approach and compare the two. I would expect the drop-off for any login method to be relatively high on mobile apps. Anyone has data they can share?
- dikbrouwer 15y ago
  You're right, although I expected a much lower drop-off. We'll post follow-on data soon(ish).
- franze 15y ago
  i know the stats of some websites(or webapps if you like to call them as such) which started years ago with user/pass and after integrating fb got a major better sign-up rate. most logged-in users now use the site via fb. either mobile is majorly different, the tinyreview adopter group is majorly different, their product is majorly different or their analysis is flawed (as you have pointed out correctly)
  - dikbrouwer 15y ago
    FYI, here is another perspective on FB Connect signup: http://damurillo.tumblr.com/post/9214057988/disappointment-with-facebook-connect http://damurillo.tumblr.com/post/9214057988/disappointment-w...
smackfu 15y ago
Main problem with Facebook only login is that the 5% that care wi rate your app one star until they cows come home.
esm23 15y ago
I'm currently building a social media news aggregation site, and was considering the merits of using a Facebook/Twitter only login/comment services. Do you believe most potential users would be opposed to this? If using these services we would be very clear about privacy issues and options,giving our users the option of restricting their activities to our network, and not sharing the information with facebook/twitter if the user would choose not to. Also in our service agreement and in practice we would restrict our use of our users information to strictly what they share with us, not datamining them, which in my opinion violates peoples privacy. There is a lot of upside in my opinion with using the Facebook/twitter login. They are the 2 dominant social media platforms, in which our potential users are bound to have their strongest ties. If they choose to share their activities on our site with their social media network of choice, it would be their way of advertising a service they are using (and presumably enjoying if they are participating on the site), which would help our service attract users. Would appreciate any feedback and advice, especially pointing out where im wrong :)
- timClicks 15y ago
  Probably depends on your user base. The general public see Facebook Connect & similar services as a way to avoid needing to remember passwords. I hate it though. It appears other, more technically inclined, folk do too.
- possibilistic 15y ago
  I can't speak for everyone, but please just take my email address. There is no Facebook or Google Plus in my life, and I don't use my old Twitter account. I only keep up with a handful of people--something I can do with email and phone; I don't want to give glorified marketers another tool for spying on me. For me personally, the web is just a means to gain and exchange useful information to aid in my academic life; I like to stay "disconnected", if that makes sense. Everyone uses the web differently. I understand that other (much larger) demographics have no problem with single sign on and that you can perhaps get to market faster without implementing a dedicated sign up system. I respect that. I do like "social" (I hate that word) news sites; a tool to help cull non-interest items, prioritize on key interests, and introduce novel information from users who share similar interest graphs would help me out enormously. I don't want to derail the topic, but has anyone given a thought as to whether aggregation (and distribution and reader functionality) could work in a decentralized, p2p manner? Without relying on a central authority of any kind? I would love a scaled-down, low-bandwidth bittorrent-type app that delivers news items (with highlighted commentary) to my devices, already wrapped in an readability like interface, collected from among my "interest graph peers". That way, the mining/ML algorithms and processing overhead can be implemented and tweaked by me.
Melyan 15y ago
Here's a proposal: use your email address. Period. No password. Take your average bulletin board--you're probably not going to use your email address as your nym anyway. Even if you do, what do you lose if someone impersonates you?
neuromancer2600 15y ago
I usually use a fake Facebook account (with a couple of other fake friends) first. And only after I see how the app is behaving and if I see a real benefit to give access to my real friends, I might consider logging in with my real name and Facebook account.
alan_cx 15y ago
Are there any over all stats as to how the general public feel about all this? Its cool that all us techie types knowing all about these issues, but does the average mug user know, or know enough to care? Most of the "normal" people I know don't even consider this sort of stuff, they just go along with it. "Yeah, whatever", seems to be the usual response. You can see them glaze over and mentally shut down if I dare try to explain it. That sort of go in to "conspiracy nut" mode.
natasham25 15y ago
We had the same exact experience with out app. It was Facebook login only, and we got a 50% drop in conversion, bad app store reviews, and some of the people who tried to login couldn't because Facebook login either didn't work or was really slow.
lordlicorice 15y ago
The funny thing is that they've basically admitted that they didn't want to take the time to build a community system capable of dealing with anonymous users or users identified only by some number. The problem with these featureless micro-apps is that you have 20 different tools which cost you little to nothing but are garbage. Either abandon the idea of one-feature apps and incorporate your functionality in a not-quite-as-slick general platform, or double down and make your app work with anonymity.
scott_to_s 15y ago
There are no doubt a lot of users like me: I don't have a Facebook account, and I will _never_ have a Facebook account. The result of my personal policy and utter dislike of Facebook is that as soon as I see a Facebook login popup on a new app, I immediately close the tab. Then again, perhaps you don't want customers like me!
- sofifonfek 15y ago
  Same here and sometimes I wonder if those who provide facebook only login would consider answering the phone 1 out of 10 times by saying "fuck off" and hanging up a good business practice, because that's basically what they are doing. "hey we have this fantastic service offering this and that, but we don't want you to use it (unless you register to a third party whose sole purpose is to collect as much personal data on you as possible and has a long history of privacy issues)". Best sales pitch ever.
mbeswetherick 15y ago
There is something sleazy about Facebook that extends beyond privacy failures. I don't like the idea of blending a new community I'm about to join with the filth on my Facebook friends list. I think this mostly applies to younger people who ended up adding everyone they knew through high school: my Facebook friends are mostly just an accumulation of people I don't really care about. If I wanted to join a network separate from Facebook, why would I want that network to have access to my Facebook? I use Spotify and Songkick reluctantly only because they are great services. Facebook is a great way to get your name out there, but I'd rather fill out a few text fields than have a service I want to use depend on Facebook. People join new networks to get away from Facebook, not extend it into every sector of their lives.
- icebraining 15y ago
  If I wanted to join a network separate from Facebook, why would I want that network to have access to my Facebook? Possibly because that network offers thing that FB doesn't, even if you don't have a problem with it. People join new networks to get away from Facebook, not extend it into every sector of their lives. Are you sure you aren't attributing your own personal opinions to others? Not wanting to login using FB has other possible explanations, like not trusting the new site/app not to spam your friends. It's not necessarily trying to "get away" from Facebook.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
sofifonfek 15y ago
I never register a facebook account and there's no way I will regsiter to facebook just to use an app even if its the killer app. I trust facebook for snooping in on the data provided by 3rd party apps, they've been doing all the dirty tricks of the book since they started. why no facebook account for me ? because it was obvious from the beginning where facebook was heading with a business rooted in linking real world identities and online activities. They are basically building a closed facebooknet to compete with the open web and internet. There's no way I would be part or support a closed and proprietary internet.
GiraffeNecktie 15y ago
I'd be happy to log in with Facebook, but every single time I've tried to do it, Facebook informs me that the application wants to help itself to my contacts, my wall etc etc etc. Now I don't bother.
- sofifonfek 15y ago
  The funny part is that for a long time they just did it without informing you and no one complained. cough zynga cough
adrian201 15y ago
1. I think the on-boarding process to an app is probably more crucial the app itself. This is purely anecdotal, but as an early adopter whenever I go through the trouble of downloading an app which greets me with “Create An Account”, I'm almost always immediately turned off. In some cases I've just excited the app and hit un-install. The last thing I need is another account, with a service I may not use for more than 15mins. I think the best process is to give users a feel for your product without an account being necessary. Maybe it's just in READ mode with the ability to WRITE enabled upon signup. Or just simply ask for an email address which is then used as a unique identifier for your account. Oink did this awhile back. 2. I think the Facebook hate is miss-placed. Do you really hate Facebook (provider of a tool) or those who spam you via Facebook (users of the tool)? If you're so worried about Facebook tracking you offsite, why have an account at all? They're in the business of collecting, optimizing, and monetizing the social graph. If their platform has more 'cons' than 'pros' I think you should ditch it and keep your tin foil hat on. I myself use it, with my tin foil hat on, but don't go through the hoops to block it as some of you are doing.
- sofifonfek 15y ago
  >2. I think the Facebook hate is miss-placed. Do you really hate Facebook (provider of a tool) or those who spam you via Facebook (users of the tool)? If you're so worried about Facebook tracking you offsite, why have an account at all? I think it is right on. Both because the tool shapes the usage (if your only tool is hammer, all problems look like nails). I don't have one.

237 points by melissamiranda 15y ago

Actual Headline: "Tiny Review and the Perils of Facebook Login" Realistic Headline: "Tiny Review and the Perils of only offering Facebook Login"

dikbrouwer 15y ago
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)

gaius 15y ago

What 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.

benatkin 15y ago
Irrelevant. They aren't talking about Bear Grylls the person, they're talking about Bear Grylls the meme. The meme is well-established even if its origins are based on rumors.
ithought 15y ago
You would prefer to see a grown man die on TV? Your comment is wrong and false. He doesn't spend every night in a hotel, the shoots are between 5 to 7 days. Some he stays outside all night, the other supporting shots he stays in a hotel. He risks his life in significant (and foolish) ways every episode. Climbing and swinging on rope vines over 1,000 foot drops are not faked. Hunting by hand, cleaning and cooking animals, or eating them raw is not faked. Sure he has assistance and safety precautions but that's reasonable.
- smokinn 15y ago
  Just because you don't have a massive support crew doesn't mean you're going to die. I'd recommend you check out a series called Survivorman: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorman http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorman It's a guy who goes out into the wilderness to survive with nothing but some basic gear and a couple of cameras and tripods. Less flashy but way more realistic.
  - sofifonfek 15y ago
    Two different shows, one is about showcasing techniques in extreme situation and feature an ex british special forces with a heavy background in adventuring while the other is about putting one guy alone in a survival situation for a few days featuring a regular guy who has personal interest in survival. Though they're not with him, Les stroud also has a support crew and a way to contact them in case of life-threatening emergency.
    - smokinn 15y ago
      No he doesn't. Most episodes he says that he has to get out on his own. If he missed his rendez-vous search and rescue teams kick into action to go out and find him. There was one particular episode where he had to find some natives to get him out because he was dying of dehydration. He got sick and had diaharrea and no one was there to help him.
- gaius 15y ago
  What he does is dangerously misleading. Eating an animal raw knowing you are literally seconds away from a fully-equipped support vehicle if you get food poisoning is a world apart from eating an animal raw where you really are a week away from medical help. In the latter case, the balance of risk is very different and you might choose to go hungry (diarrhea -> dehydration -> death). You might as well watch Rambo for "survival skills" as that charlatan.

AznHisoka 15y ago

Hmm 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?

ghayes 15y ago
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.
- melissamiranda 15y ago
  Smarty pants. This is a good way to think ahead.
dikbrouwer 15y ago
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.

ghayes 15y ago

What 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..

dikbrouwer 15y ago
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).
rhizome 15y ago
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.
- billybob 15y ago
  This is how I perceive Spotify. I can't sign up for it because I deleted my FB account. FB as the only option makes me think they must want to datamine me as hard as possible.
  - FaceKicker 15y ago
    I don't really understand what Spotify is thinking with the FB-only login. I get that it's free advertising and data for them, but it seems like there's probably a very large percentage of potential users who are uncomfortable with spamming each one of their FB friends every time they listen to a song (not to mention "guilty pleasure songs" that people would be embarrassed to listen to knowing that everyone will see it).

jsavimbi 15y ago

> nurture a community of real, authentic users. This is utter BS and the author knows it. The last people you want to fill the role of early adopter are the people of Facebook. Nurture, foster, incubate. That's lazy business people speak for not actually doing any work of note and spending more time networking and that all-consuming fundraising so they can actually hire someone to do the work for them and pay them squat. You know, living the dream that made them go to B-school in the first place. Facebook-only? That's what lazy people do.

melissamiranda 15y ago
Off base. Facebook login was implement to prevent a Chatroulette problem (nudity and profanity). The Internet Fuckwad theory: normal person + anonymity + audience = total fuckwad (http://www.quora.com/What-is-the-Greater-Internet-Fuckwad-Theory http://www.quora.com/What-is-the-Greater-Internet-Fuckwad-Th...) explains why anonymity allows bad behavior. The decision had nothing to do with laziness, and everything to do with encouraging real identity on the app.
- jsavimbi 15y ago
  No, it's not. Facebook is a ready-made constituency for anyone smart enough to figure out an OAuth plugin. I mean, why would you waste time recruiting and curating a community when you have a population of 500 million to choose from? It's generic and any explanation otherwise betrays the true intentions of the author. You need to recognize it when you read it.
- ghayes 15y ago
  Agreed that anonymity brings trolls. What about low-friction sharing that Facebook Auth brings? How did this play into your decision? You said earlier that you used to ask for that authorization AFTER asking for login auth?
  - dikbrouwer 15y ago
    Yes, asking for FB permissions twice was tripping over our users however. What seems to work right now: login with Twitter or username/password, and add FB auth later when a user wants to share. This apparently doesn't feel the same as allowing FB on signup. Makes sense?

AlexandrB 15y ago

I don't care about apps using my Facebook data (what little there is). I don't trust Facebook not to use data from/about apps that I use. That's why I would never use my Facebook ID to log in to anything. Actually I can come up with a better summary: I don't trust Facebook

melissamiranda 15y ago
Just curious, why don't you trust Facebook? Did you trust them at one point in time? What made you lose your trust? I'm a designer so it's interesting to me what's behind all the Facebook hate.
- dekz 15y ago
  I don't trust Facebook. I don't even have Facebook. It may not be due to some current form of business practice (selling data) but the potentiality of all my attributed aggregated data being released/sold/made available. Doing facebook only auth only shows the company doesn't share the same privacy values as me and therefor I cannot trust them either.
  - melissamiranda 15y ago
    Thanks for sharing this. I had no idea people felt this strongly about their data. In user testing, I picked up that people are afraid of apps publishing to their walls, or worse, friends' walls behind their back. I got that people don't trust developers with their Facebook credentials because of the abuses in the past, but what you're saying is that you don't trust Facebook itself. Thank you - now I know this going forward.
    - jilebedev 15y ago
      Another perspective: people wear hats. We cater the hat to the audience we're addressing. This isn't just a web phenomenon - we've crafted our identities in the real world for thousands of years in order to manipulate the target audience in some fashion or another. For that reason, it's not a smart idea to link a single human to a unified web presence. Facebook login makes sense in its convenience, but in reality, it grates against something that's pretty important to a lot of people: how they present themselves in front of an audience.

zak_mc_kracken 15y ago

Create a fake, empty Facebook account, use it everywhere to log in. Problem solved.

melissamiranda 15y ago
Ok, that makes 2 of you who have fake Facebook login accounts to login. Anyone else?
- mappu 15y ago
  Two people out of (currently) 47 comments. The number of people using this technique is probably statistically significant (i know lots of my friends have multiple facebook accounts under pseudonyms for similar reasons).
- OneBytePerGreen 15y ago
  My account is semi-fake, with a real pic and a few friends, but my birthday in 1920. It's great, except for those annoying "Never too old for love" and "Mature Singles" ads.
arjn 15y ago
Not really. I don't want to have any kind of FB/Twitter/etc. account. I hate being forced to use it and that has kept me from using several apps/services

jseims 15y ago

What gets me is it's 2012 and we still have to keep solving account management over and over. It's a big bucket of word dealing with multiple signup methods, resetting passwords, profile pictures, etc. I wish there were an open source project that unified best practices (in various tech stacks).

melissamiranda 15y ago
Open ID tried and failed. What I see now is more developers creating their own registration auth. Even if they lose on signup conversions vs. 1-click Fb or Twitter, they avoid duplicate account mixups.
- 18pfsmt 15y ago
  Most of the discussions on HN surrounding privacy and FB usually have several mentions of a creation of a 2nd acct (as you've seen), but also mention Mozilla's BrowserID project: https://browserid.org/ https://browserid.org/
- smsm42 15y ago
  Why OpenID failed? I see more and more services - including ones I use literally every day - using it.
sofifonfek 15y ago
Having to deal with registration and account management is a choice, not a necessity. From bugmenot to mytrashmail, examples of websites not having to solve account management are numerous. The registration is often a barrier preventing people from using your service, and it's not even mandatory to have user management [1]. [1]: https://jobpoacher.com/blog/blog/2012/02/13/what-craigslist-did-right-user-management-without-passwords/ https://jobpoacher.com/blog/blog/2012/02/13/what-craigslist-...

daimyoyo 15y ago

I have found a compromise that works well for me when I'm asked to login with facebook. I have created an account that exists solely for situations like this. That way I can use whatever site or app I want and its not connected to me.

melissamiranda 15y ago
Interesting. Anyone else out there have a second Fb account just to login?
- jsavimbi 15y ago
  Of course not; it's all about real identity, innit?
- human_error 15y ago
  Me. I never use my real facebook account to login other sites.
- Selvik 15y ago
  Me, but they have your data anyway cause of your ip. It's more so that they won't suddenly start posting my spotify playlists or whatever.
  - icebraining 15y ago
    If they did tracking based on IPs, they'd get some pretty screwed up results. My university alone has hundreds of FB users behind a dozen IPs or less. Even my home alone has two.
    - Selvik 15y ago
      Yeah, but you're probably the only one who's account is connected to both of those and some other places you've been at various times. Or? (I don't really know what I'm talking about.)
ben0x539 15y ago

arjn 15y ago

I would too. I've not been on Facebook since 2007 and it annoys me to see a growing number of web-sites/apps using FB for login. (Same complaint for twitter)

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

waleedka 15y ago

Before blaming the 50% drop-off on Facebook, you should measure the drop-off of the ID/password approach and compare the two. I would expect the drop-off for any login method to be relatively high on mobile apps. Anyone has data they can share?

dikbrouwer 15y ago
You're right, although I expected a much lower drop-off. We'll post follow-on data soon(ish).
franze 15y ago
i know the stats of some websites(or webapps if you like to call them as such) which started years ago with user/pass and after integrating fb got a major better sign-up rate. most logged-in users now use the site via fb. either mobile is majorly different, the tinyreview adopter group is majorly different, their product is majorly different or their analysis is flawed (as you have pointed out correctly)
- dikbrouwer 15y ago
  FYI, here is another perspective on FB Connect signup: http://damurillo.tumblr.com/post/9214057988/disappointment-with-facebook-connect http://damurillo.tumblr.com/post/9214057988/disappointment-w...

smackfu 15y ago

Main problem with Facebook only login is that the 5% that care wi rate your app one star until they cows come home.

esm23 15y ago

I'm currently building a social media news aggregation site, and was considering the merits of using a Facebook/Twitter only login/comment services. Do you believe most potential users would be opposed to this? If using these services we would be very clear about privacy issues and options,giving our users the option of restricting their activities to our network, and not sharing the information with facebook/twitter if the user would choose not to. Also in our service agreement and in practice we would restrict our use of our users information to strictly what they share with us, not datamining them, which in my opinion violates peoples privacy. There is a lot of upside in my opinion with using the Facebook/twitter login. They are the 2 dominant social media platforms, in which our potential users are bound to have their strongest ties. If they choose to share their activities on our site with their social media network of choice, it would be their way of advertising a service they are using (and presumably enjoying if they are participating on the site), which would help our service attract users. Would appreciate any feedback and advice, especially pointing out where im wrong :)

timClicks 15y ago
Probably depends on your user base. The general public see Facebook Connect & similar services as a way to avoid needing to remember passwords. I hate it though. It appears other, more technically inclined, folk do too.
possibilistic 15y ago
I can't speak for everyone, but please just take my email address. There is no Facebook or Google Plus in my life, and I don't use my old Twitter account. I only keep up with a handful of people--something I can do with email and phone; I don't want to give glorified marketers another tool for spying on me. For me personally, the web is just a means to gain and exchange useful information to aid in my academic life; I like to stay "disconnected", if that makes sense. Everyone uses the web differently. I understand that other (much larger) demographics have no problem with single sign on and that you can perhaps get to market faster without implementing a dedicated sign up system. I respect that. I do like "social" (I hate that word) news sites; a tool to help cull non-interest items, prioritize on key interests, and introduce novel information from users who share similar interest graphs would help me out enormously. I don't want to derail the topic, but has anyone given a thought as to whether aggregation (and distribution and reader functionality) could work in a decentralized, p2p manner? Without relying on a central authority of any kind? I would love a scaled-down, low-bandwidth bittorrent-type app that delivers news items (with highlighted commentary) to my devices, already wrapped in an readability like interface, collected from among my "interest graph peers". That way, the mining/ML algorithms and processing overhead can be implemented and tweaked by me.

Melyan 15y ago

Here's a proposal: use your email address. Period. No password. Take your average bulletin board--you're probably not going to use your email address as your nym anyway. Even if you do, what do you lose if someone impersonates you?

neuromancer2600 15y ago

I usually use a fake Facebook account (with a couple of other fake friends) first. And only after I see how the app is behaving and if I see a real benefit to give access to my real friends, I might consider logging in with my real name and Facebook account.

alan_cx 15y ago

Are there any over all stats as to how the general public feel about all this? Its cool that all us techie types knowing all about these issues, but does the average mug user know, or know enough to care? Most of the "normal" people I know don't even consider this sort of stuff, they just go along with it. "Yeah, whatever", seems to be the usual response. You can see them glaze over and mentally shut down if I dare try to explain it. That sort of go in to "conspiracy nut" mode.

natasham25 15y ago

We had the same exact experience with out app. It was Facebook login only, and we got a 50% drop in conversion, bad app store reviews, and some of the people who tried to login couldn't because Facebook login either didn't work or was really slow.

lordlicorice 15y ago

The funny thing is that they've basically admitted that they didn't want to take the time to build a community system capable of dealing with anonymous users or users identified only by some number. The problem with these featureless micro-apps is that you have 20 different tools which cost you little to nothing but are garbage. Either abandon the idea of one-feature apps and incorporate your functionality in a not-quite-as-slick general platform, or double down and make your app work with anonymity.

scott_to_s 15y ago

There are no doubt a lot of users like me: I don't have a Facebook account, and I will _never_ have a Facebook account. The result of my personal policy and utter dislike of Facebook is that as soon as I see a Facebook login popup on a new app, I immediately close the tab. Then again, perhaps you don't want customers like me!

sofifonfek 15y ago
Same here and sometimes I wonder if those who provide facebook only login would consider answering the phone 1 out of 10 times by saying "fuck off" and hanging up a good business practice, because that's basically what they are doing. "hey we have this fantastic service offering this and that, but we don't want you to use it (unless you register to a third party whose sole purpose is to collect as much personal data on you as possible and has a long history of privacy issues)". Best sales pitch ever.

mbeswetherick 15y ago

There is something sleazy about Facebook that extends beyond privacy failures. I don't like the idea of blending a new community I'm about to join with the filth on my Facebook friends list. I think this mostly applies to younger people who ended up adding everyone they knew through high school: my Facebook friends are mostly just an accumulation of people I don't really care about. If I wanted to join a network separate from Facebook, why would I want that network to have access to my Facebook? I use Spotify and Songkick reluctantly only because they are great services. Facebook is a great way to get your name out there, but I'd rather fill out a few text fields than have a service I want to use depend on Facebook. People join new networks to get away from Facebook, not extend it into every sector of their lives.

icebraining 15y ago
If I wanted to join a network separate from Facebook, why would I want that network to have access to my Facebook? Possibly because that network offers thing that FB doesn't, even if you don't have a problem with it. People join new networks to get away from Facebook, not extend it into every sector of their lives. Are you sure you aren't attributing your own personal opinions to others? Not wanting to login using FB has other possible explanations, like not trusting the new site/app not to spam your friends. It's not necessarily trying to "get away" from Facebook.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

sofifonfek 15y ago

I never register a facebook account and there's no way I will regsiter to facebook just to use an app even if its the killer app. I trust facebook for snooping in on the data provided by 3rd party apps, they've been doing all the dirty tricks of the book since they started. why no facebook account for me ? because it was obvious from the beginning where facebook was heading with a business rooted in linking real world identities and online activities. They are basically building a closed facebooknet to compete with the open web and internet. There's no way I would be part or support a closed and proprietary internet.

GiraffeNecktie 15y ago

I'd be happy to log in with Facebook, but every single time I've tried to do it, Facebook informs me that the application wants to help itself to my contacts, my wall etc etc etc. Now I don't bother.

sofifonfek 15y ago
The funny part is that for a long time they just did it without informing you and no one complained. cough zynga cough

adrian201 15y ago

1. I think the on-boarding process to an app is probably more crucial the app itself. This is purely anecdotal, but as an early adopter whenever I go through the trouble of downloading an app which greets me with “Create An Account”, I'm almost always immediately turned off. In some cases I've just excited the app and hit un-install. The last thing I need is another account, with a service I may not use for more than 15mins. I think the best process is to give users a feel for your product without an account being necessary. Maybe it's just in READ mode with the ability to WRITE enabled upon signup. Or just simply ask for an email address which is then used as a unique identifier for your account. Oink did this awhile back. 2. I think the Facebook hate is miss-placed. Do you really hate Facebook (provider of a tool) or those who spam you via Facebook (users of the tool)? If you're so worried about Facebook tracking you offsite, why have an account at all? They're in the business of collecting, optimizing, and monetizing the social graph. If their platform has more 'cons' than 'pros' I think you should ditch it and keep your tin foil hat on. I myself use it, with my tin foil hat on, but don't go through the hoops to block it as some of you are doing.

sofifonfek 15y ago
>2. I think the Facebook hate is miss-placed. Do you really hate Facebook (provider of a tool) or those who spam you via Facebook (users of the tool)? If you're so worried about Facebook tracking you offsite, why have an account at all? I think it is right on. Both because the tool shapes the usage (if your only tool is hammer, all problems look like nails). I don't have one.