Posted by John Patrick on Jul 24, 2011 in
Favorites,
People,
Social media 
The Wall Street Journal posed the question of whether Facebook is worth $100 billion. I still have no idea, but I continue to think Facebook is now facing a very formidable competitor. My initial reaction has strengthened. G+ circles are a big deal and clearly the differentiator. As for growth, technowizard Leon Haland has shared some interesting data that shows the relative growth rates of Google, Facebook and Twitter. Haland said that Twitter got 10 million users in 780 days (2.13 years), Facebook got 10 million users in 852 days (2.33 years), and Google Plus gained 10 million users in just 16 days (2 weeks). Google Plus is growing exponentially. The Christian Post reported on Wednesday that Google Plus had reached 18 million users.
Regardless of the exact numbers, I see G+ growing very rapidly becuase it has a better privacy model than anyone else, as far as I can see. With Facebook, a friend is someone for whom you have accepted an invitation. Are they really all your friends? How many friends can a person have? What is a friend? With Google+, you can establish circles for best friends, semi-friends, acquaintances, people you can’t stand, favorite people, geniuses, half-loaves, golf buddies, political cohort, heard of them, never heard of them, etc. In other words, you define your circles, you put people in one or more of the circles you create, you easily upgrade or downgrade which circle a person is in, and you are confident that none of your “friends” can see which circle you have put them in. As that notion takes hold, I think millions of people will migrate to Google+.
I currently have 169 people in my circles and there are 117 that have me in their circles. The magic is that they don’t know what circle I have them in and I don’t what circle my “friends” have me in. I may be in the “jerks” circle of them all, and I may have placed many of my connections in the “heard of them once” circle. I have seen G+ connections come in to me that show that someone has 7,000 people in their circles. That is ok with me. Someone can have 100 million people in their circle if they want. I see Bill Gates, Larry Page, and Sergey Brin in some people’s circles. Are they really friends of these czars? Maybe. I doubt it. My rule of thumb for “friends” is as described previously. My criteria for “industry friend” is someone I have actually met and talked to. Someone else may have a criteria of “heard of them”. It doesn’t matter. The key thing is that if you want to post a message to your family circle or best friends, you know that only this limited group of people that you have defined will be able to read your post. The point is that G+ gives you control. You define what a friend is. You can allow large numbers of people into your circles if you choose, but that does not mean that they can read your posts to “soccer moms” or “my political cohort”.
It is going to be interesting to see how the exponential growth of G+ plays out. Maybe everybody will be connected to everybody, but at least you will have the ability to share with everybody or just your “motorcycle friends” or whatever. Stay tuned.
Tags: facebook, friend, friends, friendship, google, google plus, plus, privacy, social media, social network
Posted by John Patrick on Jul 15, 2011 in
Favorites,
People,
Social media The Wall Street Journal posed the question of whether Facebook is worth $100 billion. I have no idea, but the market will sort that out over time. I do, however, have a point of view about Facebook versus Google+. From what I see so far, I think Facebook is now facing a very formidable competitor. My initial reaction has strengthened. Circles are a big deal and clearly the differentiator. What is a friend?
With Facebook, a friend is someone for whom you have accepted an invitation. Are they really all your friends? How many friends can a person have? What is a friend? The Merriam-Webster dictionary says that a friend is one attached to another by affection or esteem. Would you say that about all your Facebook friends? I think of a friend as someone that I would ask for personal advice, invite to dinner at my home, borrow something from or lend something to, or discuss a medical condition with. I know most of my friend’s families or at least know something about them. I think we could all agree that there are various levels of friends.
In theory, you can establish this granularity with Facebook, but it is not easy and when you have done it, you are not really sure who can see the grouping you have established or who can read something you post to that group. With Google+, you can establish circles for best friends, semi-friends, acquaintances, people you can’t stand, favorite people, geniuses, half-loaves, golf buddies, political cohort, heard of them, never heard of them, etc. In other words, you define your circles, you put people in one or more of the circles you create, you easily upgrade or downgrade which circle a person is in, and you are confident that none of your “friends” can see which circle you have put them in. As that notion takes hold, I think millions of people will migrate to Google+.
When you and your family post to your family circle about upcoming Labor Day plans, you all will know that only family circle members will be able to read those personal and private communications. Privacy has been a highly visible issue for Facebook for a long time, but in my opinion, they have not really addressed it. Google has, and hence my optimism about Google+. I don’t rule out that a new entrant will come along and trump them all. That is the great thing about the Internet. A great idea can take hold and scale practically overnight. Stay tuned and keep an eye on your circles.
Tags: facebook, friend, friends, friendship, google, google plus, plus, privacy, social media, social network
Posted by John Patrick on Dec 26, 2003 in
PKI 
Another dimension of Trust has to do with standards. Because of standards, the Internet is the only thing I know of that works the same everywhere. Most things work differently in different parts of the world. The side of the road we drive on, the side of the car we drive from, the width of the railroad tracks, the plugs that we put in the wall; all work differently around the world. But not the Internet; it works exactly the same in every corner of the world. There are a lot of debates during the process while Internet standards are being developed but once published as a standard every vendor has an obligation to implement the standard. Most do. (read more)
Tags: authentication, authorization, ca, certificate authority, digital id, encyption, integrity, key, non-repudiation, passphrase, PKI, privacy, security, smart card, trust, usb
Posted by John Patrick on Dec 24, 2003 in
PKI
In “Too Secure?”, I described how a financial services company insisted that I use the fax machine to send them a document. Let’s contrast that process with how it might have worked using a public key infrastructure approach with the five security functions described in the last part of the Privacy And Trust series. We’ll look at each of the five elements. (read more)
Tags: authentication, authorization, ca, certificate authority, digital id, encyption, integrity, key, non-repudiation, passphrase, PKI, privacy, security, smart card, trust, usb
Posted by John Patrick on Dec 23, 2003 in
PKI
The most important benefit of a digital ID is authentication. Once digital IDs are more commonplace, you will no longer have to send your login ID and password over the Internet. Your password, passphrase, or biometric will go no further than your smart card, token, or your PC. Once you are authenticated, you will be able to authorize an encrypted exchange of digital data between your PC (or phone or other information appliance) and the other party. The result of the exchange is that both parties will be able to confirm that the other party is indeed who they say they are. If you provided biometric data the person will know not only that it was your ID but that it was actually you and not someone who may have ?borrowed? your login/password. (read more)
Tags: authentication, authorization, ca, certificate authority, digital id, encyption, integrity, key, non-repudiation, passphrase, PKI, privacy, security, smart card, trust, usb
Posted by John Patrick on Dec 22, 2003 in
PKI
In the near future most people will have a digital ID along with an accompanying biometric link such as a fingerprint, face print, voiceprint, iris or retina scan. The combination of digital ID and biometric will enable you to establish yourself as a completely unique person. At last you have the ability in the digital world to establish that you are who you say you are just as you can in the physical world! Step one is to get a digital ID from someone that knows for sure who you are and who is trusted by others as a reliable source for authenticating you. And who would this someone be? (read more)
Tags: authentication, authorization, ca, certificate authority, digital id, encyption, integrity, key, non-repudiation, passphrase, privacy, security, smart card, trust, usb
Posted by John Patrick on Dec 20, 2003 in
PKI,
Public Policy
There was a cartoon by Peter Steiner in the July 5, 1993 issue of The New Yorker showing a dog at a PC speaking to another dog watching from the floor. The caption was, ?On the Internet nobody knows you’re a dog.? Very true and in fact nobody really knows for sure just who you are. Nor do you know who is at the other end of a chat session or e-commerce transaction either. Assuming success of the numerous technologies at the Inside ID conference in Washington, D.C. this week, we will soon have Digital IDs that will change this. There are many issues but has become urgent that we get digital ID’s in place for all of us (and for our servers and eventually for everything. (read more)
Tags: authentication, authorization, ca, certificate authority, digital id, encyption, integrity, key, non-repudiation, passphrase, PKI, privacy, security, smart card, trust, usb
Posted by John Patrick on Dec 9, 2003 in
PKI 
On Tuesday morning I will be speaking at Inside ID in Washington, D.C. They are calling this conference a "Mega Show" because there will be dedicated sections of the exhibit hall branded to reflect the major tools used in modern identification solutions. These "shows within the show" include: Inside Identity Management,
Inside Digital Identity,
Inside Card Technology,
Inside Biometrics, and
Inside Document Security. I am extremely interested in the content of the show and will be reporting more on it later. My talk will be called "The Future Of The Internet: A Distributed Web of Trust". The
talk will be based on my views as expressed in a story in Network World where I wrote an 850 word summary, called "The Ultimate Internet".
Tags: identity, PKI, privacy, security
Posted by John Patrick on Dec 7, 2003 in
PKI
Mention the word trust and many people immediately think of security. We hear so many negative questions about Internet security. Is it strong enough? What will happen to my credit card number? What about hackers? We would like to implement this or that application but we can’t because of ?security?. The list goes on. This is one area where some ?old fashioned? attitudes are actually healthy. Security is critical and needs to be taken very seriously — but not in a restrictive sense. In fact the question that business and government leaders should be asking is about how security on the Internet can become the enabler of global commerce, the enabler for enabling people to control the email they get, the enabler for more secure and efficient processing of healthcare information, and the enabler for trusted transcations. (read more)
Tags: authentication, authorization, ca, certificate authority, digital id, encyption, integrity, key, non-repudiation, passphrase, PKI, privacy, security, smart card, trust, usb
Posted by John Patrick on Dec 4, 2003 in
PKI,
Public Policy
Most websites now have privacy policies and it is a good idea to read them, especially if it is a company you have not done business with before. Some privacy policies amount to "We capture data about you and we sell it or give it to anyone we choose". Other companies have a policy like "We will always tell you if we are capturing your personal data. We will never give it away or sell it. If we want to use it in any way other than to fulfill an order or something you asked of us we will ask your permission first. We guard all data with extremely tight backup and security procedures to insure your data is never compromised". That is a good policy but how does a company insure they are actually complying with their own policy? (read more)
Tags: authentication, authorization, ca, certificate authority, digital id, encyption, integrity, key, non-repudiation, passphrase, PKI, privacy, security, smart card, trust, usb
