You probably know Mafia Wars as one of two things – the game you’re hopelessly addicted to or the game that constantly spams your Facebook news feed with annoying updates. In either case, you know Mafia Wars is a big deal, big enough to draw attention from Snoop Dogg, no less.

Just a month ago, Mafia Wars launched it’s newest iteration – Mafia Wars: Las Vegas – and the game has already hit the 10-million-visitor mark. To commemorate the event, Snoop Dogg will be in Las Vegas to blow up a four-ton armored truck. That isn’t blow up like your cell phone, that’s blow up like a bomb. Bullz-Eye’s own Will Harris will be on site for the event.

This isn’t quite as bad as it seems, but it does give you a sense of what’s possible with all of the data on Facebook. A hacker named Ron Bowes from Skull Security wrote a crawler to compile data from all the publicly available pages on Facebook. Publicly available – that’s important.

It’s also important, though, that such a crawler could be written to grab that kind of data. Though you could just as easily search for these people and get their info, I’m not entirely comfortable with the idea that a bot could be written to compile the same. Facebook security remains a shifting target – for most people, there’s not a lot on Facebook they don’t want people to see. As Facebook continues to grow and expand its profitable operations, there could potentially be more and more truly personal data involved. In fact, that’s how Zuckerberg would prefer things. That’s why this is important.

I’ve been thinking about kicking Facebook for a while, and every time I get a story like this, even as unalarming and completely benign as this story is, it points to the ongoing lack of attention and concern it seems Facebook gives to user data.

Everyone knows Farmville as a Facebook phenomenon, but the people at Zynga are getting to know it as a cash cow. The Facebook game has gotten so much attention that Google has decided to invest more than $100 million in Zynga, supposedly in preparation for the launch of Google Games.

Can Zynga really stand as the cornerstone for Google’s Games operation? Absolutely. The company is projected at $350 million in revenue for the first half of 2010, half of which is actual operating profit. Total profit for 2011 is expected to be over a billion dollars. A billion, people. With a “b.”

Here’s TechCrunch on why Zynga is so important for Google:

Zynga continues to work on high level strategic business development deals. The reason these deals are so attractive to companies like Yahoo and now Google is this – Zynga allows them to rebuild the massive social graph, currently controlled by Facebook. For whatever reason people love to play these games and get passionately addicted to them, coming back day after day. That’s helped Facebook become what it is today. Google, Yahoo and others want some of that magic to rub off on them, too.

Who knew a silly social game could make such a huge impact.

There are a lot of things I really loathe about Facebook. While it is a good place to connect and share things with my actual friends, there’s always the strange undercurrent of lurkers – people I haven’t seen or talked to in as much as a decade trying to keep up with me by watching status updates and the like.

One such person sent me an invitation to look at a page on Facebook titled “Find out who deleted you.” This may have been around for awhile, but that doesn’t make it any less ridiculous. If you need a script to tell you when you’ve been removed from a “friend’s” page, you probably shouldn’t have friended them in the first place. And what do you plan to do now that you know? Rage at them? Send them a nasty note? Track them down?

As great as all of our tools for connectivity are, there is a threshold of overconnect for me.

I saw this post at TechCrunch and just had to pass it along. I often wonder where people like Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg get their start. Were they just born to be badass coders or was their some kind of natural progression toward their newfound demigod status. It turns out the second is true, for Zuckerberg at least.

A TechCrunch reader who was also one of Zuckerberg’s classmates at Exeter offered up a site that Mark had written back in 2001 when he was just 16 years old. It’s…terrible. Awful. Even in 2001 it would have been way behind its time.

Check out the full post over on TechCrunch.

This weekend Zuckerberg sat down with Michael Arrington to talk Facebook privacy. I found Zuckerberg’s comments pretty disconcerting, even more so today after an anonymous employee gave an interview to The Rumpus.

The most interesting was when the employee admitted to a master password for every account, one that used to be ‘Chuck Norris’ spelled with letters, numbers, and symbols. Now, the password only worked from inside Facebook offices, but I can’t imagine a scenario under which an employee would need to actually log in to the site as anyone else. Wouldn’t there be internal diagnostic tools for viewing that information? A database viewer perhaps?

There’s also the fact that Facebook logs all of the information pertaining to your usage. That allows it to implement handy features like remembering whose site you visit most so it appears at the top of your searches. But that’s not all that gets logged. There’s also all of the information you’ve ever entered, including the stuff that you’ve deleted.

I hate to sound like a fear monger, but I think it’s important for people to be aware of how much information is held on Facebook’s servers and how many people have access to that information. It’s more than I thought, on both accounts.

I logged into Facebook last month probably three times, for all of which I was greeted by a screen that warned of new privacy settings. I ignored the messages and went about my usual routine, rejecting friend requests from the high school acquaintances and responding to week-old messages. Then the changes showed up in all the blogs I read and I went back to look over them. It was a serious shift and, as you probably know, a move away from the privacy we’ve all held so dear (or learned to guard after pictures show up).

The weird thing is, Facebook was built on giving users more privacy, not less. It was one of the major differentiators between Facebook and MySpace, the feature most people point to when they talk about why the former is so successful compared to its counterpart. Zuckerberg talked about the change this weekend with Michael Arrington. His reasons for the change are surprising, and a little disconcerting when you realize he’s helping direct the policy changes.

Here’s a quote that might scare you: “We view it as our role in the system to constantly be innovating and be updating what our system is to reflect what the current social norms are.” Here’s some news, Mark, you are the social norm. If anything, Facebook is setting trends offline, not vice versa, and that will only continue as more people come to the site.

Here’s another one:

“A lot of companies would be trapped by the conventions and their legacies of what they’ve built, doing a privacy change – doing a privacy change for 350 million users is not the kind of thing that a lot of companies would do. But we viewed that as a really important thing, to always keep a beginner’s mind and what would we do if we were starting the company now and we decided that these would be the social norms now and we just went for it.”

You know there are few things I want to hear less than “we just went for it” when it comes to information privacy. I can respect the philosophy behind the “beginner’s mind” strategy, but you also have to realize your multi-billion dollar valuation and the fact that you have permanently impacted the direction of the entire internet. That’s not the type of situation to just go for it because that’s what beginners might do.

If anything, the most recent changes to Facebook’s privacy settings have made me a much more discerning Facebook user. I’m much less prone to add people simply because I haven’t talked to them in a while. Honestly, I’m much less likely to keep my profile public for much longer. Sure, it can be a great way to stay in touch, but if it’s at the expense of making more and more of what I consider private information public, I’m more than willing to delete the account.

The Facebook iPhone app got a nice update today: push notifications! It took awhile, but considering the application’s most prominent developer recently quit, it’s not much of a surprise.

The update seems small, but it’s a pretty serious change in the way you can use the app. You no longer need to be working in the app to see updates. They’ll get pushed straight through, just like a text message. If you have friends like mine, that kind of up-to-the-minute response can be crucial. Incriminating photo gets tagged? Now you know instantly.

The update also included some handy contact syncing. Your Facebook contacts can now be linked up to your contact list, photos and all. It’s a nice way to get pics of those people you might not otherwise have in your phone. It also feels slightly less creepy than copying a picture from Facebook and using it. Yes, I’ve done that. Yes, I am ashamed.

Image: TechCrunch

Like most things involving WebOS and the new Palm devices, the Facebook app for WebOS is underwhelming. Actually, it’s worse than that, considering how far app development has come since the smartphone app craze started. Maybe they should get Joe Hewitt involved? I hear he’s done with that other project he’s been working on.

The problem is just a total lack of features. You get unfiltered news feeds, even if you’ve unselected application updates in your profile, and videos and links pull you out of the app. Sure it’s nice to multitask but to do so unnecessarily is just silly. There’s seemingly no search feature, no way to access events, and clicking another person’s name seems to bring up little more than contact info.

What can you do? Well, you can upload pictures and post status updates and…well that seems to be about it. Another compelling reason to get a Palm Pre.

Joe Hewitt’s been unhappy with and outspoken about Apple’s app approval process since about the time he started working on the Facebook app. Well he’s finally had enough. According to a recent, tweet he’s done working on the app and ready to move on.

Time for me to try something new. I’ve handed the Facebook iPhone app off to another engineer, and I’m onto a new project.

Hewitt also said in very clear language that he left iPhone development because of Apple. Speaking to TechCrunch he said, “My decision to stop iPhone development has had everything to do with Apple’s policies. I respect their right to manage their platform however they want, however I am philosophically opposed to the existence of their review process.” As are a lot of people, but to this point no one with Hewitt’s resume has made the same decision (Arrington left the iPhone for a different reason and he’s not a developer).

Hewitt’s in a better position to “quit” then some developers, though. He’s got a swanky gig at Facebook, where he’ll still be developing after his announcement. A house like Tapulous, on the other hand, is making enough money off the App Store that it’s unlikely it will leave, and we probably wouldn’t hear about one of its developers quitting because of a philosophical opposition like Hewitt’s.

Instead we’ll probably continue to see the trickle of policy changes Apple has made over the last several months. The most recent allows developers to see real time status updates about the app, so when it’s sitting in “waiting for review” you can start throwing around some lawsuits.

Since its beginning, Twitter has tried to make it clear that your tweets are your property. You make them, you control who can see them. Problem was, the micro-blogging site couldn’t make good on that promise until recently, when it finally figured out how to keep deleted tweets out of search results.

Up until the end of this week, users could type your name into the search box and get every tweet, even those you deleted. If there was something you didn’t mean to post or wanted to correct, that little bit of info was there too. Thankfully, Biz Stone & Co. fixed that little problem. Now that problematic material is gone. Permanently.

Now all you have to worry about are the scores of sites cropping up to index tweets. Depending how those sites gather and store info, your deleted material may be a little more public than you’d hope. Yeah, drunk tweeting is still probably a terrible idea.

What’s Vivox? You may be using the service without knowing it. Vivox currently delivers in-game voice chat for EVE and Second Life a boasts more than 15 million users. But the service is looking to expand into a much bigger market: Facebook.

Yes, live voice chat is coming to Facebook, and I just have one thing to say: Thank god for Facebook Lite. I hate to sound curmudgeonly, and no one likes a broken record, but voice chat is the last thing I want from people on Facebook. I realize this is great news for people who use Facebook as a primary method of communication. For all of you this could be really fantastic news.

I will say, the service actually sounds really cool. It offers conference support, and users outside Facebook will be able to call in to participate in real-time chat, which could make keeping in touch a whole lot easier. One of the most interesting moves Vivox is making, though, is releasing the source code to other third-party app developers.

Vivox will run on Facebook as a plug-in, so it’s not technically part of the core set of Facebook features. By opening up the source code, Vivox is giving voice chat to anything from games to utilities. It’s pretty easy to see how Facebook is swallowing up other social services at an alarming rate. It’s nabbed chat from AIM, integrated Twitter-like features, and now looks to go after Skype. Granted, this isn’t Facbeook proper doing the last, but it’s pretty close, and this kind of integration could turn Zuckerberg’s eyes to Vivox, and potentially open his wallet.

For now Vivox is testing in closed beta, and probably won’t go public for a while. When it does, I’ll be sure to let you know, probably by mentioning once again just how much I hate Facebook.

Facebook rolled out a new feature yesterday that just might restore my faith in the service. I’ve long hated Facebook, and that hatred only grew as the site became more “feature-rich,” that is to say a much bigger pain in my ass. Luckily, I finally have some respite from all the requests for Mafia and Texas Hold ‘Em: Facebook Lite.

Originally intended for use in countries where broadband is sporadic or even nonexistent, Facebook Lite offers a slimmed down version of the social service, removing all the extra applications and goodies in favor of a much more utilitarian user interface. You get the bare bones, nothing more. I love it.

Facebook had this to say:

We decided to roll out Facebook Lite in the U.S. to give users a simple, expedient alternative to facebook.com, and hope that it will fill this need. While the majority of our user base is outside the United States, we’re always working to enhance the new user experience even in markets where facebook.com is easily accessible. We have also found that people who are new to Facebook tend to be most interested in a simpler experience, focus on establishing their network of friends and communicating with them by writing on their walls, sending messages, and looking at pictures. We have introduced the Lite site with these new users in mind.

I might actually log in more than my typical twice a month. You can check out the new service at lite.facebook.com.

Source: TechCrunch

T-Mobile’s Sidekick got the smartphone treatment today with the addition of Facebook and Twitter applications to the Sidekick Download Catalog. As one of the most prominent phones to implement a full keyboard and some proprietary messaging features, it’s really been a long time coming. The applications work with the Sidekick 2008, the Sidekick LX, and the Sidekick Slide.

The Facebook application is free but the Twitter app will run you $2 a month. I gotta say, $24 a year for Twitter use seems a little out of hand. It’s also strange considering the Sidekick 2009 comes pre-packaged with free apps for both Facebook and Twitter. Was Twitter really that much harder to integrate into the old phones than Facebook? Did they just not have as much developer support? Is the app just that cool?

If you have an older Sidekick and the time to drop a comment, let us know. This is a strange one.

Facebook developer Joe Hewitt can finally rest easy knowing that his app is approved and in public hands. It certainly took long enough. Hewitt posted his submission on his Twitter page a couple weeks back. He made a blog post earlier this week decrying the App Store for its lengthy and often arbitrary approval process. Well the app is finally out, and it’s pretty great.

The update brings a whole list of new features along and gives the software a makeover. The new interface is much more direct, which is something I really appreciate. I probably say it too much, but I don’t really like Facebook, so making my user experience quick and to the point is fantastic.

I also like that I can manage events from the new app. I mentioned yesterday that I prefer an uncluttered digital experience and this is just one more thing I can manage on the go. As always, the app is free for download.

I’m not secretive about the fact that I don’t like Facebook. I’ve mentioned in other posts that I don’t need daily updates from people I haven’t seen in years. The simple solution is to just not friend those folks, but some of them are incredibly persistent, sending requests four or five times before I cave.

Facebook posted a reminder on its blog this week to remind users that we have methods for dealing with these problems. If you don’t want to friend someone, press the ignore button. They’re never notified. You could also friend the person, let him read your profile, and then unfriend, in which case the person again won’t be notified. If you’re in my situation, though, you have just one recourse. You leave the friend request pending. In that way you never have to deal with the request again.

But I hate that solution. Hate it. I don’t like cluttered message systems, and there’s really no reason Facebook couldn’t implement a simple ignore system, as in, ignore this request and all future requests from this individual. It’s similar to blocking people, which the site allows you to do, just built into the friend request system, making it much easier to manage.

The fact that Facebook saw fit to remind users of these features suggests the site may be getting some negative feedback, and for good reason. Facebook beat MySpace by offering better privacy features, so why not this? Why must I subject myself to the hoard of messages people send to entire friend lists?

According to Joe Hewitt’s Twitter feed, Facebook 3.0 has officially been submitted to the app store. If you need the details on Facebook’s latest face lift, check out this post from earlier in the month.

The Facebook devs are definitely excited about this one. They’ve got a new page up where they plan to release more details and screenshots as our waiting begins. I don’t think we’ll be waiting for long, though. Apple already has enough app problems on their hands without adding Facebook to the list.

The feature I’m most looking forward to is video. I don’t really use my Facebook account for much more than keeping my family up to date on my comings and goings. Adding video to the mix is most certainly welcome.

About six months ago I started having a fairly extended discussion with my girlfriend over the merits and setbacks of older adults getting onto Facebook. The prospect never thrilled her, and that attitude seems to be the norm.

An older generation’s slow adoption of Facebook never thrilled me either, but for entirely different reasons. I simply can’t stand the way they talk about it. Yes, I’m generalizing in a big way here, but the type thirty-somethings that will sit in bars and restaurants talking about how cool it is to reconnect with a high school girlfriend after a messy divorce invite just this sort of criticism. Truthfully, Facebook never thrilled me. I was already in touch with the people I really wanted to be in touch with. I’m not the type of person who likes to have intermittent contact with hundreds of people. What I’ve found Facebook most useful for is answering the questions you don’t want to answer at family reunions. Add my aunts and uncles and they know what I’m doing, where I’m living, and can see what few pictures I post. Family reunions have never been less painful.

My generation, certainly including some of those who used to love Facebook, are shying away from the social site as their parents warm up to it. In fact, just 50% of the 15-24 crowd is checking Facebook regularly, compared to 55% last year. By contrast, 46% of 25- to 34-year-olds are now regulars, up from 40% last year. It’s worth pointing out that these age groups are still using the internet, but the 15-24s have moved their usage time away from Facebook and on to other, more interesting things.

The sub-16 age group is still going strong, likely looking for a place to branch out and experiment with structuring their identity through the online social site. You can expect those numbers to drop as kids get older and realize their parents are using the same site like one big holiday greeting card.

My question to you, dear readers, is how do you spend your Facebook time? Has it evolved over time? Do you use it as often as when you started? Have you quit the site altogether? Sound off in the comments.

Source: The Guardian

Most everyone has seen or heard of social networking sites affecting privacy in crazy ways. They’ve cost people jobs, ended countless relationships, and in the best cases, resulted in some bruised pride. As more people get hit, more users are choosing to remove questionable content from their pages, but the content’s not necessarily gone.

Ars Technica’s Jacqui Cheng put recent findings from Cambridge University researchers to the test with some unsavory results. Turns out your deleted pictures may not be as far gone as you’d like.

Jacqui tested Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, and Flickr with the same method. She deleted pictures from each site on May 21st and then watched the direct links for six weeks. Twitter and Flickr were both good, truly deleting the pictures after a hard refresh. MySpace and Facebook didn’t fare so well. Direct links from both sites still produce the “deleted” images, some six weeks after they were pulled.

Moral of the story? Continue to censor your drunken impulses, particularly with regard to the pictures you upload.