IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] Webfinger discussion

John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Tue, 27 March 2012 10:52 UTC

Return-Path: <john-ietf@jck.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1148221F88C1 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 03:52:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.694
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.694 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.095, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id S9KEdoe2tT-j for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 03:52:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bsa2.jck.com (bsa2.jck.com [70.88.254.51]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7ECC21F88C0 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 03:52:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [198.252.137.7] (helo=PST.JCK.COM) by bsa2.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <john-ietf@jck.com>) id 1SCTwH-0006QQ-7e; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 06:47:45 -0400
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 06:52:31 -0400
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>, apps-discuss@ietf.org
Message-ID: <8D0CAE073DF47CFA986CE5F5@PST.JCK.COM>
In-Reply-To: <20120327084709.GB11491@mail.yitter.info>
References: <053201cd0b5d$c08c80f0$41a582d0$@packetizer.com> <20120326150556.GC3557@mail.yitter.info> <CAA1s49V0M7N1pLua+ORxGWmsrd_yAA_KQ0Piqjg8VuWJ5=G+Lg@mail.gmail.com> <20120327084709.GB11491@mail.yitter.info>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Webfinger discussion
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 10:52:49 -0000

--On Tuesday, March 27, 2012 04:47 -0400 Andrew Sullivan
<ajs@anvilwalrusden.com> wrote:

> I suppose one could argue that facebook's (or pick
> your poison) user population shows nobody cares about that,
> but I think it would still be good to have some observations
> about those effects.

While Facebook (and others who think that Facebook-style social
networks are taking over the world, or that the world is turning
into them) are fond of making that inference, I think we need to
keep in mind that the total number of active Facebook users
remains a very small fraction of the number of people who are
using the Internet and who could, in principle, join Facebook.
Statistically, we know just nothing about that larger population
and what they do and do not care about.  We don't even know what
fraction of them are not on Facebook because of those concerns.

    john

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email