gam·bit  (gmbt)
n.
1. An opening in chess in which a minor piece, or pieces, usually a pawn, is offered in exchange for a favorable position.
2. A maneuver, stratagem, or ploy, especially one used at an initial stage.
3. A remark intended to open a conversation.

1. Social: more seamless integration of social tools with productivity tools and enterprise information
2. Mobile: consistent access and experience on different devices
3. Connect: information and people through a range of communication and collaboration experience

However, Facebook hasn't always managed its users' data well. In the beginning, it restricted the visibility of a user's personal information to just their friends and their "network" (college or school). Over the past couple of years, the default privacy settings for a Facebook user's personal information have become more and more permissive. They've also changed how your personal information is classified several times, sometimes in a manner that has been confusing for their users. This has largely been part of Facebook's effort to correlate, publish, and monetize their social graph: a massive database of entities and links that covers everything from where you live to the movies you like and the people you trust.

JESS3 / The State of The Internet from Jesse Thomas on Vimeo.

The minidrama is an increasingly familiar one as companies and workers navigate the landscape defined by sites like Facebook, MySpace and Twitter. Firings and reprimands over postings to social networking sites have become commonplace over the last year.

Surely, as individuals, we’ll eventually learn to balance who we “let in” to our social networks, how we reveal our thoughts, and consider who might see what we say or do. I wonder how tolerance levels for “past deeds” will play out in the future. I think we’ll become more tolerant when just about everyone has had the experience of putting too much out there. It’s like traffic in LA (I get to say this cause I’m from LA); the best excuse when you’re late for a meeting is to blame it on traffic, everyone commiserates with you especially if there was an accident on the freeway. For an interesting read on putting stuff out there take a look at this New York Times article from 2007 (funny how this article keeps coming up).

But the answer does not solely lie with the end user. Companies need to frequently communicate with their employees on what they will tolerate and not just rely on draconian measures after the fact. What’s the phrase, “an ounce of prevention…”? Most companies have some sort of policy on cyber-flaming; although it’s probably obtusely named something like Electronic Communications Agreement that employees my need to sign (but not re-read) once a year. Usually the agreement includes broadly written rules that only do well to serve as blunt instruments when it’s needed or is useful. Typically signing the agreement is made part of employment terms but the rules are dictated rather than communicated. When was the last time you read the entire licensing agreement when you installed a piece of software? And do you think of it every time you use the software? Same idea. If a company wants to avoid embarrassment and leaked information then it should take measures to help employees understand what is tolerated and help them to do the right thing.

AP Reporter Reprimanded For Facebook Post; Union Protests | Threat Level | Wired.com

Flattering as it may be that someone would choose to make themselves a “fake me” I find the whole concept creepy and dangerous. The fact that someone is posting things using my identity (with name and photo) to unwitting readers who do not know that it’s not really me saying whatever was tweeted is not a happy thought at all.

Humorously, the whole thing reminds me of the great New Yorker cartoon “On the Internet Nobody knows you’re a dog.” Seriously, there is a very important lesson that I personally try to recall when I sign up for social things. I like to participate in social networks (and do) but I keep in mind that identity is more than digital credentials and that I tend to share less with people who’s identity is more obscure to me. I’ve been working with people and have developed relationships – working and personal – via the Internet for over 20 years now and will continue to do so. But, as in face to face reality, I try to be discerning on who gets what access to my life and information.

This isn’t a new problem per se, there have been famous cases of identity fraud online; consider the case of the cyber bullying mom on MySpace. However this is somewhat different. Here someone is saying they are a “fake” real person. It’s like cyber-squatting only with a person’s identity on a popular social network. It’s hard to tell if “the fake” is trying to be malicious or not, it mostly seems like funny stuff. Despite that, things have been posted that my friend would never say and could compromise their reputation. It’s new territory in socialization and how the social network providers will respond to these types of things. I’ll keep you posted if I find out more or how this might resolve.