

Eric Schmidt: We'll pull Facebook's data by hook or by crook - jaybol
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2010/09/15/schmidt-well-pull-facebooks-data-by-hook-or-by-crook/

======
haberman
"by hook or by crook" is the article editorializing. Eric Schmidt did not say
that, as the link text implies he did.

~~~
c1sc0
It's not only that, the whole article is pretty much editorializing. When will
the MSM learn to just cover the facts & then STFU?

~~~
jacquesm
> When will the MSM learn to just cover the facts & then STFU?

The moment people will pay for facts in stead of for entertainment.
Advertisers will pay for eyeballs, if you don't have eyeballs you can have all
the facts you want it isn't going to make a business.

~~~
edge17
cnn is a readership business, not a news business

------
mahmud
The money quote:

 _"The best thing that would happen is for Facebook to open up its data," Mr.
Schmidt said. "Failing that, there are other ways to get that information." He
declined to be specific._

What is google gonna do if they're not authorized to access the users' private
social graph? Any sniffing/MIM/deep-inspection trick they might pull off would
be illegal and unauthorized. Are they gonna bury the consent form in some
google ToS/EULA that people will need to click through to read their emails?

Seems like an empty threat to me.

~~~
ntoshev
For a quote out of context, by "that information" he could have easily meant
"the real-world social connections between people", which Google could
probably infer from Gmail.

Such articles are meaningless.

~~~
houseabsolute
The other alternative is that he may have been talking about getting
Facebook's data with its users' authorization.

------
_delirium
I'd imagine they already _do_ have a decent portion of Facebook's social
graph. The FB graph that Pete Warden harvested with a crawler, and then later
deleted after lawsuit threats
([http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18721-data-sifted-
from...](http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18721-data-sifted-from-
facebook-wiped-after-legal-threats.html)), didn't violate robots.txt in its
crawling at the time. Given that Googlebot is pretty quick to acquire any web
content not robots.txt-protected, I wouldn't be surprised if Google has a copy
of something similar.

------
bmr
This particular quote is not newsworthy, but has anyone started to wonder if
Google might have to cut ties with Schmidt at some point? I started using bing
this week in no small part because I find Schmidt creepy.

------
theprodigy
Information in social networks are so valuable.The information can be used to
generate targeted ads to the user or better search results. Everything in the
facebook world can be tracked and mined to generate some relevant information
on you. Based on that they can generate a targeted ad platform, identify who
the opinion leaders are in your social network, etc.

That is why google wants to create a popular social network or wants
facebook's data. Google is in the business of targeted ads, facebook is as
well.

Facebook alone with that data and a platform to utillize it is worth billions.
Soon they will get it right.

That being said, sometimes walled gardens are good, because if facebook didn't
protect this data a competitor will use it and take away the facebook's money
making opportunity.

------
dotcoma
Or: Google these days is sounding more and more like MSFT...

~~~
patrickaljord
Read the article, he never said that.

~~~
arethuza
What he did say was pretty close though:

"The best thing that would happen is for Facebook to open up its data," Mr.
Schmidt said. "Failing that, there are other ways to get that information."

------
rblion
World Web War III is very real. not a hype word anymore...

