<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>louisgray.com - Latest Comments in louisgray.com: FriendFeed Discussions Break Through the Walled Garden</title><link>http://louisgray.disqus.com/</link><description>A Silicon Valley Blog for Early Adopters and Tech Geeks</description><atom:link href="https://louisgray.disqus.com/louisgraycom_friendfeed_discussions_break_through_the_walled_garden/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 Dec 2009 14:48:27 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: louisgray.com: FriendFeed Discussions Break Through the Walled Garden</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2008/02/friendfeed-discussions-break-through.html#comment-26162836</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Nice to see someone who really knows their subject. Good work on this.  &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Cheapo1</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 17 Dec 2009 14:48:27 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: louisgray.com: FriendFeed Discussions Break Through the Walled Garden</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2008/02/friendfeed-discussions-break-through.html#comment-429216745</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I have NEVER been under the impression that my FriendFeed comments were private. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;In fact, as the comments above regarding email demonstrate, you can't even assume that supposedly private items are private.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Ontario Emperor</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 19 Feb 2008 18:09:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: louisgray.com: FriendFeed Discussions Break Through the Walled Garden</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2008/02/friendfeed-discussions-break-through.html#comment-429216747</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Philipp, I get your comments on e-mail being private. But I've copy/pasted excerpts of e-mails here for blog posts, not as an exposé, per se, but to show the personal side of some of these technologies and services. I do tend to err on the side of favorability when it comes to that, whereas I might be more aggressive when things are public and permalinked.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;My comment was they are "fair game for a lot of people". Your example was just fine in my mind, and I bet there are others (See: Valleywag) who have other standards.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">louisgray</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 19 Feb 2008 02:23:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: louisgray.com: FriendFeed Discussions Break Through the Walled Garden</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2008/02/friendfeed-discussions-break-through.html#comment-429216748</link><description>&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; Anything that can be copied&lt;br&gt;&amp;gt; and pasted is fair game for&lt;br&gt;&amp;gt; a lot of people trying to&lt;br&gt;&amp;gt; make news and break news.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I disagree with that one -- e.g. emails from private persons can usually be considered private (as opposed to, say, emailed company statements or press releases or a CEO talking to someone identifiying themselves as journalist etc.) But that's because they are private, technically speaking, whereas Friendfeed's discussion threads are public and permalinked, at least the one I linked to.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;On the subject of Google, I hope people don't shy away from making truthful comments in public about the company. If praising the company in public is OK but negative criticism in public is somehow not OK, then it creates a very skewed picture -- the same skewed picture some people complained about.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Philipp Lenssen</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 19 Feb 2008 01:19:00 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>