Setting:

The conversation takes place at Facebook Headquarters. Paul Buchheit is being interviewed shortly after a transition period involving an acquisition.

Learning Phase:

Paul Buchheit reveals that his team is in the learning phase at Facebook. They are deeply involved in understanding the codebase and meeting all the people at Facebook to get a comprehensive understanding of the environment they have entered.

Pre-Acquisition Projects:

Before the acquisition, Buchheit’s team was at a transitional point working in cycles. They would plan a list of features for their product, FriendFeed, develop them, and then regroup to decide the next steps. The acquisition came towards the end of one such cycle, meaning there was not much in progress.

Project Delays:

Paul mentions that some features they were planning, such as “stream splicing,” have been delayed due to the acquisition. The focus is more on understanding the current landscape at Facebook rather than on their previous projects. However, he confirms that there’s still a plan to complete what they had started.

Stream Subscription Feature:

He briefly discusses a feature that allows one stream to subscribe to another within the group feed system of their prior product. While this feature seems straightforward to him, it’s still uncertain due to the ongoing integration.

Team Status:

Paul confirms that his entire team has moved over to Facebook and they are all working together, implying continuity and collective adaptability following the acquisition.

This summary encapsulates the key points of the interview with Paul Buchheit, providing insight into how a tech team navigates the transitional phase post-acquisition, emphasizing learning, adaptation, and potential project delays.

Real-Time Feed Updates:

Paul Buchheit discusses the importance of real-time feed updates in services like FriendFeed. The discussion highlights that when an RSS feed is accessed via FriendFeed, it should update quickly to maintain a seamless user experience. Delays are usually attributed to external services or the interface between those services.

Infrastructure Limitations and Solutions:

Various mechanisms for faster feed updates are elaborated on. The most basic way is FriendFeed checking for updates about once every half hour. Additional methods include monitoring blog ping services like weblogs.com, which update roughly every five minutes. There’s also an option for direct pinging to prompt FriendFeed to re-crawl a specific URL.

SUP and PubSubHubbub Protocols:

FriendFeed has implemented the SUP (Simple Update Protocol) which allows users to easily inform about their updates. They have also added support for PubSubHubbub, another protocol for real-time feed updates. Both of these help speed up the update process but require action from the endpoint to integrate.

Collaboration with Google and Twitter:

A substantial part of the conversation is devoted to collaborations and integrations with other major platforms. Google services like FeedBurner, Blogger, and Google Reader are adding support for PubSubHubbub. In the case of Twitter, Buchheit mentions that they are transitioning from old protocols like XMPP to more effective HTTP interfaces for better performance.

Focus Shift and Maintenance:

There is a notable shift in the company’s focus towards resolving issues that Facebook is facing, implying less engineering effort going into FriendFeed. However, maintenance and necessary upgrades, including integrating with Twitter’s new feed protocol, are still on the agenda.

This summary highlights key points about the underlying technology, collaborations, and company priorities that shape the functionality and user experience in real-time feed services.

Perception of Development Halt:

The conversation starts with a question about whether FriendFeed’s acquisition by Facebook would lead to a cessation of its development. Paul Buchheit clarifies that this is not the case, although he admits that their focus has partly shifted towards issues related to Facebook.

Importance of FriendFeed’s Work:

The acquisition by Facebook is highlighted as an endorsement of FriendFeed’s importance in the digital communication and aggregation space. Buchheit is asked to reflect on this moment, implying that Facebook’s acquisition suggests that what FriendFeed is doing is significant.

Impact of Real-Time Features:

There’s a discussion about how the introduction of real-time services has exceeded expectations and had a significant impact on FriendFeed’s understanding of its own product. The transition to real-time services was marked as a pivotal moment in the product’s evolution, influencing how FriendFeed perceives the value it offers to users.

Internal Communication and Team Learning:

Buchheit notes that the team’s understanding of the product has evolved as they have worked on FriendFeed, particularly due to the real-time features. The team itself is using FriendFeed more than ever for real-time communication, especially as they integrate with and learn about Facebook’s operations.

This summary encapsulates the most significant insights about FriendFeed’s developmental trajectory, the role of real-time features, and the continuing focus on FriendFeed following the Facebook acquisition.

Product Development Approach:

Paul Buchheit discusses his approach to product development, emphasizing the importance of using the product they build. According to Buchheit, this iterative process of building, using, and refining based on user experiences is crucial for developing products that people find genuinely useful.

Adaptation to New Context:

When asked about the timeline for FriendFeed’s integration within Facebook’s ecosystem, Buchheit admits that it’s still early to make predictions. They are in the phase of understanding the systems in place at Facebook and figuring out the logical next steps. Buchheit reassures that the experiences and learnings from working on FriendFeed are being carried over.

Acquisition Timeline and Mutual Interests:

The acquisition of FriendFeed by Facebook did not happen overnight. Although Facebook had shown interest in FriendFeed from its inception, the actual decision to merge came after extensive discussions. These talks led to a mutual understanding of each company’s future visions, ultimately convincing FriendFeed that the timing was right for an acquisition.

Alignment of Goals:

Buchheit points out that initially, he was not very interested in merging with a company like Facebook, which he perceived as mainly a site for profiles and games. However, over time, it became clear that Facebook shared FriendFeed’s interest in evolving digital communication, making the acquisition more appealing.

Impact of FriendFeed Features on Facebook:

Buchheit notes that Facebook has shown interest in features developed by FriendFeed, incorporating some into its own product. He takes this as a positive sign, indicating Facebook’s willingness to evolve and improve, aligning with FriendFeed’s own product development philosophies.

This summary provides insights into FriendFeed’s philosophy of product development, the ongoing process of its integration into Facebook, and the synergies that influenced the acquisition decision.

Twitter’s Retweet Function:

Paul Buchheit discusses Twitter’s decision to extract retweets and place them into metadata. This process had been done before with “app replies,” making it easier to connect replies with their original message. Metadata gives more context but is not currently being utilized by the speakers.

Threaded Conversations vs. Linear Conversations:

The discussion turns to the nature of conversations on social platforms. Twitter and FriendFeed differ in how threads evolve. Twitter’s structure makes users less aware of other replies to the same tweet, thus shaping the conversation differently. Buchheit speculates that Twitter clients may use metadata to develop more thread-like conversations.

FriendFeed vs. Twitter Clients:

FriendFeed provides some similar functionalities as Twitter, but it is fundamentally a different product. FriendFeed aims for a more linear, time-ordered conversation model which is efficient but not designed for large, sprawling conversations like those found on platforms like Reddit.

UI and Community Level Development:

The UI plays a role in how conversations evolve. Features like “liking a comment” have been considered but not implemented due to UI complexities. Buchheit believes that these features could evolve at the community level, indicating the importance of APIs in shaping user interaction.

APIs and Federated Models:

Buchheit emphasizes the importance of a federated model for social platforms, likening it to email systems. In this long-term vision, various services would interoperate. He also notes the sale of FriendFeed to Facebook has piqued interest in creating FriendFeed-like services, which could stimulate innovation.

Open APIs and Platform Cloning:

Finally, the talk covers the need for open APIs to enable the cloning or replication of services. FriendFeed’s API, especially its new version, is designed to be simple, allowing for more straightforward cloning and understanding of the platform’s structure.

Overall, the discussion provides valuable insights into the intricacies of social media platform functionalities, conversational structures, and the role of APIs in shaping and innovating these platforms.

API Design Philosophy:

Paul Buchheit emphasizes the importance of keeping the API simple with a reduced number of concepts and calls. He mentions only a few key abstractions: entries, messages, and people, making it easier to reconstruct and recreate functionalities.

Potential Facebook Integration:

When asked if Facebook might integrate some or all of their API, Buchheit states that he’s unsure, but acknowledges that Facebook is interested in becoming more than just a website. The goal is to offer utility across the web, which could open doors for new businesses and products.

Utility of Facebook Platform:

Buchheit argues that expanding the utility of Facebook beyond its website could act as an “enabling technology,” spurring the development of various other products and businesses that may not even be conceptualized yet.

Status and Openness:

On the question of Facebook’s ‘everyone status,’ Buchheit states it seems fine and may align with his own work at Front Feet. He hasn’t given it much thought but acknowledges that Facebook is moving towards openness while maintaining user comfort and security.

Privacy Models:

Discussing FriendFeed, Buchheit describes its privacy model as simpler compared to Facebook’s. It’s essentially a one-bit system where a feed is either public or private. This simplicity stands in contrast to Facebook’s more complex, network-based privacy settings, which allow for greater specificity in who can see posted information.

Work Collaboration Software:

Paul Buchheit discusses the importance of “eating your own dog food,” i.e., using your own products for internal purposes before releasing them to the public. He notes that their work collaboration software is incredibly useful for internal communications.

Direct Messaging vs Email:

Buchheit shares his preference for direct messaging over traditional email for certain kinds of communications, particularly within workgroups. He finds direct messaging to be more efficient and lightweight compared to email, which has a lot of overhead like signatures and formalities that slow down communication.

Integration with Facebook:

When asked if features from FriendFeed will be directly integrated into Facebook, Buchheit indicates that a simple drop-in approach is not feasible. While they don’t plan to directly transplant features, he notes that their long-standing experience in solving certain communication problems can significantly inform Facebook’s planning and decision-making process.

Challenges in Product Integration:

The notion of trying to shoehorn features from one platform to another is likened to “designing a giraffe by committee.” Buchheit points out that it is more about bringing their experience to the table to enrich Facebook’s ongoing projects rather than literally fitting in existing FriendFeed features.

Disruptive Nature of Real-Time Communication:

The event of Paul Buchheit’s company acquisition is noted as a milestone in the disruption caused by real-time technologies like Twitter. These disruptions are so profound that they are difficult to predict, challenging pre-existing formats like RSS, and altering the landscape of how we consume and disseminate information.

Uncertainty and Excitement:

Buchheit agrees that the disruptive nature of new technologies like Twitter and FriendFeed make the industry exciting. The uncertainty around the direction in which these platforms are headed keeps the work adventurous. He asserts that part of their job is to understand where things are going based on past experiences and current trends to create new products.

Fear of Change and User Concerns:

People are both excited and fearful about the changes new technology brings. Concerns like user data disappearing or the fear surrounding the usage of URL shorteners have been vocalized. Buchheit reassures that in the case of Facebook’s acquisition of FriendFeed, the likelihood of data loss is low given Facebook’s established nature.

Debate Over URL Shorteners:

The conversation turns to URL shorteners, tools initially popularized due to Twitter’s character limit. While their necessity is debated, Buchheit notes that they have evolved to offer valuable features like click tracking and analytics.

Unplanned Evolution:

Both speakers agree that technologies often don’t evolve in the way they were initially intended to. Whether it’s Twitter’s unforeseen rise or the additional features now provided by URL shorteners, the technology landscape is continually shifting in unexpected ways.

Adaptability in Technology:

Paul Buchheit discusses the changing nature of technology and platforms, emphasizing that what people think of a technology today may not be what it evolves into tomorrow. He suggests that the core functionality that people appreciate will likely persist, even as the form changes.

Click Tracking and URL Obfuscation:

The dialogue touches on the issue of URL obfuscation in click tracking. Buchheit mentions that newer technologies will likely address this issue by unobfuscating URLs, allowing users to see where a link leads before clicking on it. This parallels the adaptability seen in past software changes, like when Windows incorporated compression features.

Future of User Interfaces:

A key point is the future of social media and content aggregator interfaces. Paul Buchheit posits that as the technology evolves, users will likely see a range of different interfaces, similar to Twitter clients, fostering innovation and competition.

Role of Standards and Competition:

Buchheit advocates for standards in social media technologies to ensure that no single product monopolizes the market. He argues that competition is essential for continued innovation.

The Challenge of Comment Tracking:

An intriguing issue raised is the disjointed nature of comment tracking across different platforms like FriendFeed, Twitter, and Facebook. Currently, users might get responses on one platform that refer to posts made on another, making it a convoluted process to follow conversations. Email notifications serve as a temporary solution, but the issue remains an area needing improvement.

Public vs Private Spaces in Social Media:

The conversation covers the different approaches to public and private commenting on platforms like Twitter and Facebook. Buchheit hints that Facebook’s “everyone visibility” feature is still in refinement but suggests that users should expect unified visibility settings for both posts and their associated comments in the future.

This conversation provides an insightful look into the current challenges and future possibilities in social media and user interfaces, with a focus on adaptability, competition, and user experience.

Transitional Features:

Paul Buchheit and Speaker_02 discuss the potential of rolling out transitional features on FriendFeed, considering its tech-savvy user base. Buchheit is open to the idea but hasn’t committed to any specific implementation.

User Confusion:

Speaker_02 points out the confusion around the app replies feature, questioning why FriendFeed sends two versions of a message. Buchheit acknowledges the issue and states it’s something that needs to be fixed but gets complicated when looking into the details.

Feature Segmentation:

Buchheit notes that different features are used by different sets of users. The people who use ‘at reply’ and those who send all comments to Twitter are generally not the same, resulting in a lack of urgency to streamline the two features.

Routing Strategies:

The conversation moves to routing strategies, specifically mentioning the issue with “Facebook orphaned comments.” Speaker_02 suggests that feature preferences should be more easily toggled on and off for better user customization.

Project Timelines:

Speaker_02 inquires about future timelines for these potential features. Buchheit remains vague, saying he’ll have more to say in a month but won’t be able to answer all questions.

Final Remarks:

The interview closes with Speaker_02 thanking Buchheit for his openness and wishing him good luck with FriendFeed’s future developments.

The overarching theme is the complexity and challenges in refining user experience while addressing different user needs.