Shared publicly  - 
What if it was easy to message a Facebook friend from Google+ or send a "DM" from Twitter to your Facebook friend? What if popular social networks were "inter-operable" and they could "talk to each other" like email? Would you like that?

NOTE: I am not talking about "importing" Twitter feeds into G+ or or exporting G+ posts to Facebook. I'll ask people about that question in another post. Here, I'm just asking about being able to send private messages from one service over to another. The idea is so that if you weren't on Twitter, you wouldn't have to join just to send contact someone, etc.

There's definitely an array of business and technical reasons that would make this difficult. I'm just curious if you'd want it? Vote by +1 the first two comments, and feel free to discuss below that.

Image: +Aaron Wood
Chris Moudy's profile photoTresk Tech's profile photoBrother Hood's profile photopeter r's profile photo
Tom Anderson
Yes, I want social network private message interoperability
No, I don't want social network private message interoperability
Mike Wood
FB would never allow it, but universal messaging would be great
I think that's the holy grail, but I doubt any business would ever want to facilitate it :(
Wait. You're asking for peace, love and understanding. I don't understand.
I often get links on twitter I want to share here or something here to share on FB...
I truly like everything to be kept separate.
This is great. Then each would compete on their systems and not on market share.
I'd rather use an IM client, such as GTalk. But I want to be able to have group conversations in it.
all these social networks... we may just all end up going back to sms
I honestly see Google buying twitter and indentica and everything that isn't facebook and integrating them all into G+.
How many years did it take before MSN userswere able to talk to YM users?
Back to the good ole days of IM blocking...
I remember when cell phone carriers would not let people text people who were on a different provider. Told us it wasn't possible to come up with a standard. It happened (eventually) and now look at texting. I think it is doable on the social networks too.
What if email had not become interoperable?<=>
Like email? dont they have or something now? And I think I already have hm I think this has been done before.
You mean something universal like … email :-)
I'm ambivalent about this. We already have a standard inter-operable messaging protocol. It's called e-mail. Why reinvent the wheel?
I think that's a great idea Tom !!!
SNPMP - Social Netowrking Private Messaging Protocol. Let's get an RFC started.
Am I the only one who actually read the whole post?
It's preferable. And now that I hear that a social network owner likes the idea. I know it can be possible.
We already have private message interoperability. It's called email
I'm not sure if social network private messaging will take off. It will be a bit confusing. I would rather want a client that enabled me to easily monitor and share on all social networks without having to switch across different tabs on my browser.
Yeah I really don't use social networks to DM to begin with if I can use email or chat, but it would be nice to be able to share links etc. between them. I know teenagers don't feel the same way.
They tried this out with Instant Messaging. That was the original purpose of the Jabber idea but none of the IM services went along with it. Maybe one of them did, not sure. It's possible but it would take some creative reasoning I think to convince them.
What would be really great, is a nice open framework that allowed people to host their own private information and instead of one large conglomerate site, have many nodes.
Moving in that direction would imply keeping separate networks, which for user experience and interconnected-ness, are not ideal. I would rather it be difficult and users forced to choose. I think this creates a need for each network to be more competitive. Ah, the free market.
I think if this was a reality, it would help reduce the use of email for non-business use, which I support.
I polled +Tom Anderson comments, but how do you see the results?

Edit: can see it now.. after a refresh
+Ryan Baker Yes, but you won't know if someone has that. And Gmail won't allow you to just Gmail someone based on knowledge of their profile. It definitely does not exist in the way I'm suggesting
I'd also love to message all my MySpace friends from G+. Anyone else with me?
No, lets fight. Facebook should die.
I voted yes, but it isn't a feature I'm necessarily itching to get my hands on. A nice perk though.
I'm going to say YES, YES and YES.
I think it would give social networking a stronger integration into the business world. it essentially would work like email...just not. :-)
Sounds great. I love the idea of this but I feel it would never happen.
If the only phone calls you could make using your AT&T phone were to other AT&T users it would be ludicrous but that's exactly what we have to put up with with messengers.
+Mark Harper But that would take away any incentive to buy a PS3/XBox "because all my friends have one". Which is precisely why it won't happen any time soon.
i would say yes but i would doubt they all will agree

Overall rating
I'm saying this gently and nicely, but did ANYONE read the part where Tom asked you to like one or the other, it's like a survey so he can get a count
dummies tom want our votes not our comments....
The future of social networking...I'd like that feature. +Tom some favors in...make out happen
Well, this would make sense in a world where people don't sign up to multiple services. But many of us have all of them, so no use....
It seems like a logical extension of the interoperability of email, which we all now take for granted. The big barrier at the moment, though, is FB walling itself off.
It'll be interesting to see how many people realize that Tom is trying to use "+1" to take a poll here...
+Tom Anderson Yes, I do get where you're coming from... but this is a business after all. Have to keep demand somewhat up... From user end, it's a great idea. From a money end, it'll never happen.
hi tom ? do you have tool for your idea?
+Christopher Olson I was about to say the same thing unless Apple decides to buy Twitter. I could honestly see Google buying Twitter. 
dope idea, but it'll likely never happen tho.. all these social networks do is make it so that you don't leave their site
twitter is mortally wounded, let it die in peace.
That's great to hear +Tom Anderson. This is something many have been working on for quite some time and something I know you're familiar with given the # of open standards implemented by MySpace in the past.

Unfortunately federated systems are generally more difficult to implement than closed, proprietary ones. This is clearly because interoperability in a space that's evolving so rapidly adds a lot of complexity and overhead.

Still, as these standards and protocols (Activity Streams, OAuth, Salmon, PubSubHubbub, etc) continue to evolve to support a richer set of usecases, the goal is that support and implementation will become easier.

Seeing someone like yourself advocate this interoperability can do nothing but help this effort and I would love to see you more vocal about it in and outside of G+.

For those interested in federating the social web as Tom has advocated, here are some links to standards and protocols already in development and in use by the likes of Facebook, Twitter, Google and many others:
Social media platforms that talked to each other? That would be almost as difficult as reaching an agreement on the debt ceiling. Hmmm. Maybe it is possible....but what will it look like?
I say interoperability between social networks is inevitable ... for the social benefit.
Sending stuff to other people FROM G+ I'm good with, however I would never want anything sent TO G+ from anywhere else. The day I get a Farmville request posted in my stream is the day I remove all my fingerprints from the internet forever.
I think your idea falls short, Tom. What would be a real breakthrough would be a Social Networking Working Group that set up standards for data and collaboration. Each network could keep it's own unique things, but they would standardize basic protocols like feeds, authentication, direct messaging, chat & profile data...

That would allow everyone to create a profile on the service whose quality they liked the most and share their info across all networks, while allowing the providers to compete in both quality of UX and their ability to roll out new features and be ahead of their competitors, but without fragmenting the market...

Just a thought.
I think Google would be open to that idea, but Facebook would never go for it. Too bad too, because I've already ditched Facebook.
This would require one service being given API access to the other service's user IDs and permissions, which would allow the contacting service to extract user info and contacts from the second service -- I don't think that is going to happen !
I voted Yes.

I guess it's time to revisit the Decentralized, Federated, Open Social Networks like buddycloud, OneSocialWeb, Diaspora, Friendika, GNU Social?
If we could just get away from server interpolation we could have this.
Can't I share to a fb email address from +?
uh-oh, getting to be time to mute :)
Since social networking is becoming another part of our lives I think by Law, they should be told to talk to each other. Or are we gonna get create a huge monopoly? Google vs Bing, Apple vs PC, Gmail vs Hotmail (haha) everything should have competition.
I have never liked putting all of my eggs into one basket. The intercommunication that you describe would entail sharing my identity across several platforms. Why not just call for a universal identity card and have done with it? (no thanks)
+JC John Sese Cuneta I think that by agreeing on standards, users would be able to keep the profile they're most comfortable with, as opposed to having to go to yet Another social network.
Good point +Jason Nichols , that is what's lacking with the appearance of Decentralized/Federated/Open Social Networks, each service is in it's own unfederated (and close if you will), most can not talk to each other, only within their own.
I dont use the Im f(x) enuff on either service now!
Seems like a lot of people don't get the difference between PM/IM and email and notifications and feeds... :-/
social agreement for g+ & twit d& fb & .....
This will definatelly let me stay away from facebook and twitter
I want it all. I want my google+ posts to go out to my blog. I want my google+ comments to replace my blog comments. I want a headline field in google+ that's limited to 140 characters and gets pushed out to twitter with a link to my blog post that came from goolge+. I want my friends circles and family circles to post on the facebook walls of friends and family who won't migrate over. I want my gmail filters to become google+ circles and email verification to change to a google+ dm. I don't want to be sent marketing emails, when I want info from a company I'll go search out their google+ account. I want to hang out with people on skype and huddle with people on IRC. I want foursquare badges to show up on my profile page under a tab that says badges. I want to watch netflix with 10 of my friends at the same time. Then I want to play texas holdem with 10 other friends. I want my sparks to import my google reader feeds and when I share something, I want it to show up in google+ feed, my blog, and my twitter stream.

I also want a google car that drives itself so I can use google+ while I sit in traffic.
So basically +Tom Anderson you mean like telephones and TVs and radios where all you have to do is plug it on and you can access all the info you want? Brilliant!
+Tom Anderson Last night I was saying I want G+ on Tweet deck or --- maybe we can call it Google Periscope or something catchy --- But heck ya... I'd love interoperability.
federated social web for the win. This should be designed from the ground up in any new social network - including G+.

Hoping that when G+ goes live and releases API, that this will start to become possible
Back in the early days of the network before tcp/ip consumed everything the same thing was done - managing email gateways. There was the arpanet, the uucp net, bitnet, and so on and so forth.

It's only a matter of time till this happens. I was gonna write one, it's really not hard, but I expect to see one by the end of the year and it'll save me the trouble.

If not, well...
Are you suggesting we convert everything over to global communism? Good timing, since consumer confidence in the capitalist oligarchy situation is at an all time low. ;P
Wow, you're like the Jimmy Carter of Social Networking...
+Kelly Ellis Why would people on a Social Network not want comments? This isn't a monologue / blog or POLL society... We are a communicating group... which is why we all work together... Would be so weird to cut off comments.
isn't private messages to people on different social networks just called "email" ? Just sayin.
That would really be the true meaning of social networking, but Suckerburg would never agree to that.
Can I send you a message from CompuServe if I'm on Prodigy?
No, I don't want standard email integration into my Social Networking Sites.
Isn't that kind of the heart behind open source? The idea that the individual should be the one who has power regarding what social medias they are on, without limiting their access to people on DIFFERENT social medias they want to connect with is very appealing. I have a friend who was working towards something similar to what you're referring to (he now works for Google) =)...I think I understand the idea at the most basic level (at best), but it makes sense to me as it seems to move along with the "community" concept of social media.

I like it. I like it a lot. =)
+1 in favor of interoperability -- but I'm on mobile so I can't actually +1 it :)
Also, I think what a lot of people are missing here is the developer standpoint... As a developer (by proxy), when you have to interact with three or four separate and distinct APIs to get basically the same information from four different sources, it adds to app development cost and time.

It would increase the number and quality of webapps if the major social networks could just set some basic guidelines.
It's what Diaspora does, I agree it would be awesome!
Social networking would go THROUGH THE ROOF if only these companies would work together.
Google and Twitter might be open to something like that. Facebook... not so much.
What about OpenID binding, and e-mail as a gateway?
+Tom Anderson I don't want to manage multiple social networks individually, I want the freedom to cross-post / manage them from a central app. Am I alone on this ?
Social Networking needs to become standardized like e-mail, not an individual product like Google+ or Facebok.
Well I strongly defend the independence of ever social network.
Different networks mean, different lives . People have actually changed their life going from MySpace to Facebook, and from Facebook to Google+. With them being intrinsically related, that would make all the magic of special bonuses you get in ever social network site spur away.
I agree though about embedding comments, wall posts, videos, pictures, and information.
I believe implementing these too late is what killed myspace.... And the over bloated ui.
You all do understand that Tweetdeck and a couple of other operations ALREADY do this?

Google plus just needs to build an ap or something... But yeah --- Like I said --- We should call it Google Periscope - or something...

Or tweetdeck needs to add Googleplus (there are MANY apps out there that do FB Twitter and combo others together - ALREADY!)
I can see why it'd be wonderful to have, but why they want it to be a private walled garden so they can make money inside their closed area. So... skip using social networks chat systems and everyone use a standard/something else?
I don't want this. If I can message people easily on other social networks, they may expect me to keep up with their Stream/News Feed/etc. on those other networks as well. That works fine if I'm dealing with one other network (i.e. Facebook), but not so well if I'm able to message people on five or six different social networks.

I would much rather have each network enable a "contact me by e-mail" button on the person's profile, like Google+. That should handle all the private one-to-one messaging you need.
That would be great, since I hate twitter and only use it because there's a few specific things I needed it for (following), but rarely post or do much else with it.
It would be pretty great. It would be difficult to come up with a protocol, though. It would have to be... I dunno, a "simple protocol for transporting mail." Hey, that's a good name! SPTM! I wonder if anyone's ever thought of it before.
+Lyrics Express: +Kelly Ellis was referring to the option under a post that allows the creator to disable more comments. Thus, the post basically becomes a poll that people can +1 the comments, or in this case, the options of the particular poll one is taking
Oh god how I wish this would come to pass. To have some kind of open standards (like e-mail or www were) that would allow easy sharing and communication between these services. I just really really REALLY want ONE place I can go to and contact ANYONE or post information to ANYONE without having to think about what network they happen to choose.
My biggest blocker to using Google+ more is that I can't share articles and links easily yet -- so Share via Google+ on sharing widgets. If I could do that, and DM/Message anyone on any network, it'd be awesome!
I vote for "kaleidoscope". Geez, that's a long word. (one hole for many colors = one platform for sending posts/PMs to multiple sites)
+Jim Munro No kidding - Twitsters are basically about PROMOTION and no one really reads anyone's tweets any more - it's just one HUGE Sell-a-thon --- A live Craig's list - if you will.
I see you left myspace out of there. kinda sad. I love google + and still use my twitter alot. I don't have a facebook account but many of my friends and family are on there. But what of myspace? still a few diehards there that refuse to move and are clinging to a hope that myspace will return. I still check it on once in three months and still see the same messages of hope there.
I'm all for interoperability and sharing. But each of these networks has its own environment, and its own flavor. I see myself maintaining them differently. Having chat between clients would be cool, but I kind of hate chat as a practice.
No, I don't want social network private message interoperability: I want Facebook to go away. It has outlived it's usefulness, and is now nothing more than a headache to visit. With Google+ having the ability to share posts by emailing them to people not yet on Google+, I see no need for interoperability, as long as the person you're emailing it to still checks their email inbox.
This can be done with existing standards, XMPP.
basically creating emails out of social network accounts? hmmmm, i dunno
I'd love to see cross platform talk, in all things. Why can't I play the same game on my 360 with a guy playing the same thing on his PS3? It doesn't make any difference how much sense it makes, there will always be a guy in legal/business with the ear of an exec saying " this will cost us money!" or "we'll lose potential revenue!" That's the reality we have right now.
The reason I would not is due to the fact it would be just like email and therefor be pointless I can get email more places than I can get to social networks due to the fact of blocking,
I would much rather see T and F die and G thrive. G already has email access on the profile as long as the individual allows it. It also seems secure as the other person does not you your email unless you reply.
isn't that what email is for?
For that the social network need to have a email address option or something like that.
I use once from G+ to my email address in Facebook, and it work
Facebook and G+ can already have this connection. You can send an email to a person from their G+ profile, and you can send an email to a persons vanity tag to send them a message on Facebook. You can also send a message from facebook to an email account outside facebook.

You couldn't do this for twitter, however, because a DM on twitter is really just a locked tweet, and you can't DM anyone that isn't following you.
I'm thinking that once either party figures out a way to monetize "inter-operability", it'll become inevitable.
is it just me, or is it not possible to click +1s for comments on the Android app, nor Android browsers?
Heh, I actually joined Myspace just to send a message to a band. I never did get around to actually sending that message, though. I think making DMs interoperable like emails would be nice.
IMHO, it would be good to use such a most of my friends are still on facebook and don't really find G+ interesting...i can atleast be touch with my friends from G+....
i think it would be quite simple, Google is ridiculously rich right? so google goes and buysout twitter and facebook. unlikely but plausible
Should we all just hold hands and sing Kumbaya?
+Joshua Tan Yes, but I only have about 5% of the emails of the people I might hope to contact someday. That's a big part of what made Facebook so popular. Its "email" with a "directory" that's based on people you know. +Yonatan Zunger
you pretty much already can via "facebook" email and gmail. why not through the social network part
what if this facebook vs google war is a bunch of balogna, and was created just to stir some form of competition so that more and more curious people will try one or the other just to see how it is? what if both were to work together, hypothetically speaking, and somehow secretly propose a plan to join together once they both have enough users? Do you know how much money both would make? I mean the idea sounds preposterous atm, but what if somebody was like the umbrella organization orchestrating this phony war? It would be like the Wal-Mart of social networking right?
I could see Google and Twitter playing nice. I think Zuck wants to keep FB all to himself and will never play with anyone.
I think its an interesting idea but each of the platforms would have to agree to that interaction and that's not likely to happen. You're looking at a simple application that pulls your contacts from each platform in and allows you to choose to post to all, private message someone, etc. There are IM apps that do this now. 
Try this app it lets you cross post every message of yours on g+ to other platforms and vice versa. Very cool I thought.
You need voting and commenting.... And what happend to MySpace logo?
Unless Facebook, Twitter, and G+ are not social media enemies. Each of them wants their products stand out from the crowd. If and only if each one of them agrees to sit down and talks it out or else interoperability is not even possible.
Well G+ is based around e-mail, and FB provides a pseudo-e-mail system which I believe is reachable from outside.
Twitter is all by itself (don't wanna be) and My___, Friendster, Xanga, hi5 are beyond my knowledge (I haven't used them in years).

Seems like it could work amongst the most popular ones (QQ and Navor both use e-mail I think) albeit with a really old protocol.
Sounds like an interesting idea
It sounds interesting, just not sure if I'd trust the companies to interact properly.
Can't you do this (admittedly on way) by tagging their Facebook email address in you G+ post?
+Tom Anderson You're always on point with this. That's really what's missing. Why do I have to choose just one? I like them all for different reasons. Is this something an app developer needs to do, or is workable between the companies (doubtful).

And so I have highlighted your post and sent it to Google+ Feedback. Good Luck!
Would I like that? +Tom Anderson, I feel like that would be a great idea (if it's technically possible). I think the a client that could do that would be golden. The only two thoughts I have that would make it better would be to allow that client to also combine feeds (while still accounting for multi-network redundant posts), and to put it all in a great mobile-app format.

The greatest possible challenge to that, outside of the technical aspects, would probably be combining all of the networks (or the big 3, as it is right now) into an app with a non-cluttered (dare I say aesthetically pleasing) user interface.
That image reminds of the "coexist" one which combines the symbols of various religions - and the idea reminds me of ICQ. I don't use the social networks primarily to send and receive messages except for people I know only casually or whom I met while travelling. While that's a decent number of folks (I've bounced around Europe a bit over the past few years), it's secondary to posting links and thoughts publicly and being able to comment on similar posts from others, such as this one.
Yeah,,,in a perfect world...but when money is concerned there will always be a fight.
Another great concept +Tom Anderson. I like the creative posts! It would be like xbox live and psn having an arrangement to play games together (Ex cod on the 2 systems in the same match). Great for the community but not great for the business side! They gotta make there money being different enough so that you want both haha. I mean look at how close a computer is to a xbox and we still don't get to play pc to xbox. I talk in video games because its what I know but I hope people see the relationship between social media in this way also.

ps thanks for the links you posted the other day that had the sparks add on so I can see my facebook and twitter right on my google +
i thought myspace was headed in that direction for awhile and then suddenly they stopped when they rolled over to 3.0 and pretty much destroyed the message center there it was very disappointing the changes they made there
+Tom Anderson, I'd love to read all of these comments, but alas, no. :) I'm sure someone has already said what I'm about to say but given I haven't read all 200 comments I'm sure you'll forgive me.

My answer to your question though is no.

ONLY because I do not want to participate in a Google/Facebook handshake. I don't want Facebook anywhere near my Google Account, see. Twitter, I have absolutely no problem with. Hell, I'm all for any and all other interoperability. But my distrust of Facebook is off the charts. So, sadly, it's gotta be a no.
+Tom Anderson Do you even think it should be social network based? I mean we've been using all kinds of different instant messengers for way too long and it's the same kind of deal. There are clients like Pidgin where you can messege gtalk, yahoo, even facebook chat, BUT you have to be on the same system. I want to talk to someone directly without going through all that.
+Julie Webgirl the value of social networks in this is that they are networks clustered around people that know each other. ever try to find someone's Yahoo SN who you used to work with 5 years ago? good luck. but it's pretty easy to find them on Facebook :)
So many previous comments - if this is dup'd sorry! Whilst technically "easy"

It always comes down to market share, I would imagine that it would breed complacency towards adding yet-another-social-network to your list of social networks. If I have access to resources on another network, then why bother? Also-cross network spam, blech - if I find an exploit in signing up to one social site, then I get spam access to all social networks... that worked great for EMAIL... amirite?
This could be a positive and negative. Many people would take advantage of this by using it to spam others. But I'd definitely like to see this happen. This is very interesting.
If you use service in or outbound, you should still need to go through the toll booth. Interoperable yea, let Facebook do it first, then put it in the tweet box. The quiz is the blog integration. If g+ is the blog, tweet, social box of the next election, then the perimeters need to be started. My question is will google make + the source or the destination, as you suggest both direction, I suggest making g+ the origination point, then using it's algorithm to see how much comes full circle, spider web, or goes into the abyss. A simple tracker should do the trick. Facebook has integrated its messaging system within itself, and I use it as an end destination for my tweets, as it's my broadest audience of known reference. If replies are capable from basic email then the other tools will integrate while google maintains it's autonomy.
Just thinking out loud...

I don't care about private messaging so much, but I'm still pretty keen on having key aspects of social networks be federated (posts and comments, photos, etc). There's plenty of people thinking about it (eg OStatus, Salmon for upstream-commenting, etc), but obviously not a lot of incentive for most networks to implement it.
I've wanted this for so long now Tom! I would extend it to comments as well though. You may remember that I was pushing to allow facebook and/or twitter users to comment on myspace blogs and profiles using only their twitter/facebook identities. I want full conversations to be possible across networks!
+Tom Anderson I guess what I meant was why should it be limited to social networks. (it should be noted, I'm not delving into the technical possibilities, just running with the idea) If I'm logged onto g+, I want to be able to send a message/chat with a friend on facebook. Definitely! But I also want to be able to do the same with someone that, I know this is a shocker, but someone who isn't on one of those three social networks. I'm just thinking more universally.
It's coming. Not so long ago you could only call people who used the same carrier, so if you used AT&T, but your friend didn't, you were just SOL, or if you used AOL and your sister used Earthlink. The same change will eventually come to social networking and we'll be able to message any person from any network. ...and no, they won't expect you to be following them on there if their Facebook inbox says that it's from G+ or Twitter. ;-)
No! I don't want that private message cuz we already have email. If it's easy to send message through social network, why don't we email for other message cus that's the function of it. Social network is more to informal talk. Besides, it's a very good idea to break the barrier between social network by supporting of message interchange, but it's juz seems not right.
I'm starting to feel like +Tom Anderson is up to something of his own. Are you going to shock us with your own "newer" "social" network? or are you just trying to get Google to hire you? ;-)
+Ben Kubilus That analogy has been used before, but we're STILL waiting for all IM services (which are much older than SNs) to play nice with each other :)
@Michael Coleman: Trillian ;)
They haven't had to because others are doing it for them (IMs), although some are, indeed, making them on their own. This, however, will require a little more. I promise you, it's coming. I give it 3.5 years - tops.
Tom, I feel like I know you so much better now then I ever did when we were friends on Myspace. 
Great! A must do functionality if social networks want to trully compete with telcos where calls and SMS are reaching the intended party across networks. By truly competing, I mean compete as an industry or as a eco system with another industry. Currently social networks compete between themselves which does not make them much of rivals to traditional services mentioned.
+Tom Anderson Social network interoperability would defeat the purpose of why I came to G+ in the first place.
+Ben Kubilus Trillian isn't an example of SNs playing nice. I'm sure that when the G+ API opens up (if its similar to Twitters API), that somebody like Seesmic will release a client that functions like Trillian but for SNs. However, it is a long ways off before FB/Google/etc. have any sort of native integration.
+Julie Webgirl Ah, I see. Cool idea - send to email and IM and any future communication channel, nice.
Facebiook really has this already opened up if you think about this. Google+ Direct Messaging is handled via email, obvioiusly. However, if you set up your personalized url for Facebook, you get a working "email" address at Twitter, obviously is left out in this, but maybe they could work on that?

However, in contrast to this, I feel this is still a step in a backwards direction towards what you are saying +Tom Anderson. A greater step forward would be Google Talk and Facebook Chat working together to provide private messaging?
+Robbie Coleman You must love DISQUS -- maybe they could take over the world :) I think if the big players could agree on PMs first, they might later be open to what you're suggesting.
+Paul Danger Kile I was having some issues with that extension a few days ago, where it kept kicking me off of Facebook on Google+, are you experiencing those issues?
Being able to message someone if you are not signed up for a specific social network? Ever heard of email?
In a way I think the chat feature on G+ is a little lacking. The only way to add people is via email address when it really shouldn't be that complicated. I think they should bypass Google Talk, turn on chat by default and allow you to be visible only to the circles you choose. However, a side effect of making chat difficult is it pushes people to interact more on the message threads which gives G+ more of a community feel. I do like the idea of being able to communicate between social networks but I don't think it would be a big benefit to them if they shift the resources in that direction. In fact it could be a nightmare getting multiple technologies to interact without breaking often.
Facebook already opened up to e-mail. Is that really that big of a leap?
Anyhoo, it's all theoretical at this point, so I think we'll just have to disagree and see what happens. I can hope, at least. :)
What we would need is an open standard. Of interest here is Diaspora, a distributed/federated social network currently under development (i.e. you can host your own information or host it somewhere you trust, and various Diaspora servers talk with each other):
that's what i've been saying for the past 3 months
U got to integrate them
i was waiting for IBM to do that but it seems xxxxx
Facebook planned something like this, it was / is called social open graph? Not sure about it, but they changed it and "locked" it down
I often wish there was a "tweet this" button next to G+ posts. 
J Young
I have a feeling I know what +Tom Anderson is up to. If you need an interface artist for prototyping loop me in. I like the idea.
Social networks are selfish. Each of them want to dominate. They do not want interoperability. I do not think it will happen.
Tom, your creativity continues to amaze me.
Keep Rocking, my & everybody else's 1st myspace friend :)
You could do that. Pidgin already works with google talks jabber clientand facebook where you can message both people from one client. Google could do something similar with their webclient of google talk. They already have aim integration
I actually think this is an excellent idea. I'm not sure why this has not been accomplished already. Well, that's a lie. The way that social networks have approached things in the past have been sort of a zero-sum game. As such, they would be naturally disinclined to encourage their users to view the online social ecology in a free or open way.

The walled garden approach has been a tool for the social networks to leverage in increasing their own userbase, which they in turn use as leverage for their different monetizing schemes. This is why it is not an easy thing to find the "delete account" option on Facebook, why they have shut down the ability to easily transfer Facebook contacts to G+, and why the cross-posting technologies thus far have been relatively poor.

So what would an open online social ecology look like?

Some things would certainly still remain the same. The sites would still have to compete in integration, allowing third-party sites and applications to tie into their own social network. Sites like Youtube and news sites will still want to accommodate their users with whichever social network they may be choosing to use.

Where things would differ greatly would be in site design and cleanliness, ease of use, and certainly privacy. The users would no longer be tied to a particular service just because that's where their friends are. They could pick their service based on that cleanliness, that ease of use, and how greatly they integrate with other sites.

But how far would the openness need to go? Is it just direct messages or private messages, however you like to refer to it? Does it extend to status updates? If so, how do you handle the inconsistencies between character limits? Those limits could be easily covered for private messages, but not so much for status updates. What about the more proprietary features, like Huddles and Hangouts on G+, or the Skype integration on Facebook? And how about photo sharing?

As I said, I think that this is an excellent idea and it may even be where the future is going. But it does require some way to monetize an open system like this. Since all the big players look to be going towards advertising schemes, would it be possible for them to come together, setup some sort of profit share, and have everything linked into a singular social advertising system? It's a big question and a complex system to wrap one's mind around, but is more than worthy of our attentions.
Interesting idea, but something tells me Facebook is not going to agree to let G+ users message Facebook users, or vice-versa. Facebook has everything to lose by letting messages from a competing social network reach it's users. And likewise, Google has everything to lose by letting Facebook users stay where they are.
haha love how G+ is in the middle lmao
I like things separated.
But G+ needs to separate messages. -- right now it's done through sharing a post privately - but since it's shared with just one person, when that person answer, popularity of that post isn't high enough to be anywhere top of the feed... And finding that post is a chore. The usability of that is just not right. 
I'd buy it. But i'd buy into having one unique personal ID for all my banking, email, phone, social, postal adress, insurace and taxes as well. (I think in norway every native citizen has a unique ID number already.)
Private messages are my least-used feature of social networks.
Prediction: Social network interoperability will become an essential strategy for Facebook when they realize they are quickly losing the battle against Google+ -- when the choice becomes: make friends or die, maybe somebody at Facebook will see the light and give everybody real choice.
No one here has mentioned Linkedin? And I am forced to use a mail account for work that is administrated by the company. I also need test-accounts for development, editorial accounts for publishing,... In Belgium every citizen has a unique ID that can already be used for online taxes etc, but sharing that with Facebook? On the Xbox-PS example, think also interoperability for Zynga players anywhere. As far as monetization goes, less ads/banner visibility would mean more in game advertising. With interoperability, I would stay on the platform with the best transparency, highest security, best user interface/functionality and most importantly best anti-spam/noise features.
I'd like it to go beyond just sending messages - the way I've always imagined (hoped) it would eventually work is that you basically pick a network to host your profile and can circle or "friend" people no matter which network is hosting their profile.

Competition would be based on the features each network offers, not which people they've already locked-in.

The current situation would be like if GMail and Hotmail couldn't send emails to each other.
You're talking about email, you can send a private message from one service to every other.
i think the best definition of social network is all social network sites should be in one network.. no need for competition. tsk tsk
i think there will be spam msgs from facebook :S
+Sunny Jay Sabuero I'm afraid I can't disagree more. No need for competition? Competition is the reason that we have Google+, that new features are added to any social network. Facebook's reactions to Google+ is a prime example of this. Not even a week after Google+ was introduced, Facebook announced some site redesigns, the Skype integration, and group chat.

The only benefit to only having one social network is exactly the problem that already exists. If there were only one social network, then all of your friends would be on that one network.

The whole point of the concept of network interoperability is it removes the need for having all of your friends on one site. Once that need is removed, it allows real competition to take place. Too much of the current competition is purely based on how many of your friends are on one site or another. This has absolutely nothing to do with the quality or features of the social networks in question. It becomes a matter of seniority.

A lot of focus has been placed on how quickly networking sites get to the big numbers of users, with Google+ outpacing all previous networks. But at the same time, every person I have talked to about Google+ that does not want to switch gives the excuse that none of their friends are there.

That is not a refusal to switch based on any good Facebook features. It's just because of seniority. So if they could still openly communicate with their Facebook or Twitter friends from Google+ - not through reposting but with real, native integration and collaboration between them - then you would see far more people switching.

And what would be the only real solution to that? Facebook would have to really innovate and improve itself. That is the purpose of competition. That is the benefit of competition. Without competition, we'd still be rating each other's hotness between one and ten.
+Noushin Laila spam messages from Facebook could potentially be a problem with this sort of situation, but that's just something to consider in the design of this interoperability. I think it would require an understanding of where each message comes from. A message from you on Facebook could easily be shot out to your friends on the other networks. But the Zynga games and applications on Facebook aren't posted by you. They're posted by applications hosted and running on Facebook's platform.

Their system already allows for easily differentiating your own messages from messages spawned by applications. So there's no reason the system shouldn't be able to simply ignore those. Anything that is only relevant on that particular network should only live within that network.
I am totally with you, +Tom Anderson , it's starting to make no sense. Having so many accounts to communicate (most of the time with the same people that you've befriended in other networks). The web shouldn't reflect the ghettisation that is typical of 'real life' and our society. I am no tech-savvy as such, but surely with just a few silly formulas it's something that can be achieved!
I think each social network gives us something different, that's why all of them (almost) work at the best. To mix everything could make them boring, some of them already are... In my humble opinion, of course.
+Joshua Jones now that can be's just stupid Facebook has Zynga and all other stupid apps that flood your feeds, msgs and walls even if you didn't have anything to do with them!!
+Noushin Laila I absolutely agree that those messages are annoying on Facebook. The lack of those messages are currently one of the things that I greatly prefer about Google+. It does only stand to reason that Google+ will eventually have apps of its own, but I believe that Google will have learned that particular lesson from Facebook as well. It will be important to have application-related messages separated from the rest of the Stream.
+martina colonna The whole point of network interoperability will ultimately be to refocus the attention on those things that really differentiate the networks. As it stands, the biggest leverage that any of the social networks can claim is their userbase. By introducing interoperability, the social networks will have to really compete by providing new unique features and improving those things that already make them unique.

If interoperability becomes a reality though, it will be necessary to ensure that when the networks are introducing very similar features, that a standard be decided upon to further improve that integration between them. A prime example of this would be the Skype integration on Facebook and the Hangouts on Google+. I think most people would agree that Hangouts simply work better, and so the best solution would be for Facebook to integrate Hangouts into their system.

By doing so, they would both benefit greatly. Facebook gets a better video chat feature, and they both get the benefit of having more users able to actively use that particular feature, thus making it even more valuable to the end users.
For me, social networks are made for sharing stuff, not for direct communication, we have emails for this.
Facebook DMs are one of the worst feature ever because casual users tend to use them as real emails and even call them "emails"... 
Totally agreewith Sébastien!! where is all this need to be anywhere, anytime, anyhow? we are all becoming sick, and we are all losing the perspective of real life. Def!
It sounds like it could be cool depending on how it's done. Similar to the Twitdroid app for Android devises makes post to twitter and it goes to your Facebook page from that one twitter message.
Haven't read the above comments but since Facebook offers users personalised email addresses, alternatively these go to your inboxes and lets you email via. that.
The risk would be people trying to replace email with G+/FB/etc.
Sadly this will never happen since all of these services want to own their users data.
This is the promised land. Allowing businesses to stay on linkedin/twitter, non content creators to stay on facebook, and g+ would stay as it is. The problem is photo sharing, commenting, and other non message interactions are still locked in. 
The technology already exists.
It's called SMTP for email and XMPP for IM.
Google Chat and Facebook Chat already use XMPP.
Lots of Jabber servers already have transports to all the popular IM networks like Facebook Chat, MSN, ICQ, AOL,...
I have already used this.
I wish there were a variety of open api's and protocols that would allow us to live in whichever ecosystem we chose, but communicate to the alients in the other worlds. I think Google is interestingly placed to be that facilitator...
I think imperialistic networking is the best, no separate, but equal
Inter-operability is a Bill Gates dream. He wanted it between all databases when he first mentioned it YEARS ago. I'm not sure the term exactly applies. If all you want is message cross over like email it's more of a Ray Tomlinson fix. Use @user just like email works now and try to get all the services to assign email addresses. MySpace and Facebook already have. Google+ has the gmail address and Twitter needs something. Now use Gates dream and connect the databases that hold the email addresses, (the contacts). Once you figure out that mix of code you will have the Holy Grail.
It's all about healthy competition, I'll say. Actually, all social networking sites have different styles and functions so it'll be useful to users. I'll say there are "bandwagons" but if tested, there will be a long time use of that certain social networking site.
+Tom Anderson ... doesnt someone have to follow you in order to direct msg on twitter? +1 for the first comment (im on mobile)
For some reason Facebook is making me enter a captcha each time I post to my Business Page, which is counterproductive. I have even had my own posts banned from being posted. There is no way to contact Facebook. Then anyone who creates a group, can add me to a group without my permission. I am not happy with Facebook right now.
Windows Phone has integrated twitter (with Mango update) and facebook. People are working on an app for Google+, although I doubt it would be as integrated because Google would probably try to sue them or something..
I'm amazed how many people are pro-email. I thought all the youngins hardly used it, primarily communicating within these platforms. Everyone assumes email will stand the test of time, mainly because it's been around for a while.

Your proposal, along with FB email in/out functionality, could be an email killer. 
I'd love to see a BBM style integrated messaging system across iOS, Blackberry, Android, Windows, Symbian etc smartphones as a standard product with interoperability. It's high time they implement that first!
I definitely agree with +matthew morin 's post, and chuckled while reading it. It would be great to have all sorts of interoperability between social networks, email systems, and Netflix.
I'm afraid this will never happen, though. Lock-in is more important to "free" services like FB/G+/Twitter than it is for Apple. If you can get your Twitter DMs in G+ or your G+ messages on Facebook, how will the marketing people sell ads based on number of users?
Why not just use email? We're making things complicated for ourselves, trying to make all things work for everybody's preferences when there is already an easy way to communicate online.
I agree with +Kelly Knights . Also, Email allows us to stay connected without having to create profiles and preferences and all that stuff. Its the one form of communication on the internet that doesn't feel like a your entering a cult to send a message.haha
If I want to send a (non-sharing) message across platforms, I usually fire up a multiprotocol chat client like Trillian or imo. I don't necessarily need or want each social networking service to determine which other services I can message, nor do I want to remember which service I sent a message to "Joe" from (logging). So, I would wish each service to publish an API on authentication and messaging, and allow third party apps to do the actual "work". 
All of which can not be dispensed with but the best for me G+
If you want to to this, then there is an entirely different social network. I believe they call it email.
Facebook introduced their Facebook email thing, so technically you could Share a G+ post only to a Facebook email address, effectively becoming a private message to that person on Facebook. They could only reply back via your Gmail account probably though.
Like on Trillian? That would be ingenious.
Maybe just call your friend or hangout for real. 
It would be good to talk to anyone. But it would be bad that they don't use G+

I don't mind, yes or no, it will not make any difference, I will be using just G+ no matter what.

Short history of why I decided that: I've never liked facebook and I barely use Twitter.
+Tom Anderson I don't see how this is much different than using extensions that let you cross-post. In the case of twitter, a post is also a DM. You could argue that social media would benefit from a messaging standard, but I don't think that will happen. I would have doubts about Facebook adopting something like that.

It's a good idea, I just don't see it happening especially in the case of Facebook. It would be nice if at a minimum there was a cross-platform social media standard for simply determining if someone is online and what their status is. The real-time bit is key. I have a project I'm starting to work on that is along these lines but for much higher purpose other than simple messaging or status.
That is a awesome idea. To tell you the truth, I barely log into my facebook account, because I am on Gmail all the time. I rather be on twitter. So, if I could send a msg to the friends that do not use twitter, it would be great, and less time consuming.
Meebo should get on this. It is all coming together, slowly but surely. Competition is good, so third party apps is where it is at.
that would be sick, but social networks getting along with each other isn't that some kind of play on the so called friendliest sites on the interwebz won't play nice with eachother...hahaha
Jim X
Isnt it our data?
So no doubt this will get lost in the flood of comments as often happens.

This is something I've wondered about for the past couple of years, with the talk of "Data portability" and "who owns your data" discussions. It's what the businesses are missing - they are more concerned with holding the keys to their "empire" than they are about long term sustainability.

Really, instead of adopting each others best features, they could be tapping in to each other's APIs and making a cross-social-network that makes them all work better, interact smoother, and let the "social" network be the "internet" network.

I'm sure someone else can put it more eloquently, but I hope these tech businesses - or the next social network - gets it right and makes it more about the users and less about bilking as much money as possible by selling out the users.
So there is still room for a new Social Network which name starts with I or H.
I know that you can reply to Facebook comments through email (preferrably Gmail). It is nice. You dont have to go to Facebook all the time to reply just one comment.
+Tom Anderson I love this idea so much that I started work on it about a month ago! I was thinking of creating two things.

1) An organization that would create/maintain this communication RFC and help direct the interactions (DNSish)
2) A company that creates an interface for this type of communication (similar to how gMail creates an interface for email)
I dont see why not interoperate between all network... just like IM Protocols did-- MSN and Yahoo interoperate together. GTalk and AIM interoperate together. Some people prefer that service over the other. Why not they keep their preferences and should able to communicate between two or more networks? But they still can keep them separate but should be able to read posts or reply comments across two/three networks.

Of course it may not be that easy because of the privacy/security issues... But if they able to work together and figure out, I am sure it would be good, I think.
I don't just want private message interoperability, I want a universal login and a platform from which to read, sort and respond to all my various online communities. In short, I want the Google Reader of Social Media. Seems like, if G+ would allow us to import our contacts from various channels as circles, that would get us 90% of the way there.

For example, if I could import my Digg contacts as a "Digg" circle on G+, then use my Digg circle to read and respond to the content they're posting to Digg, that would be GOLDEN! It would also mean that the lion's share of my social activity would take place on G+ - instead of it all being separated amongst the various platforms and communities.
sad to see social networks are not at all "Social" with each other!
Speaking of email - don't you think that circles should be integrated into gmail? Or groups in gmail should be integrated into G+? I want the two services to be more integrated so that the administration I do in one (putting people into circles) helps me categorize emails better. I keep thinking of G+ as so close to email because it can send email out to those that are not plussers yet, and yet it is so different from email because not every post is read by your audience like an email (in theory) is.
Actually, Facebook already have its own email system, for example: <username> So you could send personal/private messages from any email address to Facebook. But it would be nice to able to send from Google+ personally to Facebook and the vice versa. I know that Twitter doesnt have that yet. If Twitter has an email address, or something, then you can send messages to each other and able to reply to each other.
I must say, this is a pretty interesting way to do a poll (especially because all of the comments below your first two are hidden).

Although I don't see any harm in interoperability, I also question the benefit over this type of communication versus simply using email. I guess one answer could be: people use social networking more than they use email (although I haven't done any research on this, I think it would be reasonable to assume this is true) and therefore are more accessible through social networking than email.

However, I think we might be coming dangerously close to the episode of The Office where Ryan proposed WUPHF: The Office: Ryan and Michael pitch WUPHF
I just noticed that I can't +1 an individual comment from the G+ android app. You can only +1 the post. 
Of course federated social networks are a good thing, just like federated email was a good thing.
Well, I think the beauty of G+ is that you can replace facebook with a suite of great features, the most important of which (for me) is two-way content segmentation. I suppose if making one platform your singular social network, you'd be losing touch with some friends and colleagues so your proposed interoperability would be useful. As it stands today, I would chose G+ as the master platform though...I'm hoping innovation through competition to happen sometimes soon here to make this choice harder.
I am for innovation, in almost every form, unless it hurts our privacy or freedom. It would be cool if the Big 3 cooperated to make it all work interchangeably. Turn it into one great big New Social Media World Order.
I want it, so I don't have to log into my stupid facebook account anymore......unless of course everyone I know would like to make a switch and come over to Google+ where they have more privileges with their sharing capabilities.

Ahh.....what a wonderful world it would be...
You Know, I love G+ ... but it seems to attract technical people. As much as I love being technical, and using technical services ... the value of social networking is dependent on real friends ... and being able to share with them. Some of those friends have struggled to the point to where they are finally comfortable with facebook. I can not see them using G+ without greater hurdles to jump.

Personally ... I would love for the three social services to allow cross communication sharing functionality. Great idea!!!!!
I would like Google to buy out the others and be done with it.
actually, i want all social networks to be completely inter-communicable just like different email services are. if i want to share a picture or status with 2 persons on twitter and 2 on g+, i should be able to do that. imagine if the web wasn't OS and browser agnostic from a user's point of view

sadly, that requires standards and wont happen unless there are at least 3 or 4 equally successful social networks
While it's true that email is pretty much the same thing, the fact is a lot of people don't want to deal with email. it has become a place for the average user to send all the junk mail that comes along with signing up for things online. Granted some of us are using seperate accounts for that purpose, most people just use there social network to communicate. It just seems like reasonable evolution to blur the lines between email and social. I for one prefer getting private messages in facebook or g+.
I think it's a good idea..
First off +Tom Anderson , I love the vote at the beginning of the post. There is no need for a separate facebook questions application. Second, I would love to communicate (and even follow) twitter through my G+. Without circles, twitter is too noisy. There are techsperts mixed in with political analysts mixed in with football players ... and then my friends are in there too! I know you can sort things out with tweetdeck, but G+ makes things so much cleaner!
Corky K
Don't we call this capability.... email... ?
I would LOVE this!!!

Ok, none of the big Social Networks want to talk to each other.

So what?

Let Google be the first to "offer" it (an olive branch or a smart business proposition if you like...) and I am sure that a few smaller services will take the plunge (and actually secure their survival in the long run...).

Folks will like this, people will demand it and eventually even FB and Twitter will have to bend to the will of their patrons.

I hope ; )
Congratulations: you just described email.
...I kinda already have private message inter-operations with email; isn't email considered a social networking tool?
What about a program like TweetDeck, with support for Google Plus as well as Facebook and Twitter?
it would be nice to see even some inter-communication between social networking.
It won't happen. Facebook would never allow anyone in.
They aren't going to learn the lessons that your former company did until its too late Tom. Facebook are going to make Microsoft and Apple look co-operative.
There were several open social network startups that looked promising. It would make social networking like email.
+Tom Anderson Check out its a start up that is trying to do a similar thing through AIM, Facebook Chat, Google Chat, Ichat and even text messages a friend of mine +Chad Stark is the founder and CEO
Being someone else will eventually wear you out, your better off being yourself and let them understand you for who you really are.
One of the things I hated about Facebook was it's separate "email" system. To me it was one more place to check for messages. I would have preferred to use Gmail for all my communications.

I had friends who loved it though. They complained about the spam in traditional email and used FB for everything.
I don't want that. I kind of think of G+ as a more mature version of Facebook, and I don't want any of the annoying chatter that can happen on Facebook wasting my space here on G+.
Interesting idea. Makes choice of social network remarkably analogous to choice of phone network. You can still communicate with people using the others, but don't have access to the features (unless you get a phone/account on said other network)
+Tom Anderson have you got a WP7 ? I really enjoy how everything is together in Mango. Why have barriers stopping people from contacting you from diffrent accounts when you can check a feed with all your OWN decided important lifelines dare i say, i havn't added them all so i control my own sources of information as much as i can, I can't just close my Linkedin because i have Twitter, or Facebook because of G+. It's not that simple sadly. Some people plainly won't leave Facebook and i'm not going to cut anyone off by closing accounts for another social network as that defies the whole idea.
Yea, that's called SCORM: Sharable Content Object Reference Model rooted in Advanced Distributed Learning systems under the Secretary of Defense since 1996' Get on board people . . . It's not just for the military anymore ^_^
Adam L
You'd have to either have shared friends lists between all platforms, which would have privacy nuts up in arms, as well as open up for more spam as the spammier networks can now contact you on all other services, or each platform would have to assign a unique address for each user, which brings us right to what email is now, and I'd rather not have new email address for every service that I use...
+Tom Anderson I wanted to + you in my previous comment, but the feature on their android app still fails to show all of my circled people. And yes, I do really like DISQUS and even use them for my wordpress blog at: ;-}
+matt peterson the beauty of + is that you can very quickly send a private message to the recipient without having to leave to a separate service...simply add a + or @ to their name and voila....a private message that is not publicly posted on someone's wall! Hell even my gmail usage has been reduced at this point!
It would be great to share a link to a G+ post outside of G+ (of course, the person would need permissions and access to G+ to view it)...I think this would generate a lot more traffic/interest in G+.

I have a lot of friends/activity on FB, so I find myself wanting to post on both...However, I'm partial to G+, and want to get rid of FB altogether, but find that I don't have enough traffic on my G+ to get rid of FB...
There is, its called use Digsby, or a multi-platform messenger, On digsby i can us a custom html code to make a messager window on a website, talk on fb chat, google chat, aim, msn live, yahoo, etc
The ability to build your own apps to do such things is more appealing to me than to have the capability built into each social network. The network owners need to get over this overriding desire for it's users to forever stay on their site. The first truly open social network will dominate because innovation by the masses always surpasses innovation in a closed box.

Create a wrapper API to what's already available from each service and you could probably do a lot of what you suggest already. If you are using a 3rd party service (of which there are many) to compose a DM to twitter, that service could just as easily send the message to anywhere that provides a means to deliver a message.

Going further it would be nice to drop a Google Hangout onto a page at my website. Google is still the provider, Google still gets to serve an ad but I get to maintain my website's brand and also serve my own ad on my own page.

I imagine it would be damn complex, but hey.
i really like this idea... make google plus an "invite only" social network :} i liked it way better when facebook was like. therefore it keeps spam to a minimal.
It might help with those holdouts.

I had friends who refused to leave myspace for quite some time after it became a ghost town, and my G+ circles are only the uber-geeks who were already complaining about FaceBook daily.

I think at least adding contact imports would be nice. Let me keep a watch list on my FB "friends" so I can circle them when they finally join the party here.
I really like the post of Tom Anderson! Agreed!
+Tom Anderson It would be pretty cool to have the ability for each server to in some way use a protocol for transmitting data between one another without sacrificing it's security. However, I would only want the ability to do this if I could choose whether or not to allow specific networks to have this sort of connection in the same way Facebook Apps and Twitter Apps ask if you would like to allow the connection between them. Seems like this is definitely possible considering twitter just added the ability to post photos through photobucket, and the ability to log into most websites with your facebook or twitter UID. How do you feel about this type of interconnectivity??
Yes, I want social network private message interoperability
Alex B.
this is awesome, how the fk didnt i think of it.
I agree with you Tom, I want to know the code for google+ so I can start using it on other social media, and created web pages, etc...
don't yall know your boss is the same boss as the other bosses?
Wouldn't it be awesome if you could actually DM from Twitter to Twitter? Or, still within Twitter, reply back to DMs received from non-twitter-experts? Until that is solved, I doubt that talks about further integration with other services are worth one's while. ^_^
i think it would be awesome!!!! As of right now, I am on Twitter, Facebook, and now as of today, I am here on G+. I think it would be a great idea Tom to be able to send messages from one service to another. Maybe even import contacts too. Just sayin, instead of me having to have all three of these services, it would be nice to narrow it down to one. I think so far, I would have to stick with G+ for the fact that they do have a video chat going on. That is my opinion!
Well Tom, you ARE the one with the money and experience. Why not create something to link them up? I'm sure you can.
I think people are naturally tribal. Religion and politics are good examples of how people attach to an idea and hold on to a me vs. them mentality. I think it expresses itself in many area's of our lives. People naturally want to feel like they are making the best choice or are on the best side. It is of course, the ego... the root of everything in our world.
Hey you!
It's not a fight.... It's a MASSACRE!
we need this, just like email we need an easy way to connect them all together
great idea, but not so good for business. It would totally destroy the marketability of either companies involved. Great for the consumer, bad for businesses. That's just like Walmart and K-Mart under the same roof. Someones going to lose out.
They each run proprietary databases. Did Sun Microsystems, Microsoft, and Apple work together in San Jose?  Does the CIA,FBI,DHS work together here?
You have a point Dan. DHS def works with CIA, FBI, and other agencies. That's how they get all of our info by luring us in with free stuff in exchange for our info and we sign the dotted line every time. Nothing in life is FREE folks. THere's some kind of gimmick. Note to everyone with Obama phones out there. This is a legal way to track you calls and messages and even location. Be aware!
Add a comment...