Just read this article (sent by Detavio) that suggests Instagram's decision to launch public profile pages on the web has ruined the community that makes it so great (the author actually blames Facebook, but I find it hard to believe public profiles weren't already underway before the Facebook acquisition). What do you think - is Instagram better or worse than it was as a mobile-only social network?

At first I was going to dismiss the conjecture because a) I think the profile pages are beautifully done for a V.1, b) many Instagram photos are already shared publicly to Twitter & Facebook anyway and c) I always thought it was an inevitability. But thinking about it more, I recognize that in the past I have taken liberties with Instagram that I would not have taken on Facebook or any other more public place. Even as it passed 100 Million users Instagram still felt more intimate than Facebook because it was less accessible. Now that all those default-public photos are completely exposed on the web, maybe Instagram is shedding its correlation to the intimate Path and accepting its place as an image-based Twitter.

the author seems cranky about nothing. hes complaining about the statue of the union as much as he is the decision to make your photos public on a larger screen. I don't mind the decision, b/c it was public anyway, but haven't noticed or thought about it much as a casual instagram users. I only take photos that I want public. I'd make public pages in exchange for that $$$ but personally I could easily do without em as I don't use them now.

I bet Instagram had way more users asking for a web interface than they'll ever have complaining about the introduction of a web interface. Did I enjoy it when it was a super secret internet hide out? Sure! But it looks like the natural progression of a successful social network to me. Instagram still has a narrow enough focus (only photos, read, but no write api) to be interesting & fun to me.

I feel the same way that it was like a cool hideout, I actually deleted a bunch of pics after profiles happened. I also wonder if the general public is aware of this? I still follow many people who post super personal things not noticing they are easily linkable on the internet.

I agree that much of the public probably doesn't know they have a profile page. And I do think having a default public page begs the need for photo-specific privacy options (public, for your friends, for yourself).

Maybe a side-discussion: Instagram's biggest photo day ever was Thanksgiving - and most of those photos were probably personal and non-artistic. what does that say about where the community is headed?

So @bcantrell, what's the next super secret internet hide out we can all enjoy in peace?

I don't know, let's build it!

Shouldn't we give up on the idea of a free place super secret internet hangout? They have to monetize their product and their product is us. I just think they should keep it as simple as possible. All pictures are shared publicly unless you have a private account. It's always been that way they are just giving us more ways to engage with our photos and monetize off of us. If they add value to me (which I think public profiles do) then I'm fine if they want to make some money off of it.

This is my old man on the internet coming out but I remember the exact same sentiments expressed when Google made the usenet archives available to be searched. The content was always public and findable, there was just a barrier to access (namely you had to know Usenet).

Everyone whines when their secret underground hotspot is featured on a travel show and Bob and Mary from Peoria show up. Some people will move on to the next thing, others will hang out in the corner booth and moan, and the vast majority won't care and continue doing the exact same thing they were doing before.