How about this… today, people remember AOL as a walled garden that restricted people’s ability to access the open web. When I worked there, I saw it as a company that provided rich content at a time when people didn’t know much about the web and they would have been put off by the lack of content out there. But, you could also click the browser icon should you wish to check out the wild west. So the WWW wasn’t restricted at all.

What if FB provided that same experience where access to the open web was also possible on top of their “rich experience” within their walled garden.

Why hasn’t someone come out to defend the lack of full access rather than question the resistance against limited access? Why not provide open access? I don’t believe it’s related to data/access costs.