The social networking world has been all a buzz. First MySpace announced their Data Portability to allow some sites access to MySpace user information. Then Facebook releases Connect to share its users. The Google quickly unleashed Friend Connect to try to share everything. Facebook was having none of this. They blocked Google’s Friend Connect access in the name of privacy.

And let the Info Wars begin. The winner will own your data and you’ll be lucky if you have a choice.

Maybe I’m hyping this a little much, but the truth is user information is to the internet what oil is to the Middle East. Advertising has its place, but slowly websites, especially social networking sites, are learning their user information is the most valuable resource.

That’s why Facebook wants to block Google. Whoever controls the user info will control the internet.

Google has shown an appreciation for monetizing user information, from tracking and letting you control your search history, providing free 411 telephone calls to help study voice recognition, and providing dozens of free services without advertising (Docs, Notebook, Reader, etc.) all to build a destination where users tell Google everything (Google isn’t reading your documents, but they’re probably looking at how much you write).

Facebook hasn’t figured out the money yet, but it seems to know where the potential is. But Facebook’s privacy argument is obviously aimed to deprive Google of valuable information. Facebook wants to trust itself more to share your data than Google. Of course, several sites have already penetrated Facebook’s high walled gardens, as TechCrunch points out.

Facebook’s position is one of arrogance rather than rationality. Facebook is assuming its users are really locked into Facebook and as a result won’t let their data leave. Why should they? All the data’s already there. Google, of course, is also arrogant, but they get to play the underdog in this space since Facebook still the hot thing, but numbers are showing Facebook’s time might be up.

It’s for that reason Facebook needs to be open and inviting rather than closed and hostile. There’s always the risk users will find something new and exciting somewhere else; that’s the risk of the web - it makes competition easy forcing websites to keep innovating to keep user interest. Locking in users limits the value of the Facebook account, especially if several niche social sites pop up sharing the same data from Friend Connect. Facebook gets left out of the loop. TechCrunch also points out Facebook’s lucky its “users don’t yet know they’re angry.”

Google, Facebook, and MySpace’s only-just-starting fight over your data is ignoring the question of who owns all this data. My hope with initiatives like OpenSocial and OpenID will push for users to actually own their data, emphasizing open standards to maintain your info, from friends lists to interests. I’m trying to manage new Twitter, FriendFeed, and Linkedin accounts but have to find all my friends all over again. I dream of a future where I control my data - easy data portability connecting my friends, so I don’t have to do this work all over again. Facebook can relax - I want to maintain all four accounts, but in the current walled garden world, it’s too time consuming. While that keeps me comfortable on Facebook for the present, it frustrates me and encourages me to look for less frustrating alternatives. Once that appears, I’ll be happy to leave Facebook. And that’s what Facebook should be concerned about.