The Open, Social Web (N2Y4)

The open, Chris Messina social web N2Y4 May 27, 2009 San Jose, California

What is the social web?

Let’s begin with Web 2.0

“Web 2.0 is the network as platform, spanning all connected devices; Web 2.0 applications are those that make the most of the intrinsic advantages of that platform: delivering software as a continually-updated service that gets better the more people use it, consuming and remixing data from multiple sources, including individual users, while providing their own data and services in a form that allows remixing by others, creating network effects through an “architecture of participation,” and going beyond the page metaphor of Web 1.0 to deliver rich user experiences.” — Tim O’Reilly, Web 2.0: Compact Definition? Photo credit: Adam Tinworth “Web 2.0 is the network as platform, spanning all connected devices; Web 2.0 applications are those that make the most of the intrinsic advantages of that platform: delivering software as a continually-updated service that gets better the more people use it, consuming and remixing data from multiple sources, including individual users, while providing their own data and services in a form that allows remixing by others, creating network effects through an “architecture of participation,” and going beyond the page metaphor of Web 1.0 to deliver rich user experiences.”

“Web 2.0 is the business revolution in the computer industry caused by the move to the internet as platform, and an attempt to understand the rules for success on that new platform. Chief among those rules is this: Build applications that harness network effects to get better the more people use them. (This is what I’ve elsewhere called ‘harnessing collective intelligence.’)” — Tim O’Reilly Photo credit: Adam Tinworth Web 2.0 is the business revolution in the computer industry caused by the move to the internet as platform, and an attempt to understand the rules for success on that new platform. Chief among those rules is this: Build applications that harness network effects to get better the more people use them. (This is what I’ve elsewhere called “harnessing collective intelligence.”)

now, some people want to suggest that Web 3.0 is coming. it’s like the modern version of the apocalypse: everyone wants to be the ﬁrst to predict its arrival. just yesterday, Walt Mossberg and Kara Swisher became the latest pundits to suggest that, no, really, Web 3.0 is upon us (CLICK)

“So what’s the seminal development that’s ushering in the era of Web 3.0? It’s the real arrival, after years of false predictions, of the thin client, running clean, simple software, against cloud-based data and services. The poster children for this new era have been the Apple iPhone and iPod Touch, which have sold 37 million units in less than two years and attracted 35,000 apps and one billion app downloads in just nine months.” — Walt Mossberg and Kara Swisher, Welcome to Web 3.0 writing that the real arrival, after years of false predictions, of the thin client, running clean, simple software, against cloud-based data and services is Web 3.0. And that the iPhone and iPod Touch are its horsemen. (CLICK)

i Bullsh.t. Well, I call bullshit.

“After all, Web 2.0 was not a new version of the web, but a name that tried to capture what distinguished the companies that survived the dotcom bust from those that survived, and point the way forward for new companies entering the market.” — Tim O’Reilly, responding to Mossberg and Swisher Photo credit: Adam Tinworth Web 2.0 isn’t a version number. Instead, it was a narrative aimed at the industry to explain to them the rise of the age of cloud computing.

Five rules • The perpetual beta becomes a process for engaging customers. • Share and share-alike data, reusing others’ and providing APIs to your own. • Ignore the distinction between client and server. • On the net, open APIs and standard protocols win. • Lock-in comes from data accrual, owning a namespace or non-standard formats. In fact, if you go back and look at what he said, he laid out ﬁve rules that accompanied his deﬁnition. The perpetual beta becomes a process for engaging customers. Share and share-alike data, reusing others’ and providing APIs to your own. Ignore the distinction between client and server. On the net, open APIs and standard protocols win. Lock-in comes from data accrual, owning a namespace or non-standard formats. given this, it’s clear that Mossberg and Swisher didn’t do their homework because we’re not done building Web 2.0 yet!

Open source and so if we consider the last 10 years of open source, it’s really been about a slow, grudging migration from a hardware-based perspective to the cloud.

most people know of open source because of the public battle between mozilla’s ﬁrefox and internet explorer. sure, maybe some people have heard of linux, but few people actually use it in day-to-day computing.

but there has also been something of a religious fervor in the open source community, rejecting all that which is not 100% open and free. however, gone is the time when open source software ALONE is enough to have freedom. richard stallman has been a staunch advocate of open source, outlining the contours of ONE vision of “open”, but I believe that the in the era of the social web, we need a new narrative...

“The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.” —Thomas Jefferson we can learn from stallman’s example, AND we must not forget that the “the price of freedom is eternal vigilance”.

i Bullsh.t. and so when we see things like this, where camel is using the open brand to advertise their cigarettes, we must call them out. this is not “open” as we think of it. this is an example of what i call “open washing”. it’s a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

What does open really mean? but this raises the question of what open really means. is it just a catch all phrase that’s simply less nerdy than “web 2.0”? given the changes going on, we must deﬁne what open really means in this new era.

Competition & freedom of choice for me, openness is about competition and freedom of choice

Social networks & monopolies • data portability lowering switching costs • multi-homing increasing reliability • roaming incurring off-network costs • disaggregation service substitutability Bertil Hatt in Paris, working on his Ph D in economics... talked to me about social network monopolies. gave some good ways to think about this. data portabilility -> lowering switching costs. multi-homing -> increasing reliability of service by parallelizing access roaming -> the ability to access your service from someone else’s network disaggregation -> the ability to substitute services

Photo by Mary Beth Griffo Rigby phone number portability — concept of being able to switch providers without incurring a switching fee. we don’t have the concept of social network switching. furthermore, when the industry was left to its own means, it didn’t make this possible for free... and so governments had to step in a regulate the industry to ensure this kind of freedom.

multi-homing... parallelizing our networks to improve robustness. this is a service called ping.fm — it lets you publish to many networks all at once making sure that people have access to your data. it might not be ideal, but it’s a good example of parallelizing access.

here’s an example of roaming. at&t sent me a text message telling me that they wanted to charge me $20 a megabyte to access their service because i was on someone else’s network. it’s expensive; carriers don’t like it. they don’t want to deal with someone else’s customers. and so this is one of OpenID’s challenges: we have lots of providers, but few relying parties.

Picnik disaggregation: the ability to choose the service that I want to use without having to import EVERYTHING AND without having to even create an account. this is in contrast, for example, to being forced to use a default service, like Photos on Facebook or how Apple refuses to let apps that compete with their own apps enter the AppStore.

Cloud computing what does open mean in the era of cloud computing? (CLICK)

c: icon by Seedling Design we’re going from owning our own hard drives with our data... (CLICK)

http:// icon by Seedling Design to relying on someone else to host our data for us. having the ability to move data from place to another — while retaining metadata will be essential.

http:// icons by Seedling Design and Fast Icon you’ve got your youtube, facebook, ﬂickr... no one will need to do backups anymore, but this will have a profound impact on how you design services.

http:// icons by Seedling Design, etc hybrid applications like this essentially require a connection to function.

and we’re even seeing this creep into desktop applications like Keynote where there is now a Share menu... that I imagine will slowly replace the File menu (like the fax machine).

Open cloud computing? and so the question here is: can we prevent cloud monopolies by applying the principles of open source?

Social web where this all will make the most difference is in the social web. it’s one thing if you want to move your application from one company’s cloud instance to another. what happens when you want to move your identity and friends?

WWW the reality is, the web was built for sharing documents... (CLICK)

WWW not for connecting people — at least like people connect today.

? ? ? ? WWW ? ? ? ? not for connecting people — at least like people connect today.

I think we can start to see where this is going — in a very basic way — by studying FriendFeed. Already they’re doing a lot of work to minimize the emphasis on services and are instead focused on two things: People and what they’re sharing. (next: feed formats)

But they’re ending up spending all kinds of resources just getting the basics working, since our feed formats like ATOM and RSS were designed with blog posts in mind, but people are doing a lot more on the web today, beyond blogging.

Diso this is really the premise behind the Diso Project: to make it make it easier to build social experiences on the web by deriving standards and formats from popular trends.

Diso Components* *subject to change (DON’T CLICK) identity & proﬁle discovery & access control contacts & friends activity streams messaging groupings & shared spaces

Diso Components* 1. identity & profile 2. discovery & access control 3. contacts & friends 4. activity streams 5. messaging 6. groupings & shared spaces *subject to change (DON’T CLICK) identity & proﬁle discovery & access control contacts & friends activity streams messaging groupings & shared spaces

A standard in practice is worth more than a standard in theory but adoption of these technologies is key.

Ubiquity of a standard allows an industry to move the level of competition to a new layer Photo by grendelkhan why take the approach of creating standards when we could instead be building sweet apps? because we don’t want to compete on the level of social apps that exist today. we want to move up to a higher level of competition by commoditizing aspects of the social web that are hard today, but are also basic or fundamental.

creating new opportunities for innovation on user experience Photo by Chris Metcalf in so doing, we create new opportunities to compete on the basis of offering better service and experience without relying on user lock-in.

Identity but all of this is predicated on developing a means for estabishing durable, cross-site identity on the web.

the basic atomic unity of society is the individual. which is critical when it comes to the designing for the social web

“Social” is the state of living as a “society” we’re really talking about society — the collection of norms, habits and behaviors that deﬁne what a fairly large collection of people are all about.

and since change happens at the level of the individual a building block technology like openid is critical. the architecture of the social web must have the individual as its cornerstone.

Real identity it’s interesting to look at a current trend people are starting to use their real identity online.

Facebook recommendations No where is this more obvious than on Facebook. Here is a list of three people that Facebook has recommended to me. The second one was suggested because we went to the same high school. Kind of a stretch, right? I mean, what is that in the photo? A pillow? I have no idea WHO SHE IS

So let’s say I actually dive in and ask Facebook to list ALL the people it thinks I might know... this is where it gets interesting. (click) Now, here I see someone I know. I’ve met Eric in person; I could probably add him as a friend... but is it really him? It’s not like I have some shared secret with him to verify that this is actually an online representation of his...

so I decide to do a search — and lo, out of 444 results, he comes up ﬁrst. Sure, but this is the same guy from the previous page. (click) If we have 63 mutual friends, well, that’s starting make this more plausible...

Ok, now I’m feeling pretty conﬁdent. In lieu of a shared secret between us, a familiar social graph is a reasonable substitute. Get that: by revealing one’s social connections I get closer to someone’s real identity.

your social graph is essentially a kind of identity ﬁngerprint for people who know you and know who you know. but this is really only possible because my mutual friends shared their identities ﬁrst.

@factoryjoe so some of you might know that I use “factoryjoe” as my username on the web. But, no one in the real world has any frigging clue who “factoryjoe” is, especially without context. And so people have come up to me and called me “Joe” without even thinking about it. This online identity was becoming better known than me!

@factoryjoe @chrismessina So I killed it. At least on Twitter. And now I’m just @chrismessina. Like I was before, and always have been. But I’ve seen other people do the same thing since I made this change. And it looks like it’s only becoming more common.

Let’s take a look at another example. Compare the chat list on the left with the one on the right. With AIM, you’ve got all these foreign-looking usernames... whereas on the right you have real names. CLICK - focus on pirillo [talk about Facebook’s early decision to swear off usernames]

“l0ckergn0me” vs. Chris Pirillo understand that this DESIGN decision was as important as Flickr’s public-by-default decision. Heck, I don’t even know what a “locker gnome” is. But here’s the change.

Eventbox and you can see this in software like eventbox

Eventbox why does this option even exist? This to me proves that we are in a transitional period, from assumed aliases to one of real, public, transparent identities.

even places like MySpace, where pseudonymity reigns is moving in this direction...

morality, creativity, spontaneity, problem solving, lack of prejudice, Self-actualization acceptance of facts self-esteem, confidence, achievement, respect of others, Esteem respect by others friendship, family, sexual intimacy Love/belonging security of: body, employment, resources, Safety morality, the family, health, property breathing, food, water, sex, sleep, homeostasis, excretion Physiological Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs now, I think this what this means is that we’re seeing a shift to using real identity because the social web is becoming a increasingly important piece of many people “self-actualization”. self-actualization is from mazlow’s hierarchy of needs and is at the top of the pyramid here.

• facebook.com/chrismessina • friendfeed.com/chrismessina • google.com/proﬁles/chrismessina • twitter.com/chrismessina You can see this people try to “claim” their identity across the web (CLICK)

• facebook.com/chrismessina • friendfeed.com/chrismessina • google.com/proﬁles/chrismessina • twitter.com/chrismessina and course, companies are jumping over each other to be namespace for people on the web.

Five rules • The perpetual beta becomes a process for engaging customers. • Share and share-alike data, reusing others’ and providing APIs to your own. • Ignore the distinction between client and server. • On the net, open APIs and standard protocols win. • Lock-in comes from data accrual, owning a namespace or non-standard formats. remember Tim O’Reilly’s rules? Yeah, this one.

Five rules • The perpetual beta becomes a process for engaging customers. • Share and share-alike data, reusing others’ and providing APIs to your own. • Ignore the distinction between client and server. • On the net, open APIs and standard protocols win. • Lock-in comes from data accrual, owning a namespace or non-standard formats. remember Tim O’Reilly’s rules? Yeah, this one. let’s look at what these namespaces look like on the web today.

this is how facebook presents me to the world. note that i can’t change this. sure i can change my photo... but i can’t alter what’s presented here. this is all left up to facebook’s discretion.

friendfeed present an activity-centric view of me. i can’t change how this looks, but at least it represents parts of what i’m actually doing

Google now lets me have quite a bit of control over my proﬁle, but it makes me look like a google employee. oh, and everyone looks the same.

Meanwhile, Twitter at least lets me customize the colors and background image... but otherwise, that’s about it. and without context, it can be a bit jarring.

So what if I wanted to just do something like this? I’m not saying this is the best webpage evar, but the point is, when I host my own identity, it’s up to ME how I present my identity to the world. And I believe that it’s at the level of the individual that all change and innovation begins and so the web’s architecture should reﬂect that.

and so this is why i use factoryjoe.com as my OpenID. It means that I, as an individual, am in charge of, and own my own identity. and what we need to develop, over time, is a way for people who own their own identities — regardless of whether they delegate to a service or not — to connect to the people and services that matter to them. (next: asshole)

* now, do you know what this is? it’s the asshole of the universe.

now, do you know what this is? it’s the asshole of the universe.

and like assholes, it seems that everyone wants to have a connect API these days.

* Connect and like assholes, it seems that everyone wants to have a connect API these days.

Photo by Timothy Vogel the result is what we call the “OpenID NASCAR” where everyone wants their brand shown on login forms.... (CLICK)

...like this.

when people really just want this. their goal is to get access to their account To be fair, this is merely an uncomfortable transitional step along a much longer path towards open identity on the web. it is a means to an end, but not the end that we seek.

Eventually, I think people will know their OpenID, just like their address, phone number, screennames, email, and so on... until we get to their OpenID. And just to be clear, an OpenID shouldn’t have to look like a URL. We’re working to ﬁx that actually. But the primary thing you should take away from this point is that we’re creating a standard to make it possible to have durable, lasting identity on the web.

• What’s your address? Eventually, I think people will know their OpenID, just like their address, phone number, screennames, email, and so on... until we get to their OpenID. And just to be clear, an OpenID shouldn’t have to look like a URL. We’re working to ﬁx that actually. But the primary thing you should take away from this point is that we’re creating a standard to make it possible to have durable, lasting identity on the web.

• What’s your address? • What’s your phone number? Eventually, I think people will know their OpenID, just like their address, phone number, screennames, email, and so on... until we get to their OpenID. And just to be clear, an OpenID shouldn’t have to look like a URL. We’re working to ﬁx that actually. But the primary thing you should take away from this point is that we’re creating a standard to make it possible to have durable, lasting identity on the web.

• What’s your address? • What’s your phone number? • What’s your AOL screenname? Eventually, I think people will know their OpenID, just like their address, phone number, screennames, email, and so on... until we get to their OpenID. And just to be clear, an OpenID shouldn’t have to look like a URL. We’re working to ﬁx that actually. But the primary thing you should take away from this point is that we’re creating a standard to make it possible to have durable, lasting identity on the web.

• What’s your address? • What’s your phone number? • What’s your AOL screenname? • What’s your email address? Eventually, I think people will know their OpenID, just like their address, phone number, screennames, email, and so on... until we get to their OpenID. And just to be clear, an OpenID shouldn’t have to look like a URL. We’re working to ﬁx that actually. But the primary thing you should take away from this point is that we’re creating a standard to make it possible to have durable, lasting identity on the web.

• What’s your address? • What’s your phone number? • What’s your AOL screenname? • What’s your email address? • What’s your MySpace? Eventually, I think people will know their OpenID, just like their address, phone number, screennames, email, and so on... until we get to their OpenID. And just to be clear, an OpenID shouldn’t have to look like a URL. We’re working to ﬁx that actually. But the primary thing you should take away from this point is that we’re creating a standard to make it possible to have durable, lasting identity on the web.

• What’s your address? • What’s your phone number? • What’s your AOL screenname? • What’s your email address? • What’s your MySpace? • Twitter? Eventually, I think people will know their OpenID, just like their address, phone number, screennames, email, and so on... until we get to their OpenID. And just to be clear, an OpenID shouldn’t have to look like a URL. We’re working to ﬁx that actually. But the primary thing you should take away from this point is that we’re creating a standard to make it possible to have durable, lasting identity on the web.

• What’s your address? • What’s your phone number? • What’s your AOL screenname? • What’s your email address? • What’s your MySpace? • Twitter? • Are you on Facebook? Eventually, I think people will know their OpenID, just like their address, phone number, screennames, email, and so on... until we get to their OpenID. And just to be clear, an OpenID shouldn’t have to look like a URL. We’re working to ﬁx that actually. But the primary thing you should take away from this point is that we’re creating a standard to make it possible to have durable, lasting identity on the web.

• What’s your address? • What’s your phone number? • What’s your AOL screenname? • What’s your email address? • What’s your MySpace? • Twitter? • Are you on Facebook? • What’s your OpenID? Eventually, I think people will know their OpenID, just like their address, phone number, screennames, email, and so on... until we get to their OpenID. And just to be clear, an OpenID shouldn’t have to look like a URL. We’re working to ﬁx that actually. But the primary thing you should take away from this point is that we’re creating a standard to make it possible to have durable, lasting identity on the web.

Why standards?

The open, social web will be built on standards that are free to implement and that encourage competition at the layer of service and user experience.

so, one example of this is email standards like SMTP and IMAP. These protocols are dinosaurs... (CLICK)

but have allowed services like Gmail to be started relatively recently and widespread adoption by creating the incentive to innovate on top of a basic set of features.

where they’ve created this amazing experience in the iphone version of Gmail. Largely because of standards.

similarly, Twitter has grown in large part because of its use of SMS, a standard feature of phones that has been around for ages — that few had previously taken advantage of. Ironically, you could argue that RSS on Blogger was what lead Ev Williams to his original success. So, he just seems to be at the right moment leveraging standards as they become ubiquitous in the marketplace.

 of course, one of the best examples of my point is Apple.

vCalendar and indeed, one of the best examples of the power of standards to change an industry is the iphone. it is the benefactor of years of open standards development. so clearly the open, social web will have an impact on mobile development.

IEEE 802.11 (WiFi) vCalendar International Mobile Telecommunications-2000 (IMT-2000) Bluetooth Short Message Service (SMS) JPEG MPEG-4 Part 14, ISO/IEC 14496-14:2003 (MP4) MPEG-1 Audio Layer 3 (MP3) SQLite, TXT vCard, etc HTTP, CSS, JS, etc SMTP, IMAP, POP3 and indeed, one of the best examples of the power of standards to change an industry is the iphone. it is the benefactor of years of open standards development. so clearly the open, social web will have an impact on mobile development.

Just consider that WebKit is the rendering engine that powers the Safari browser. this is an open source project

webkit is also the rendering engine that powers Google’s Chromium/Chrome open source browser project.

the Palm Pre’s applications are also all webkit apps. see how important standards are here?

So, just as WebKit is becoming the new operating level, the underpinings of Mac OS X itself is UNIX, which is open source. Apple leverages open source and community-based peer-production and ostensibly sells an experience on top of it. The value is not in the software, per se, but in the designed experience and vision carried through Apple products. And so, we need to endeavor to have something like UNIX for the social web.

The open, social web and so, hopefully I’ve given you a clear picture of why OPEN standards are critical to innovation on the SOCIAL web — that really the aim of the Diso Project and similar initiatives are to move the realm of competition to a higher level so that we can actually begin to build social experiences at the level that Apple builds hardware experiences today. SO WHY THE OPEN SOCIAL WEB?

Diso and so the Diso Project, conceptually, is how I’m framing my work in this area.

Our challenge is to build technologies that enhance the network and serve people so that they in turn can build better and richer societies. Our fundamental challenge is to build technologies that enhance the network and serve people so that they in turn can build better and richer societies.

ﬁn. diso-project.org chris@citizenagency.com • @chrismessina • factoryjoe.com Color palette: oddend by martin Typeface: FTF Flama™ by Mario Feliciano so that’s it. questions?

The Open, Social Web (N2Y4)

by Chris Messina on May 27, 2009

Accessibility

Categories

Tags

Upload Details

Usage Rights

3 Embeds 10

Statistics

The Open, Social Web (N2Y4) — Document Transcript

http://www.hastac.org	7
http://hastac-new.aas.duke.edu	2
http://www.lmodules.com	1