The Debate about Social Software

Roland Piquepaille writes "Is "social software" the new overhyped buzzword? In an article for the Guardian, Jack Schofield says yes. On the contrary, in Historical Roots of Social Software, Howard Rheingold offers insights about this new phenomenon. And in this Tech Central Station article, Arnold Kling agrees with Rheingold. He thinks that social software is likely to the basis of what could be the next "killer app." Kling says that with social software, the interaction is no longer between you and your computer, but between the groups you belong to and networks of computers. In order to explain the issues, King studies three types of problems that this new kind of software might solve: the matching problem, the issue-resolution problem, and the classroom-management problem. So, is social software hype or reality?"

Comments

Not new.

[user no. 590291]

Anyone remember "Have my fax call your fax--we'll do lunch?"

Seriously, since computers have taken over many of the roles previously reserved for personal assistants, such as arranging meetings, et al, it only makes sense that they would start to become robotic facilitators of social interaction.

Part Hype...part reality

[the-dude-man]

The concept behind social softwareis very legitimate...But its also becoming one of those buzzwords like 'realtime' or 'high preformance computing' The definition of realtime is to place a deadline on a proccess...and kill it if it has not completed by that time....and high preformance computing is the structuring of algorithims to crunch numbers faster

Yet Microsoft says windows XP does both.

If you ever needed more proof that these are no more than overused buzzwords...thats it!

Similarly, social software is a very real concept, but it just seems to have one of those sexy...media friendly names....every time i turn around now i hear a devloper talking about the next generation of 'social software'. Please.... its not some magical philosiphy that software devlopers are using to better society...we do what makes money...hence our software follows social trends....boom...social software

To be a real social software

[Juiblex]

It must have ChattingAndDrinkingAtAPub.

Six degrees

[Mattygfunk1]

In the labor market, the problem is to match hiring managers with qualified workers. When you need something fixed, the problem is to match your dented fender or stopped-up toilet with the appropriate repair person.

These problems have already been solved in several formats. Think MP3. Someone wants a track, and they are connected with someone who has that track.

One format is websites. This is especially true for topics such as employment and dating where an "offerer" is connected with the "needer".

With my previous example of MP3s there the possibility of having a P2P referer network. Each person posts their "resume" of talents / interests, and then is refered through their friends lists to friends of friends searching for that interest. Six degrees of seperation stuff that is backed by the trust you have in your group of friends.

When I started this post it was just an unusual thought, but the more I think about it, the more logical this seems. I reserve all rights to this idea ;) ___
cheap web site hosting

Keys

[ArmenTanzarian]

What seems off to me about these filtering and pattern matching programs is the vague key values. Like genre recognition software for managing movies, where do you put your stops, what do you filter on? When you're looking for directions, you have a simple weighted graph traversal, the data is mainly empirical. But when you're looking for a plumber, what're the key values and who puts them in for each entry?

Such software has one primary fault as it's basis

[Anonymous Coward]

Such software fundementaly screws with baseline criteria. You end up hireing a plumber, not because he's a good plumber, but because he's got a good score on the *personality* test. In the begining it looks kind of nice to be able to aquire groups of people that you'll "get along with" for all your needs... but this is the real world and things don't quite work that way.
And for it to do so, it requires people to be honest about their profiles (much less it requires them to provide them) and that just isn't going to happen... we value our freedom of privacy, and all the really practical apps of this would require us to give up a great deal of it.

Irony

[arvindn]

Am I the only one who finds the term "social software" terribly ironic, considering the social skills of the people who write software? :-)

Re:Irony

[arvindn]

Social skills are defined by what society you're part of. The well-dressed, smooth-talking types who are usually what we think of as "socially skilled" are just as out of place among a bunch of geeks as geeks are in other settings.

I don't agree that being comfortable in geek company makes you socially skilled. Socially skilled people are those who can get along very well with a random person. $RANDOM_JOE is far more likely to be a non-geek than a geek.

"It's okay to get some exercise, take a shower, and put on clean clothes!"

None of which has much to do with social skills. We're talking about how easily you interact with other people. Take me for instance: I do all the things you mentioned. Heck, I even have pointy hair. However, I have great difficulty behaving in society as I'm expected to. I find most social mores to be ridiculous. See the link in my sig, it starts with: "If you're the kind of person that hates being invited to parties...". And I mean it. I think lack of social skills is a rather fundamental trait/problem, one that can't be overcome just by being a little less lazy. From my limited observation, being socially skilled involves things like "small talk", and smiling like a retard every once in a while, things which I abhor. I often find myself forgetting what's the thing to say when someone says thank you. And if you accost me and ask me a question, particularly when I'm coding, I might look at your face and stare blankly for 15 seconds while I disentangle my train of thought, which you might find unnerving. And I would get totally frustrated if someone I'm waiting for spends half an hour primping themself. So you see, my social skills are pathetic. I'm sure other geeks also share some of these traits. And its not something you can change without giving up a fundamental part of what you are.

Hmmn. Not sure about that...

[Open_The_Box]

It might just be me but for each of the problem types mentioned the article seems to be saying that the "killer app" which solves this problem will take the human factor out of the equation (not completely but close).

Maybe my problem is that I don't think social applications will be the next killer app. If you think back then most of the applications (or genres of applications) which have made it big have come about due to new technologies or by making existing applications more convenient in some way.

Examples from the article: Word processing apps (upgrade from typewriters - introduction of computer technology made this an almost inevitable step), spreadsheet programs (upgrade from, well, handwritten spreadsheets - again computer tech introduction), e-mail and web-browsing (not needed until the internet became a mass population creation rather than an academic or BBS thing).

My point being that none of the examples cited are social software based so why should the next killer app be? Not that I don't see social software coming up with something useful to a subset of people in the same way that modern programming suites (convenient drag and drop features and comprehensive debugging systems and code optimisation in comparison to simple text editor and command line compiling) are useful to programmers. But a necessary app for the entire computer user base? I find it more likely that anything that large will require a new technology development.

Could be wrong though...

Social Software?

[Hard_Code]

Hype or reality? Total hype. I mean why would people want to use software to say, "post their ideas" on a "shared forum". Totally ludicrous.

Limitations of computer systems

[sphealey]

Kling says that with social software, the interaction is no longer between you and your computer, but between the groups you belong to and networks of computers. ... So, is social software hype or reality?

I used to work with a company that did a lot of acquiring of small and mid-sized manufacturing companies. Some of the initial tasks upon acquisition: shut down all e-mail systems. Terminate all large-scale "ERP" or "business management" software and replace with simple inventory and bookkeeping systems. Close all stand-along headquarters locations and move personnel to closest factory. Demolish all walls in office spaces and move desks to central "pen". Move office personnel into open locations in the middle of the factory floor. Prohibit all use of studies, whitepapers, and Powerpoints, and 98% of all memos. In some cases they took out fax machines. Require all personnel to talk to everyone they did business with 4 times per day, either in person or on the phone.

After taking these actions, the typical acquired company would see a doubling of productivity and a tripling of profitability in 18 months.

So I guess I have to say I am a bit skeptical of "social software" in any kind of business setting. Blogs are fun to read in the evening for one's personal enjoyment, but turning the business day into a blogging session doesn't seem to me to have much promise.

sPh