Slashdot Mirror
Google Social Network: Orkut
shelleymonster writes "According to CNET, Google has quietly released its own version of Friendster, called Orkut. About 3 months ago, Google entered into talks to acquire Friendster, but was turned down. Named after one of its engineers, Orkut Buyukkokten, the new social network looks even tougher to get into than Friendster. An initial 12,000 invitations were sent out, and new users can only join through an existing user. Someone want to invite me?"
Comment removed based on user account deletion
...created Orkut.com in the past several months by working on it about one day a week--an amount that Google asks all of its engineers to devote to personal projects
Ok, that is a cool company. I wish I was working at Google. But they haven't opened a software development office in Iowa yet.
yet another way for people to make themselves feel popular and socially accepted while being a commodity for someone else.
get over yourselves and do something useful.
Does the fact that I don't need this service mean I have a life?
FLR
If I actually had any friends, I wouldn't need a "social networking service".
I love the numerous links imploring me to 'Join Orkut', only to bring up a page saying " Membership to orkut is by invitation only." It's like yelling from your doorway to 'come on in', only to ask for a ticket at the door.
Why is anything anything?
A social network's attempts at exclusivity would seem to be at odds with scalability. Once the network exceeds some threshold then it is bound to contain mutually distrusted people connected by chain of trust. The problem is that trust is not fully transitive -- it is not true that if A trusts B and B trusts C, then A trusts C.
A more scalable approach would allow open enrollment and self-organizing clusters. Each joiner would become trusted within one or more loosely defined clusters of BOFs, while remaining untrusted or disliked by other BOFs. At a higher level, BOFs could even assign trust to other BOFs, with members partially inheriting the relative trust levels of the BOF(s) they belong to.
Membership-by-invitation creates an unfortunate hurdle to creating truely globe-spanning networks because it means you have to know someone to be permitted to know someone. Although intended to weed out the riff-raff, invitation-only policies probably do more to create obstacles for legitimate, but previously socially unconnected, potential members. A better post-joining filtration/sortation/cluster would let everyone find their respective community(s).
A truely scalable social network would admit and support gun-toting republicans, and enviro-liberal democrats, and Microsoft apologists, and Apple fanboys. A set of trust distance functions would ensure that each member stays within their respective BOF clusters.
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
...and then /. will hate him like a holy Jihad, with every other story a lefthanded rant about how Google sucks, and how the world of mindless sheep computer users just don't properly appreciate the open-source alternatives (which are JUST AS GOOD even though they're:
a) not as stable
b) hell to install)
Can I be modded +1, Prophetic?
-Styopa
I had to put on my tinfoil hat for this one, but "Orkut" is really, REALLY old news. The funny thing was, all mention of it has been virtually stripped from Google. "Orkut" is the revival of "Club Nexus", something Orkut built while at Stanford University. You can see a more complete description of Orkut/Club Nexus here.
Also, Stanford mentions it here. It's also been live for quite sometime as Stanford's inCircle. The oldest mentions I can find in Google are from 1991, but then again, Google's been pretty well stripped of information on the subject.
The oddest part, of course, is that http://www.clubnexus.com/ is gone, and purged from the Google cache. Same thing is true of http://clubnexus.stanford.edu/. *sigh*
Anyway, here's Club Nexus/Orkut in a nutshell: "Some people were upset because they're not sexy," says Buyokkokten.
Cheers.