Slashdot Mirror


It's Time for Social Networks to Open Up

edmicman notes that "Wired has an article, "Slap in the Facebook: It's Time for Social Networks to Open Up", that calls for the greater programming community to create a truly "open" social network. Specifically, the problems with today's networks, says the author, is that their content is not available to everyone."

7 of 231 comments (clear)

  1. As you can see by UncleWilly · · Score: 5, Funny

    I will be out to dinner tonight at 8pm, so that will be a good time to rob my house.

  2. knock yourself out by yagu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm not sure what the complaint really is here. Market forces and web site design combined to create places like Facebook, people signed up, and it was successful? Alternative ideas are better, but haven't worked?

    The article raises interesting points but I'm not sure there's any "there" there. If you build it, they will come. If they like it.

    Don't discount some of the suggestions in the article will emerge, but market and social forces prevail. As long as these social networking metaphors are popular and users come and go of their own free will, life is good.

    I'm not sure the sublime or transcendental solution Wired seeks exists, or should. The internet is a network, electronic. It's a powerful tool. (..., the internet is not something you just dump something on. It's not a truck. It's a series of tubes.(!)) I'm not sure life was meant to be played out on the internet, anyway.

    (For the record, I'm no big fan of these web sites... I think they're more fad than substance, but I embrace others' freedom to participate.)

    1. Re:knock yourself out by pthor1231 · · Score: 5, Informative
      After reading the article, it really looks like it's just this guy whining about being really lazy.

      Therein lies the rub. When entering data into Facebook, you're sending it on a one-way trip. Want to show somebody a video or a picture you posted to your profile? Unless they also have an account, they can't see it. Your pictures, videos and everything else is stranded in a walled garden, cut off from the rest of the web.

      Honestly, how hard is it to sign up for a facebook account now. You don't even need a school email, just an email. Everyone could have access if they wanted to, in about 5 minutes.

  3. Its the "club" syndrome. by BiggestPOS · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think part of the reason these sites are so popular is because they are *not* open. People like feeling as if they art part of a group, no matter how open that group may be in reality, if there is even a hint of the "velvet rope" effect its generally enough to make people feel special.
    And the general public likes to feel special.

    --
    What, me worry?
  4. BUT WAIT by thedrunkensailor · · Score: 5, Funny

    If we open up social networking and make it a community effort, who gets to sell it for millions?!?!?!

    --
    i support the right to offend.
  5. Re:Well... real-life social networks aren't open by nine-times · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't think the suggestion is that these sites be "open" in the sense that anyone can view and participate in your "social group". Rather, the suggestion I think is that these things should be able to interoperate, so that your profile didn't "belong to" Facebook or Myspace. As in, you could have your one profile that could be used in any social network you want. At least, something more like that than what we have now.

  6. Re:I don't want EVERYONE to see my data!! by fastest+fascist · · Score: 5, Informative

    Sir, get thee a Clue.

    Either you didn't read the article, or your reading comprehension needs serious work. The author was NOT calling for a network where all information is freely available to everyone, simply an open framework within which people can network as they please. It's kind of like IRC versus a web-based chatroom on a website - IRC is an open framework, anyone can make an IRC client that will work with any IRC server, but that doesn't mean users can't form private channels or choose who they communicate with. Similarly, there is no reason an open framework for a social network would require you to give up the ability to have distinct, closed cliques within the open system. You could, however, reuse any profile data you put in for as many different groups in as many different configurations as you like, without having to sign up for and maintain your presence on a multitude of different, specialized social networking services. You'd just need one login for one service, or maybe one login for a master network which you could allow any independent service to access to retrieve your data as you see fit.