Re: Federation protocols

On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Michał 'rysiek' Woźniak <rysiek@fwioo.pl>wrote:

> Dnia sobota, 1 czerwca 2013 o 21:30:28 Nick Jennings napisał(a):
> > On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 4:40 PM, Simon Tennant <simon@buddycloud.com>
> wrote:
> > > On 31 May 2013 16:28, Michał 'rysiek' Woźniak <rysiek@fwioo.pl> wrote:
> > > > Anyway, my point is that this idea that a one-size-fits-all protocol
> > > > just
> > > >
> > >>  > doesn't work. We've tried it. Federating a bunch of social networks
> > >>
> > >> that
> > >>
> > >> > aren't solving a real user need (beyond privacy) is an exercise in
> > >>
> > >> protocol
> > >>
> > >> > masturbation rather than solving real problems and therefore have a
> > >>
> > >> chance
> > >>
> > >> > of being adopted.
> > >> >
> > >> > I wish the world was otherwise. It's not and usually I find it
> easier
> > >> > to change my approach than try to make the entire world change for
> > >> > me.
> > >>
> > >> Well, the same was said about MySpace several years ago. And before
> > >> that, Geocities. Remember those? Users flock and change services from
> > >> time to time.
> > >> The time users move off of Facebook is drawing near and we really
> > >> *should* have something to offer.
> > >
> > > What do you think the reasons for Facebook's success were? Why did
> users
> > > leave Myspace for Facebook?
> >
> > I think people left Myspace for two reasons. One technical reason I
> think a
> > lot of people were prompted to leave Myspace was that it was buggy as all
> > hell and there was a clear alternative (Facebook) that offered a solution
> > to the exact pain point - which was a clean, uniform, interface. Also,
> > Myspace started to completely change their UI which alienated a lot of
> > users.
> >
> > That said, Facebook would have never been perceived as an alternative
> > unless thousands of college age kids didn't already have accounts there,
> > making the switch more attractive.
> >
> > In addition, remember Friendster? It was actually (if I remember
> correctly)
> > much less buggy than Myspace, but as a friend summed it up one night in
> > 2003 over beers "people on Myspace are hotter". So, Myspace was the hip
> > place to be, friendster was stuffy and too genuine/corny.
> >
> > These are all social tastes, not technical. Facebook was clean and less
> > buggy - that was a nice change, but it was the mass of college age kids
> > that made it a viable alternative.
> >
> > That's the way I saw it anyway
>
> This is the power of federation. We can have "hip" sites and "corny sites"
> that are interoperable and battle the network effect together without
> sacrificing appeal to any a group.
>
>
I'm not saying you can or can't, I was just sharing my recollection of why
people migrated from one place to another. I think it's least of all
technical, more social.

In other words, it's not something that we can "solve". The network effect
is a symptom of social perspective, it's not something that can be
addressed with technical implementation IMHO.

Unless of course, in addition to making the next facebook, an open
initiative also wants to take on marketing and innovative end-user
features. Which makes them even less likely to succeed (whatever that
means) than they already were.