Re: Federation protocols

Dnia piątek, 31 maja 2013 o 16:40:18 Simon Tennant napisał(a):
> On 31 May 2013 16:28, Michał 'rysiek' Woźniak <rysiek@fwioo.pl> wrote:
> > Twitter changed their API rules lately, drawing ire from developers and
> > killing off a lot of small companies by this simple move. There is huge
> > value
> > in decentralised, federated, standards-compliant services. It's not
> > *only* privacy.
> 
> Agree this is a bad move, but do users care that they changed their API?

Users? A bit, "where's my favourite webapp?.."

Developers? Oh hell they do! I am not making this up, people and companies 
lost serious revenue over Twitter API policy changes.

As I said, it's about BOTH users AND developers.

> > And don't forget the public/administration sphere. There are valid
> > arguments
> > to be made against public administration using proprietary, walled social
> > networks, but this argument falls flat, because there is no viable
> > alternative.
> 
> Agree 100% - companies like their private data kept private. Can you be
> more specific about

You seem to have lost a part of that sentence here.

> > > This could be things like federated media sharing or quick ways to add
> > > a social layer to their mobile app or game.
> > 
> > Great. Let's promote a single, well-defined protocol and this will be
> > possible.
> 
> Where do existing protocols like pump and buddycloud fail? What would the
> single unified protocol do differently?

Network effect:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_effect

Usefulness of a social network grows exponentially with the number of users. 
If BuddyCloud, Pump.io, Diaspora and Friendica could all seamlessly interop, 
the "power" of such a network would be several orders of magnitude larger than 
the simple sum of all parts.

> > 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?

There were Terms of Service changes that were definitely not to users' liking, 
which incidentally were similar to what Instagram did after being bought by 
Facebook. Of course that was a minor issue, but issue none the less (I 
remember talking to my friends in ~2008 about it, and it was a factor in their 
decision to ditch MySpace).

I see a very similar pattern developing right now. Terms of Service changing, 
Facebook trying to "milk the cow", users growing wary of it, looking for a 
solution -- that we still, after all these years, do not have.

-- 
Pozdrawiam
Michał "rysiek" Woźniak

Fundacja Wolnego i Otwartego Oprogramowania