Re: Federation protocols

Myspace was a key element in Facebooks development- myself, and lots of
people I know wouldn't have gotten started on Facebook without Myspace.
Myspace had elements of creative expression, which are completely, and
totally dead on Facebook. What killed Myspace was the spam and the
technical glitches. The notifications were also worse than Facebooks.

I think there are a lot of people who are theoretically worried about
privacy, and yes, the realm of people who are early adopters are small, and
somewhat outside the box.

I also hear a lot of pushback on Facebook. Zuckerbergs recent involvement
in some hare brained conservative PAC doesn't help. People want to get to
something better. but there needs to be something out there noticeably
better, 3 steps ahead, and provide more advantages than, better friend
requesting.




On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 10:40 AM, Simon Tennant <simon@buddycloud.com>wrote:

> 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?
>
>
>> 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
>
>
>
>>
>> > 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?
>
>  > 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?
>
> S.
> --
> Simon Tennant | buddycloud.com | +49 17 8545 0880 | office hours:
> goo.gl/tQgxP
>