- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
- Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 09:32:39 +0200
- To: "XMPP and Social Networking, Two Great Tastes That Taste Great Together!" <social@xmpp.org>, "public-xg-socialweb@w3.org" <public-xg-socialweb@w3.org>
Opera just announced this - http://dev.opera.com/articles/view/an-introduction-to-opera-unite/ http://labs.opera.com/news/2009/06/16/ http://unite.opera.com/ Basically they expose webserver via the browser, and it seems also offer some proxying of this into public URIs like http://mymac.chrismills.operaunite.com/ I'm crossposting this to the XMPP Social list and the W3C SocialWeb XG list, since the intro in http://labs.opera.com/news/2009/06/16/ has some interesting motivation re social network and data portability, and I've lately been wondering about design decisions where I'm setting up personal/domestic computing APIs and feel drawn to XMPP rather than HTTP mainly due to NAT/Firewall traversal issues: XMPP services on a laptop can be universally addressed, unlike HTTP services. So I wanted to ask - is there a XEP spec for proxying HTTP over XMPP? Would this be relevant to Opera Unite scenarios such as the following? """Social networking is important, but who owns it — the online real estate and all the content we share on it? How much control over our words, photos, and identities are we giving up by using someone else’s site for our personal information? How dependent have we become? I imagine that many of us would lose most of our personal contacts if our favorite Web mail services shut down without warning. Also, many of us maintain extensive friend networks on sites like MySpace and Facebook, and are, therefore, subject to their corporate decisions via “Terms of Service” and click-through agreements. Furthermore, what does it mean anyway to be connected to hundreds of our “closest” friends? What about our real social networks, the people we want to interact with on a regular basis (like once a week, or even every day)? Why are online solutions to help us with our real-world social needs so few and far between? We are connected to a Web that has democratized much and is an amazing source of information. However, "the wisdom of the crowd," along with the notion that our data ought to live on other people's computers that we don't control, has contributed to making the Internet more impersonal, anonymous, fragmented, and more about "the aggregate" than the individual. In fact, quite the opposite of the original promise. For too long, we’ve been going online to connect to each other, but sacrificing intimacy as a result.""" thanks for any thoughts, Dan
Received on Tuesday, 16 June 2009 07:33:19 UTC