Our identity on the web is our network of contacts. Let's regain control over our identities by creating an identity management software that runs locally on our computers. I need your ideas and input!
The censorship fiasco at Flickr - my original Web 2.0 home - has left me deeply unsettled. I am in the process of moving over here, but the question still remains what will happen if this service becomes successful enough so that its owners decide to cash in and sell the service to some other Internet moghul (like Flickr did). After all, Ipernity is a business too, and no charitable institution.
One of the fundamental contradictions of Web 2.0 is the fact that users generate the content, but hosters take possession of it because they own the service. And owning the service means they not only benefit from the content we generated, they also own our network of contacts. To put it bluntly, they attempt to own our very identity on the Internet.
I think it is time that we do something to change Web 2.0 from being provider-centric to being user-centric:
How about making our network identity / contacts a 'moveable feast' which we can take along if need be in case someone tries to sell our favourite community (again)?
I envision some kind of freeware software that everybody can install on his/her computer: The software's first function would be to communicate with the image host's database via scripts to download all the user's identity and contact data.
The software would - as a second function - act like a file swapping program (remember the early days of Napster?) and contact all my contacts' / friends' computers that host the same program to check for any mutual contacts / friends, and whether they changed their address or image hoster.
A third function of that software could be to periodically contact all image hosters the user is a member of, and download links to all new images or messages.
The effect of such a software on the nature of Web 2.0 could be substantial: Such a program would break up the limitations imposed by image hosters that 'lock in' their customers, effectively making them prone to their business-related manipulations. Once a large number of users would use such a software, consumers could punish image hosters that treat their customers without respect by just moving elsewhere - WITHOUT LOSING THEIR CONTACTS.
I am in the process of setting up a blog outside of Ipernity for this project. The purpose of that blog will be to provide a framework for structuring the task of generating this software. I will post it here as soon as the blog is up and running - please check back frequently.
Tell me what you think of this idea, and whether you would be able to help making this dream become reality.
(i loved napster! they also had a chat function, though i'm not too found of chatting)
Making everything available in Napster style would create a network that does not have all documents available at all times (You do switch off your computer sometimes, do you? Not doing so would be unfriendly to our environment.). Also, this would mean an enormous burden on your Internet connection's bandwidth.
After all, I do indeed think that Web 2.0 hosters provide a useful service in hosting our files - I just feel that I wouldn't want to trust then with my entire Internet identity.
The point I am making is that there are two things that have different importance to me as a Web 2.0 user:
(1) My identity, consisting of my contacts and their links is of paramount importance, and I therefore want to have these data locally on my computer. This very information has highest priority for me as Web 2.0 consumer - but precisely this information does not reside on my computer. And this is what should be changed.
(2) My document content (pictures, sound files etc.) which I upload to a hoster need to reside on a constantly available Internet host, because I want others to see it. Of course; I keep a backup of these files locally, but my local computer is very inappropriate as web server, as it is not constantly powered up, and even if it were, my Internet service provider forcibly switches my IP number at least once every 24 hours, so I can't use my PC as web server.
I propose to regain control over (1), because that's what defines my identity as Web 2.0 user.
wenn du z.b. providerunabhängig sein willst, müsstest du eine art cache schaffen mit dem du die gesamten kontakte "schwebend" hälst. also eine DB die sich aufteilt auf die ganzen user.
kann aber sein ich hab das nur falsch verstanden.
flickr geführt wie wikipedia wäre auch ne idee. unabhängig und so.
das hauptproblem bei flickr ist ja nicht die grösse, sondern yahoo.
Every user has an instance of the software installed, and this instance stores a database of the user's own contact data (personal ID, links etc, and links to all his contacts, including links to the computers of all contacts who have the same software installed). As the program is being used by more and more users, it will mutually synchronize contact link data to generate and maintain an up-to-date database of the user's own contacts.
At the same time, it will spread the link data of the user's contacts to other program instances whose users/owners have established a contact relationship to the same contacts!
So, all contact data will be stored locally on the corresponding computer, and every program instance will only store those data that are relevant to the program instance's user/owner.
So, no centralized server, no super-organization needed and no legal problems, because all data accesses from the user to the hoster will only be performed in a normal client/host communication (which is undeniably legal within the definition of the hoster's terms of service).
So here's Mashable's top twenty:
mashable.com/2007/07/17/social-network-aggregators/
I envision a tool to manage social network contact across multiple websites, and to track any migration of contacts among those sites. This tool shall be resident on the user's PC and thus is not subject to any company's decision to capitalize on its member base.
What I don't envision is a website offering which has operating costs and which in turn is hard to maintain as an open-source offering.
All: Thank you for posting your ideas and insights in this blog. I will evaluate all your input this week and open a blog outside of this service so that any future discussions can be held independently of any hoster's interests. Once I have set up the blog and posted my initial outline of the tool concept, I will publish the link here.
Please tell your contacts about this project - I really appreciate your thoughts, suggestions and ideas - after all, I intend this project to be open-source!!
I am starting a blog also -- and I would like to include some information about what it is your doing here.
Please let me know the address of your blog as soon as you have it going.
Lola
I'll add you to my mailing list for the future blog.
To all: The same applies to everybody else, too. Please get in touch with me if you too would like to be on that mailing list...
edit: typo
I believe you that this might be a real problem, but on the other hand, aren't we all responsible for our own actions?
aren't we all responsible for our own actions?
That's exactly what I would like a new system of photosharing and commenting to make sure: everybody should be responsible for their own actions. I don't want to be held responsible for out-of topic and/or abusive, violent, racist, sexist or otherwise offensive comments posted by anybody else on one of my photo pages. And I don't want to spend much time monitoring, moderating, deleting, blocking comments (or whatever method is currently available to have at least a fair chance to get away from a trial before court if someone just happens to "attack" your photostream). If anybody is interested in this side-topic, read more on my blog
A vision
before it gets deleted over there.
Mfluch appears to be a guy with some technical knowledge how to implement a new kind of photosharing system.
Btw. it seems threads have a short half-life period in the group there - one more reason why I'd prefer to have my posts hosted under my own control.
And I support your idea to set up a blog outside an existing photosharing site to discuss this topic ...
I already use an OpenID hosted by ClaimID... and I have the ability to add friends to that account... but have had little luck migrating the important ones there.
I don't think the "store local identiy info" model works too well though. For me the primary benefit, the same benefit as has having web-mail... is that I can access my network from any computer in the world.
My ideal would probably be a piece of open source server software I could put on my host, which managed my peer connections to other identities being served off of similar software. For those not into hosting... there could be a free service also built around the concept. Basically it would be like ClaimID that I could run myself if they ever went byebye. The trick is getting everyone else to do it also and implement STANDARDS.
lido_6006 has replied to clickykbdAs to the storing of my indentity info, I'd prefer to have it hosted on my own web 1.0 domain server. But the standards should describe an API so that I can easily back it up on my computer at home and play it back to another server - in case my hosting provider disappears or fails to backup the server properly. The API issue will be still more important with "free" or "cheap" hosting service providers because they will host the majority of "profiles/social network info" and are more likely to be affected by a "bubble pop" or to change their TOS.
However, it appears to me that such a solution has some legal drawbacks which might become relevant when trying to acces the various image hosts (or social networking hosts in a more general sense):
I can imagine such hosters will try to block server-based user accesses to protect their business model - they will however never be able to block normal remote user accesses from computers that will be on-line solely for the purpose of accessing the user-account as defined in their standard TOS. They will never be able to block this type of access, or they would lock out their customers altogether.
Also, I don't think that the average user of social networks as a rule has access to his own dedicated web server.
On the other hand, it would probably not be overly complicated to have two versions of such a software solution:
(1) a remote version for installation on a normal desktop, or notebook computer, and
(2) a web server version for those that have their own active server web space.
Please let me know what you think of this.
Please go to this address:
idcenter.wordpress.com/
Sign-in to post a comment.