Open Social Media of the People, by the People, for the People

The Cost of Communication is Closing on Zero

Open technology has been developed which enables people to chat or have longer conversations. It’s been around for some time, but only recently have developers understood the many to one communication potential of social media. While we can all benefit from amazing technology that comes out, the rules of engagement and the ownership of socially generated content and attention no longer need to fall under the umbrella of outside corporations. Communities can and will host their own social media servers, fully functioning and formed for their interest.

We are redefining social collaborative design aggregating the thoughts and experiences of many individual voices in easily accessible Internet locations. But as our technology has developed the increase in our need for web democratization has grown. Blossoming communities can no longer tolerate the voices of a few directing what and how they should interact.

The Genie is Coming Out of the Bottle

The real time web can’t possibly be bottled anymore than the Internet can. Many federated open social networks have sprung up thanks in part to development of folks like Brian Hendrickson and Dave Winer. Communities can take control of their own fate by owning their content, creating their own rules of engagement and sharing information and technology upgrades freely. Full data portability is a requirement of federated social platforms and tech businesses that understand the nature of social media will prosper as tool suppliers.

The decline of Myspace’s dominance is not just a function of Facebook’s wide appeal. It is simply human nature to want to define and cultivate our social communities by our own localized priorities, and social businesses that don’t react to that need, will invariably fluctuate.

The technology that enables decentralized or federated social media is a set of real time protocols. Once the information standards are worked out, publishers and relay hubs can connect people to communities that share their worldviews in moments. Some communities may spring up and then fade away over a few minutes, other organizations may evolve to withstand the test of time.

Results Require Rational Rewards

Integral to all communities is a fair and self propelling rewards architecture. Whether it be shared profit measured by community engagement, or virtual currency that is spent within a network content generators will be rewarded. Corporations can come into being out of the mutual efforts of passionate leaders. These trendsetters will go through the initial struggles of helping to focus a community vision, but that won’tt entitle them to control the destiny of the group they initiate. Nor should they rewarded any more handsomely than truly dedicated community members.

The powerful force that drives this communication and organizational structure is emergence. From simple abstract concepts great tides of social change will result from active networks. Self moderation will go hand in hand with emergent Internet communities. Decentralization of authority allows for rapid identification of power or influence abusers. Each voice in the Technium will be judged by the merit of it’s shared views, not by the financial backing or social clout of a name.

Examples of open social media

  • Pingback: Brian Hendrickson (brianjesse) 's status on Monday, 27-Jul-09 23:58:54 UTC - Identi.ca

  • Pingback: Brian Hendrickson (brianjesse) 's status on Tuesday, 28-Jul-09 00:11:19 UTC - Identi.ca

  • http://lmframework.com David Semeria

    Very interesting Mark. I'm in complete agreement and have been working on a platform to do this for the past 3 years. It all hinges on the meaning of the word 'open'. There is open as in 'door' – which is bad for privacy. And there is open as 'compatible' – which is where all the value lies. People should be able to assemble their social networks like Lego.

  • http://www.victusspiritus.com/ Mark Essel

    Brilliant Dave, glad to hear you are working the problem. Heartily agree that folks should be able to retain their privacy but engage in a more limited way.

    I just recently grabbed some code to setup an open source, social app on the Google App Engine, although I think Google Wave dabbling may come first. I also heard about some protocol concepts from Brian Hendrickson, and Dave Winer, so that various hubs can all communicate.

  • http://lmframework.com David Semeria

    Thanks for the kind words Mark.

    The system I'm working on essentially puts code and content on the same level, and allows applications to be assembled from blocks made up of both. There's nothing clever about that. The tricky part is making the blocks compatible with each other, which is where we've focused most of our efforts. Obviously, once you get to a point where you can mash everything up, the logical extension is to allow all the pieces to 'flow' around the ecosystem in a controlled (access privileges) manner. We're nearly there.

    As regards Twiggler, unfortunately it will never see the light of day. We just built it to test and demonstrate the technology. Twiggler is composed of hundreds of tiny blocks which are assembled in real time in the browser. That's not obvious when you see the system working – which is the whole point.

  • http://www.victusspiritus.com/ Mark Essel

    Although I'm partial to friendfeed's conversational UI, I enjoyed the demo of twiggler, especially dragging an icon to it's own box to see it's stream.

    Is there a different demo you have planned for the data/software block technology? Looking forward to it.

  • http://lmframework.com David Semeria

    Well, there is a second and much shorter demo http://www.lmframework.com/page.php?id=vd_twig_short_2' rel=”nofollow”>video of Twiggler which shows the same data structures that are used to manage contacts being used to manage images. The key is to have generic data structures in combination with generic library functions to manipulate them. This is the basic foundation of our idea of interoperability.

    That said, I wouldn't want this thread to turn into a promo for LM, and detract from the excellent ideas contained in your video.

    Feel free to email me at david-lmframework-com and I'll be more than happy to pick-up the conversation.

    Cheers.

  • http://lmframework.com/blog/about David Semeria

    Thanks for the kind words Mark.

    The system I'm working on essentially puts code and content on the same level, and allows applications to be assembled from blocks made up of both. There's nothing clever about that. The tricky part is making the blocks compatible with each other, which is where we've focused most of our efforts. Obviously, once you get to a point where you can mash everything up, the logical extension is to allow all the pieces to 'flow' around the ecosystem in a controlled (access privileges) manner. We're nearly there.

    As regards Twiggler, unfortunately it will never see the light of day. We just built it to test and demonstrate the technology. Twiggler is composed of hundreds of tiny blocks which are assembled in real time in the browser. That's not obvious when you see the system working – which is the whole point.

  • http://www.victusspiritus.com/ Mark Essel

    Although I'm partial to friendfeed's conversational UI, I enjoyed the demo of twiggler, especially dragging an icon to it's own box to see it's stream.

    Is there a different demo you have planned for the data/software block technology? Looking forward to it.

  • Pingback: Friendfeed Is Fading

  • Pingback: The Message > the media

  • Pingback: You Define Open Social Media

  • Pingback: Iter8r: Organic Crowd Shared Startup