Group items tagged

Server server model - not thin client - server Content is on owned server - published out with privacy and pay wrapper When you want to you can 'sell' content to services - you still control it they get it by call out Ajax left behind at presentation service We build reference front end Own the means of production ie a server Tyrant would make it illegal for anyone to own a server (printing press) On the welcome page we can redirect new users for ISP and personal server host, take cut Just collect all the producers together and tell them they can own and control evthg they publish, period, then publishing services will come running Take a vig on the pay wrapper /kdl

note that all elements of this model (structure (relations and aspects), content, presentations) have a privacy and value exchange wrapper on them and can be 'bought and sold' using a value exchange model, this may be everything from rick/frank/twain agreeing to exchange content for content straight up to a start up firm valuing all aspects of contribution to the start up, including things like commitment, deliverables, ip, validation, ideas etc.

safe of gold...gold is for suckers!! i have a safe full of CHOCOLATE!!!! Serious though, i see the structure and i am becoming more enamored with the concept.

cheap servers, everyone can get one, then we get a power server to run the presentation server

"Wherever we look upon this earth, the opportunities take shape within the problems." - Nelson A. Rockefeller - Ho, Ho! Remember how he died! LOL "The purpose of a business is to create a customer." -P.Drucker

Cheap servers ... sounds great!

round up of socnet approaches, courtesy link by michael j p

Very nice. Now this is done by the FSF (Free software foundation) and all projects listed here are freeware (as opposed to both open-source and commercial ware). The group behind it (http://groups.fsf.org/wiki/Group:GNU_Social) has nice goals: "GNU social, true to the Unix-philosophy of small programs to do a small job, will be a decentralized social network that you can install on your own server. What if you could authorize your server to reveal as much, or as little information about you to other sites, as you wish... one time, one day, or forever?" "But you'll never beat Facebook, so why bother? Maybe everyone in the world won't use this, but not everyone uses Facebook either. Privacy is important, and lots of people value their privacy as well as their freedom to ensure the software they're using isn't doing things they don't want." "It is still in open discussion on the mailing list, if it makes sense to have this technology server-based or rather, for reasons of privacy, based on the user's computer. The current consensus seems to be, that there is a need for something quick that will federate existing server-based social community servers, yet at the same time we should maintain a long-term look on how to provide peer-to-peer privacy." See also: http://groups.fsf.org/wiki/Group:GNU_Social/Ideas

@Kurt--here's that server you were looking for.

Isn't this idea soooo 2009? ;) Actually, I quite agree and am very excited about the possibilities. Bent opened this idea to me last year when we were talking about the PNRP protocol already available on Windows machines. I've another friend doing similar things with XMPP and JavaScript (no, not Wave). This is indeed exciting. I wonder how many will jump directly to this architecture as their new hammer? I imagine a lot. It will probably overcomplicate things for a little while. I would really rather see more use of DDD/CQRS (http://groups.google.com/group/dddcqrs). It seems to have a bit more utility in the HTML5 landscape. Time will tell. Cheers! Ryan

FishMan - this sounds a little bit like Ning, a socnet for all folks (build your own!) Why do you think there is no monetization by any one of these efforts? That's a key part to what I'm imagining for HBSN. Hmmmmm

Checking into ad.ly, their pay rate and advertisers aren't based on your attention, they are based strictly on the number of followers you have. Their whole model is wrapped around slight-of-hand diversion. They figure that by dropping an ad tweet into your own personal twitterstream on an every other day basis, will appear innocent enough on the surface, that some (>1%?) will mistake it for something you personally tweeted and since they follow you blindly like hooded lemurs in Jonestown, they;ll drink your koolaid and make a buying decision. Seems a bit underhanded to me. And they aren't paying me because I might be a good target, they are paying me because I have a high enough unwashed masses quotient to justify the exposure. I set my rate for $5000 figuring that even though I have fewer than 100 followers, they are quality followers and not bots (except for Kurt) and that my endorsement to them is worth a great deal. So far, the till's empty.

if you advertise to me I will recycle it on an hourly loop and feed it back to you

maybe we need a new browser?

'fraid not. this is just a toolkit

I really should 'share' this to alerts management feature post in this group if I could do so easily I would. I run gmail in my browser to do 'alerts managment' something it does very poorly in concert with the variety of implementations of alerts from each socnet, this is something that can and should be improved

Compare: "MySpace User Data For Sale - Information being sold to third parties includes blog posts, photos, status updates, and more." http://www.pcworld.com/article/191716/myspace_selling_user_data.html Looks a bit scary, doesn't it? Is P2P the solution?

yes, but if it's a central site, it's not peer to peer. peer to peer requires a "desktop" solution. ironically, peerson is blocked at libraries, so it makes it useless. a program that can fit on a thumb drive cannot be blocked like this. *web services* - not *web sites* are the key.