

Let's Deep-Six Facebook and Do Open Source Social Networking Instead - mcantelon
http://www.linuxinsider.com/story/Lets-Deep-Six-Facebook-and-Do-Open-Source-Social-Networking-Instead---Pro-Evan-Prodromou-70256.html?wlc=1277232213

======
teilo
You first.

And while we are at it, let's deep-six Microsoft Office and have a perfectly
compatible replacement (down to the VBA level) that is completely open source.

I mean, if we only have to _say_ it, then we may as well get all our other
good-sounding but completely unrealistic statements out in the open too.

~~~
Joeboy
Having a perfectly compatible open source MS Office replacement is a laudable
goal and I'm extremely glad people have attempted it. I'm not really sure what
point you're making. Nobody is saying we only have to say it and it will
happen.

------
wdewind
All of these distributed model guys keep disregarding and not addressing the
fact that people simply don't want to deal with hosting their own web server,
no matter how simplified it is.

I've seen a couple of people on this forum talk about (and Prodromou talks
about it as well) "volunteers" who will run these micronetworks and host their
friends and family. The idea just doesn't make sense.

For one thing, how many of us constantly are forced to be the "tech guy" in
our friends/family circle? It SUCKS. Now imagine what you have to deal with
when you're hosting a node...where do I sign up...

Now add that that to the facts that normies on facebook etc. simply don't
notice or care about the privacy issues, the network effect, the ability for
facebook to pivot their privacy settings, the fact that all attempts at
distributed social networking to date have failed, and the conceptual issue of
explaining what exactly the difference between distributed and non distributed
social networking is to a non educated population who (again) doesn't know
that they have a problem in the first place.

Prodromou also talks about "simple protocols" that these different social
networks could use to talk to each other. I'll just leave that one at "devil
in the details."

Finally he says, "Nobody keeps a global database of blogs, yet if you're
trying to find, say, Doc Searle's blog, it's not very hard to do." in
reference to not needing a global database of who belongs to what networks. So
the issue here is that this creates the need for a Google-like replacement to
index these social networks (why is it so easy to find Doc's blog? oh right.)
and we are right back at square one: undistributed.

In my opinion this is a gross misunderstanding of the consumer, and reality.

~~~
what
Even if people were willing to host their own, people wouldn't keep their
installs up to date. Then they all get hacked like all those self hosted WP.

~~~
wmf
This seems like a fairly small problem; while we're boiling the ocean we might
as well make Chrome-style auto-updating the default.

------
davidw
Why don't we just go to the bar for a glass of _something_ with our friends
instead?

------
houseabsolute
> An open and distributed model gives users and organizations a chance to
> choose their social networking platform

First fail is easily seen in the leading sentence. Most people don't really
want to choose what social networking platform they use. They just want to be
on the best social network and have it work for them.

------
rabble
check out <http://crabgrass.riseup.net/> open source social networking which
works.

~~~
wmf
"Crabgrass currently consists of a solid suite of group collaboration tools,
such as private wikis, task lists, file repository, and decision making
tools."

I see the point of Crabgrass, but it's hardly an alternative to
Facebook/Twitter/Flickr/Foursquare.

------
lanstein
Naturally, preceded by a Flash ad.

------
tvon
What ever happened to FOAF?

