You know, this thing called OS is a thing that makes your files be actually saved on the hard disk, or when you plug the USB stick there, or that makes for programs possible to use TCP and not program the hardware of your network card, or that makes the letters visible on your screen.
From a point of view of an OS developer, what you talk about are still just applications, and that has nothing to do with an OS.
You're just making a confusion if you're trying to invent the new meaning of the names. Is that your goal?
The actual term they are looking for is social web protocol.
As others have pointed out, though, an open social protocol would quickly degenerate into a wretched hive of ads and spam. The underlying problem to solve is identity, which the existing social networks attempt to solve through real-name policies, social conventions, and pro-active policing, to various degrees of success.
This is going to be unpopular to say on HN, but there would be upsides to a government-issued internet ID card, that allowed to someone to declare unambiguously which actual human they are (ideally on an opt-in basis).
Would the inevitable abuses of this power be worth the benefits? Probably not. But authenticated identity is the core problem that needs to be solved for an open social protocol to really work; without it, you're trying to craft TCP/IP without IP addresses.
What would be the upsides of the government issued internet ID in your opinion please? Compare such an ID with the stuff everybody already has in his wallet.
Keep in mind, I meant it in an abstract sense; we could just as easily use existing government IDs (state driver's license, SSN, etc) rather than create a new one. Hardware biometrics are an option (in theory), and would also eliminate the terrible security practices inherent to email+password.
What matters is not the unique identifier; the real benefit is the threat of punishment for fraud, and the "single source of truth", whether that's a government, or something else. We have this, for better or worse, in other aspects of communication infrastructure (names, addresses, phone numbers), but there is no equivalent for the web (except perhaps for domains). I'm glad that an anonymous information-sharing network exists, but I think a non-anonymous flavor (AOL : www :: Facebook : ???) would be a societal boon as well.
I haven't clarified this yet, but what I'm really advocating is a combination of protocol and hosting, which when put together is, in my mind, something like a distributed virtual OS for startups to build social services upon. OS is probably not the right term, but I think it conveys the scope better to non-developer than "protocol" does. I'm not trying to confuse - I'm trying to think of something better.
Total jibberish. There is no need for any more social any things let alone a "social web OS", whatever that means. I'm sure the average Internet reader thought this sounded smart with all the fluffy language and big words but in the end it was a lot of words with little substance. The web already is social. So what now? We rebuild the Internet pretty much like it is now but we change the names of the protocols, languages, and frameworks? I have a hard time understanding if this is a call for an open source Facebook created by Tim Berners Lee or if someone's been reading about App.net and wants to get in on some of that action. This kind of came off like someone rehashing Dalton Caldwell's idea except in a really convoluted way.
What's going on with what get on the front page lately?
We are all so eager for adoption before the implementation. Big things on internet were not made wide adoption guaranteed. as @dglassan said, "Refactoring the internet is not the solution". Create something, invite small group, dev friends to take part. Either it is an api, platform or an application. If it is any good, it will get picked up for the wide adoption.
I would frame it as a social vos virtual operating system.. or social dashboard. Its a good idea, monetization may be hard but its a needed product that should generate long page views.
Idea, long page views might make watching a video ad before the dashboard appears acceptable..paid version no ad..
Assuming that we could seriously do this, I feel like the Mobile OS's and desktop OS's like Mountain Lion, elementary, and Ubuntu do a fairly good job of integrating with the internet that it would be hard to drive adoption of something else.
From a point of view of an OS developer, what you talk about are still just applications, and that has nothing to do with an OS.
You're just making a confusion if you're trying to invent the new meaning of the names. Is that your goal?