Archive for Communication

Connecting online with @people via OpenID

I think the best innovation from twitter was messaging with @username. If I remember right, Twitter didn’t support that at first - it was a grassroots invention by Twitter users that was picked up and officially supported. Facebook did something similar even before Twitter: when you wrote a post on your Facebook blog (haven’t seen much uptake there), you can choose from your friends list which friends are mentioned in the post. Kinda kludgy solution though, since you have to scroll through hundreds of people and click a bunch of checkboxes.

It’s obvious from the evolution of @replies on Twitter that this is something very organic and natural to humans. The internet is not a solitary vacuum; all software is social.

So here’s a thought: let’s bring @replies to the rest of the web. Whether I’m writing a post on my blog or commenting on a Flickr photo or sharing an item on Google Reader, I should be able to use @username. This serves two purposes.

1. Who is being referred to?

One is to give everyone reading your comment to understand who you are talking to. This is a basic tenet of face-to-face group communication - you turn to a specific person in the group, address them by name, and speak. Sometimes, like at a big dinner party, you might not know all the guests, leaving you guessing as to who is whom and what their background is. On the internet, we can do better. By linking to some kind of profile, the comment reader can read up on who is being pulled into the conversation and better understand context.

2. Who is referring to you?

Here’s something the internet can do that can’t happen in real life - being able to read the record of all conversations that made reference to you. Twitter does this with their “Replies” page. Why not off Twitter as well?

How #1 could be implemented

This is a really difficult engineering problem, and I won’t pretend like I’ve got all the answers. So I’ll do my best. There are a number of existing web sites that vend OpenID accounts, including Yahoo, Blogger, and LiveJournal. Here’s the list. All of these services support some kind of “Profile” page, where the user can publish information about themselves. So we have a decentralized way of naming people (OpenID) and we have a way to lookup information about that person (hosted profile). So what’s missing is browser support for interpreting the @reply markup.

What’s that you say? No one is going to use awkward OpenID URLs to name people? You’re right. So, browsers will also need hooks into your Address Book, so that they know which “John” you are referring to. This could have the same auto-complete UI that email clients already support - as soon as you start typing @John, a small drop down appears next to your cursor showing the various people you know who match “John”. You pick the right one, and the markup is entered for you, linking to John’s profile.

How #2 could be implemented

The last bit of this is discovering all the places people are referring to you. This is tricky, and the two ideas I have have weaknesses. One idea uses another open technology called XMPP, the Jabber protocol. Here’s how it could work. When your browser publishes “@John”, it will use XMPP to send a message to John’s OpenID server notifying John of the reference to his name. When John logs into his OpenID-supporting service of choice, he can be shown all of the messages that have been pushed to him.

The other idea is for the OpenID server to support an HTTP POST whose payload would be the URL where the reference was made. The OpenID server would log all traffic to that special URL and pass it on to John once he logs in.

Thoughts?

Anyone have thoughts on this? Obviously to big (some might call it “unlikely”) changes need to happen. First, browsers need to add support for OpenID based @name markup. Second, browsers need to know how to send XMPP messages (or, invoke a hidden URL hosted by the OpenID server, which might be easier.) Lastly, OpenID servers need to process these incoming messages and present them to the user in some helpful way.

Naturally, I imagine there are a host of security concerns to work through, especially with browsers pushing URLs around. Still, I think this would create a very interesting social ecosystem. What do you think?

Comments (1)

Facebook, the platform - a nightmare.

I’ve been thinking about writing this post for a few weeks now, and have finally decided to do so now that a number of posts are coming out about Facebook replacing email.

Facebook has the potential to replace a lot more than just email.

Facebook could be the next Internet platform. One built upon interconnected social networks.

How about:

  • classifieds (Craigslist)
  • used and new products (Ebay)
  • personalized start pages (Netvibes)
  • social bookmarking (del.icio.us)
  • video (YouTube)
  • news aggregators (Digg)
  • search engines, except the one inside Facebook

That scares me. Why? Because it’s a black hole - what goes in doesn’t come out.

Data is everything. If you own it (and have a LOT of it), you have a HUGE advantage. Just look at what Amazon can do with it’s recommendations.

Social networks, because of the network effect, are winner take all markets. Move everyone to the platform, build all of the apps on top, add trust, filter out all of the crap/spam, and you’re left with an Internet sized bundle of content with nothing but good stuff.

Which is wonderful, except the lock-in part. Facebook shouldn’t own all of the data built on top of it.

Do you trust Facebook?

Comments (1)

Microsoft and horrible PowerPoint slides

Just saw this via Read/WriteWeb . The topic was the latest Windows Live announcement, as if this one will better explain it than the previous ones. While reading the article, I came across the following two slides, which would make Mr. Tufte vomit:

One would hope that the creators of PowerPoint would have a clue as to what a well-designed slide would look like. Instead, they have way too much text, glaring colors, differing font sizes that do not correlate to importance, and enough bullet points to make your head hurt.

Communicating your thoughts clearly really shouldn’t be this hard.

Comments (2)

Regarding the Opaque Value problem.

First, read this.

The Opaque Value Problem (or, Why do people use Twitter?)

Thanks. This is important, and most people over the age of 25 don’t understand this. (Uh oh, I’m not bringing up the age question again, am I?)

Let’s start from a simple statement.

How compelling you find content is directly proportional to how relevant it is to you. The more relevant to you, the more you care.

OK, how about one more simple statment.

The people in your social network are relevant to you compared to those who are outside your social network. For more on that, read this.

Let’s mash the last two statements together.

Given that your social network is relevant to you, content generated from your social network is going to be compelling to you. The more content generated from your social network you get, the better.

It’s going to be boring nonsense to everyone else. So what.

Sites need to realize that if they want customers to visit at least once a day, there needs to be a lot of content available for consumption generated from their social network. This is what Facebook does. This is what Twitter does.

How well does your site integrate with my life?

Comments (1)