DataPortability is boring?

Drama 2.0 has made a guest post on Mashable suggesting that DataPortability is boring. I obviously disagree.

Let me address each of his main points one by one.

(1) The average Internet user probably isn’t an active member of dozens of Web 2.0 services. While this may be difficult for some to believe, the truth is that most people don’t feel compelled to sign up for every new Web 2.0 service that launches. And quite frequently, users sign up for services that they eventually end up using very little. Data portability seems a lot less compelling when one recognizes that many, if not most, mainstream Internet users aren’t actively investing their time equally across a wide range of Web 2.0 services.

Actually you’re wrong. Data Portability is not about ‘Web 2.0’ – it’s about any web-based service. A typical user might use CNN, Yahoo Mail, Facebook, AIM, their cell phone and their PC or Laptop. That’s a lot of apps. Imagine the possibilities of having them sync some aspects of your data.

(2) The average Internet user probably doesn’t need or want to take his friends along to every Web 2.0 service he or she signs up for. These services can be fun and entertaining, but the notion that every user wants to be able to import his data when signing up for a new one is asinine.

Really? I remember the same argument against Telephones, PCs and Cell phones. It’s only asinine if you have a failure of imagination.

The point is not what users do today, but rather what new applications and innovation are possible in a standards based data ecosystem.

(3) Privacy is just as important as openness. Where does my data end and yours begin? If you believe that users of Web 2.0 services have some inherent “right” to control their own data but that this data is in inexorably linked to the “social graph,” what “rights” do users have to control where “shared” data goes?

Openness is the wrong word. The DataPortability project does not refer to the ‘Open Web’ for a reason.

Privacy is also the wrong word. Privacy is too broad a term that has no actionable attributes. We need to focus on words that represent features for implementation. Features that allow Access controls and permissioning for example.

As for shared or derived data, the lines are being drawn and the issues are being debated. Just because it’s hard to work out doesn’t mean it’s not worth trying.

Speaking at Social Media

 

Speaking at Social Media

Join me there! Using the code “zaph” will get you half price off ($495).

Revolution of Me Chapter 3: Family 2.0 – Continued

As I posted earlier, I am going to be posting my book outline in parts to my blog to get feedback and Ideas – please feel free to chime in!

Except from “Revolution of Me” – A book outline by Chris Saad

Family 2.0

IMPLICATIONS OF THE CLUSTER

TABOO AND BAGGAGE

Marriage is a highly emotional subject for many. Our initial instinct when asked ‘Is an increasing divorce rate a normal and healthy trend’ is to scream no! How can it be?

When people get divorced they are hurt and betrayed. They leave with emotional baggage and are forever affected by the painful experience. “No” seems like the only obvious answer.

Without passing judgment one way or another however, consider that many of the downsides of divorce outlined above are actually not from the act of divorce, but rather our impressions and social taboos associated with it.

Social expectations and pressures result in many feeling a great deal of pain when trying to make the decision to separate. Once the separation occurs a lot of animosity and anger is based not on the failures of the other person, but rather on the failure of the marriage, wasted time and other external factors.

Besides the normal feelings of losing a long term loving relationship, perhaps a change in social dogma to families as flexible clusters of people who love each other, some who might have been married at one time or another, would improve the resulting fallout from divorces. Perhaps if the act of disolving a marrige was more normalized, the time would not be considered wasted, but rather well spent with a partner – a learning and growing experience for both.

Similarly, if parents and adults recognize families as more flexible clusters and behave accordingly, children would also experience less emotional turmoil when relationships change and evolve.

 

Read more on the wiki

Comments, ideas and contributions welcome!

See you in NY and Vegas

I will be heading to NY this coming week (Starting Sep 15) to speak at Web 2.0 Expo and Vegas to hang out at BlogWorldExpo over the weekend (Starting Sep 19). Please drop me a line if you’d like to meet up to chat.

The mythical value of data lockin

When talking to people about Data Portability there is a couple of questions that always gets asked first.

 

Why would a vendor allow users to leave their service?

 

Why make it easy for users to take the preacious data you have about them and use it on other sites?

or…

What is the business justification for letting data walk out the door?

 

You spent a lot of time and energy to get users to sign up and give up their data right?

My answer always consists of a number of parts. There are a number of reasons why vendors should get involved in an open ecosystem of data interchange. User respect, reduced barrier to entry, reduced network fatigue and more.

Today, however, I’d like to focus on one particular reason why the value of Data Lockin is a myth.

Here is a diagram that represents the data you have about your user. 100%. Awesome right? You have a complete view of the proprietary data you have managed to collect about your user.

100% of your proprietary data

Have you ever considered, however, that your user’s data actually looks like this?

Your User's Complete Data Set

Even if you are Google, and you know every search your users do, every document they write, every chat they have – you still don’t know their facebook social graph. You don’t know their tweet stream. You don’t know the books they bought on Amazon.

Your view of your user’s data pales in comparisson to their complete data set.

Not to mention the data you think you have is out-of-date weeks after you aquire it. Interests change, friends come and go, projects, assignments and jobs change and much, much more.

Rapid Expiration of Data

So, Data Portability is not about letting your users ‘walk out’ of your service. Data Portability is about enabling, empowering and encouraging your users to bring all their data with them, to connect your data to the rest of their data ecosystem and to continue to refresh and maintain the data on an ongoing basis.

The value of Data Lockin is a myth. Data Portability is an opportunity to have true visibility into a user’s friends, interests, content and comments.

Are you thinking about joining the data web?

Revolution of Me: Chapter 3: Family 2.0

As I posted earlier, I am going to be posting my book outline in parts to my blog to get feedback and Ideas – please feel free to chime in!

Except from “Revolution of Me” – A book outline by Chris Saad

 

INTRODUCTION

Unshakeable family units have given way to an increase in constantly evolving family clusters.

GETTING A DIVORCE

If you return to the core truth about Marriage, it is an institution designed to lock two people into a contract for the sake of raising children in a stable, predicable and balanced environment. It is a container for building a successful life and offspring together in a family unit.

The institution has its roots in ancient history when work was hard (and potentially far from home) and survival was even harder. People had limited choices for partnership (mostly inside their immediate geographic area), life expectancies were short and life moved very slowly.

In modern times, in developed countries, life looks very different. Work is not always hard or far away. In a lot of cases it can even be done from home. Survival is not as hard. Technologies and medicines have ensured that life spans average around 80 years and dense cities and the broad Internet access has created a hyper-choice for companionship.

Is life better? Who’s to say? Perhaps our fast pace, shallow connections and increased life spans have only served to further isolate us from real relationships. The purpose of this text is not to judge.

It is clear, however, that the contract of Marriage now exists in very different times.

It seems natural, then, that Marriage as an institution (a container) seem to be changing shape as well.

From Wikipedia article about ‘Divorce’: 

“In many developed countries, divorce rates increased markedly during the twentieth century. Among the states in which divorce has become commonplace are the United States, Canada, South Korea, and members of the European Union, with the exception of Malta (where all civil marriages are for life, because civil divorce is banned). In addition, acceptance of the single-parent family has resulted in many women deciding to have children outside marriage, as there is little remaining social stigma attached to unwed mothers in some societies. Japan retains a markedly lower divorce rate, though it has increased in recent years.”

So with changing social pressures, perhaps a change in the success rate of the basic social contract of Marriage is both healthy and expected adjustment? Perhaps a change in definition from a formal container into more of a loose cluster of familial associations will ultimately serve our new living conditions better.

 

Read more on the wiki

Comments, ideas and contributions welcome!