Inverting the Social Network

ReadWriteWeb covered a recent presentation by Kevin Marks of Google on the Social Cloud. Utilizing the Social Graph is currently something that is in the realm of developers. They dream up new applications that leverage our shared connections and Google's OpenSocial API makes it easier to deliver these applications to a variety of Social Networking sites. This is all well and good but I believe that adoption of OpenSocial could lead to a new phase in Social Networking. Let me explain... In the current evolution of Social Networks we have the different sites competing to be the leading social network. This has seen Facebook extend beyond its college roots to a more general audience. However, I am convinced that we as individuals separate out aspects of our persona by using different sites. For example, I tend to use Facebook to stay in touch with family and close friends whereas my professional network is on LinkedIn. If OpenSocial reaches a critical mass and makes it easy for us to join up and connect with friends on new sites then we could well see the next phase of Social Networking. This is a world that may be hinted at by Marc Andreessen's Ning. A world of niche social networks that address specific aspects of our persona. Our network of connections may exist in our address book, or in a networked resource like Plaxo, but we will enhance that core web of personal connections with discrete networks that address particular interests. When you think about this, it points to a world that turns the current Facebook model on its head. It is this view of the future that drives my interest in Data Portability. We should be the owners of our social cloud of connections. That information should not be held hostage by the sites we use. This is a fascinating debate on a vitally important issue. It is an issue that the vast majority of people do not fully comprehend the ramifications of.

Why is Web 2.0 so hard to define?

Marc Andreessen has posted a provocative blog about Web 2.0 - with a headline of "Why there's no such thing as Web 2.0". It is true that the classical definition of Web 2.0 is long and complex. It doesn't trip off the tongue! Marc Andreessen points to Tim O'Reilly's compact definition:

"Web 2.0 is the network as platform, spanning all connected devices; Web 2.0 applications are those that make the most of the intrinsic advantages of that platform: delivering software as a continually-updated service that gets better the more people use it, consuming and remixing data from multiple sources, including individual users, while providing their own data and services in a form that allows remixing by others, creating network effects through an "architecture of participation," and going beyond the page metaphor of Web 1.0 to deliver rich user experiences."

Marc also pokes a little tongue in cheek fun at Dave McClure's definition:

• web 2.0 is about rich client-side applications (aka ajax, flash, etc)
• web 2.0 is about tagging & ratings & voting (aka Flickr, Loomia, etc)
• web 2.0 is about user participation & user-generated content (aka Digg)
• web 2.0 is about APIs, RSS, and web services (aka Amazon, Google, Yahoo, eBay, etc)
• web 2.0 is about mashups & remixing content (aka HousingMaps, ChicagoCrime, etc)
• web 2.0 is about web 2.0

Dave does in fact gets us to a more easily memorable definition - if only by example. Which really serves to support Marc's underlying message - Web 2.0 is a label that has been utilized to define new business startups. What you notice with Dave's definition is that it uses compelling products and services to define the current boundaries of this Web 2.0 stuff. As Marc says - Web 2.0 has been latched on to by the entrepreneurial and venture communities to categorize new startups and leading lights in the Web industry. But Web 2.0 is real partly because as Tim O'Reilly started out - We can recognize what is NOT Web 2.0. My own humble attempt at a definition is this: "Web 2.0 defines web-delivered services and products that unleash the power of user generated, shared knowledge and discovery, delivered via a rich fabric of loosely connected, adaptable applications and open interfaces that are hosted in an entrepreneurial eco-system that monetizes the emergent knowledge pool for the shared advantage of the serivice creators and their community of users." I have probably missed some crucial aspect of What is Web 2.0 - if I have please help tell me. Leave a comment below.