3 ms·
"Every user decide which other users can follow them and what information will be shared with each of their followers." This effectively makes each person an i
by webwanderings 14y ago
"Every user decide which other users can follow them and what information will be shared with each of their followers."
This effectively makes each person an island in h/herself and hence the model of social-web breaks down. It wouldn't work and people know it.
In order to liberate the data, you're throwing the baby out with the bath water.
- arscan 14y agoI'm not following your rationale. Isn't that Facebook's default model? I explicitly choose who is allowed to see my content, and I have control over how much of that content they can see through privacy settings / lists. The problem with Facebook is that I simply don't trust them with my data.
- webwanderings 14y agoYes, that's correct, hence Facebook's user feed is not really based on, or helping, the social-web part of the user's life. The user feed or stream is there as an advertisement, a selling product, for the product and services to advertise to (it is sort of a loop, isn't it - you are selling yourself to the one who is also selling to you). The real social-web aspect of the Facebook is in their Groups, or Pages, where users collaborate, converge "together" on a single entity (of any particular Group or Page). Do you follow my logic now? I am against the idea of making users standing independent on their own because they then become an island in themselves. It is fine if you are making them a product, a brand, or portfolio, but none of this is helpful for the authentic social-interaction. You don't need a brand or portfolio to be social, that's not its original purpose. The original purpose of the user (individual human being) is to communicate, be social, create communities.