Sounds amazing, Tom! Of course, I can't completely wrap my head around it. This is one of those things, as was YouTube and the Ipod, etc., that I have to see in action in order to understand it. I look forward to doing just that!
It's gonna be interesting to see how it plays out. If it keeps going to the way it looks like it's going we might be able to keep our real friends together as we move from site to site...kinda like bar hoppin' with your buddies!
The people who think YouTube has it all... are not looking very far into the future... all of the big issues are about Community and it's the only asset that YouTube has that's wort a dam in the long run... it's a shame they don't know that...
I guess it all depends on what you're used to and the expectations that arise from that. Remember when we all had 3 channels? When UHF arrived, we were thrilled...for a while. Thanks.
This data portability factor is precisely why I made the decision not to do personal vlogs. I want to keep my stalker in the dark (yeah, right) and not give anyone reign over my image for manipulation or misrepresentation in the future.
Well, "data portability" doesn't refer to people copping your images, of course, but to your own ability to maintain the relationships you (and the other person) want to maintain across platforms. Stalkers don't care about these things: they simply rip and manipulate, legalities be damned. Thanks.
No doubt about it, Peter. Security is a key to data portability. Without it, we're all sunk. The good thing is that big companies like Google are putting their reputation (and their money!) on the line in this initiative. That's motivation to make sure it's done right. Thanks.
Great! It was inevitable. I'd read articles about this being the future of "data/info sharing" since the days of Napster. Looks like it's all-but upon us.
My mouth waters to think YouTube may decide to give access to some of the database tables relating to us. (I don't think it will happen) They could do this without relinquishing some of the proprietary stuff. I wish the DBA of Google would at least kick this idea around. You can do this physically now, but how nice it would be if we could issue a SQL statement and get this data in seconds.
I see both good and bad potential in such portability. The good is mobility, and independence from specific websites. The bad is the exploitation and abuse for the sake of accumulating personal information. That aspect scares me. Too much data, too portable. As JR mentioned, it's Pandora's Box.
Google is a corporation, not a non-profit. They could be sued by stockholders if the things they were doing weren't aimed at making money.
Of course Google is in favor of interoperability. It gives them access to more databases of personal info to track your age, gender, geographic location, and interests. That tells them what ads to present and gives them demographic data to use to charge higher prices to advertisers. Remember, Google's primary business is making money from information.
Well, Google also has a large foundation, so not every single activity is necessarily profit-making.
I wouldn't slough off their support for interoperability so quickly. As the big dog in the information market they probably will end up providing more information than they receive.
Sorry, I wrote that when I was very tired and it doesn't sound quite the way I intended. I've got to start making videos. The 500 character limit is too restrictive for a discussion like this.
I'm not anti-Google. I was just playing devils advocate and pointing out the potential down side of having that information concentrated in one company. Actually, I like Google and use several of their services regularly. (continued)
Being a corporation sometimes makes Google do things they don't want to do. For instance, as soon as Google, with their deep pockets, bought YT, the usual suspects started making noises about multi-billion dollar copyright infringement lawsuits. That's why we're seeing so many videos taken down and accounts closed. Google doesn't really have much of a choice.
They also had to implement it quickly, which is probably why we're seeing so much collateral damage. (continued)
Third parties also play a role in this. IIRC, some third parties are already using search engines to vet people for jobs and loans. I bet the insurance companies would like to search for any pertinent info before issuing policies but I've never heard of that happening.
Google has a lot of valuable information and that has to be tempting to a lot of people both internal and external to Google, no matter how nice they are. Bummer!
very interesting reading. thanks for providing this information and providing a venue for thinking (in general, but also more specifically, about this topic). personally i am torn on the issue because at some point, i don't care who accesses my information (it can only effect my life in the way i allow it), but on the other hand, there are numerous wackos out there.
I don't think any of us are completely of one mind on this issue. Security will be essential, yet we all know security is imperfect. People steal cars every day but the auto companies have chosen convenience over absolute theft prevention. Every one of these choices involves trade offs. Thanks.
When I would talk with friends or family and laugh about how the way things were in the past seem so silly in the present, of course the question rises "what from the present, is gonna be laughed at when it becomes past itself."
I think the lack of interoperability of these kinds of sites might very well be one of these things. Internet services now are like mobile telephone services were a couple of years ago, you can only call those with the same service provider... I bet that made you giggle
I think the best you could do would be making a video saying "Hey, everyone who wants to keep in touch with me should join this mailing list or subscribe to my blog RSS or contact me on instant messaging." I can't really see any way to export subscribers that isn't like a violation of the individual subscriber's privacy.
Thanks for the update! I'm enjoying all the comments regarding identity and a "brand identity"... nothing really original to add aside from the fact that I am envious some YouTube users have been pretty successful at keeping their real identity private. (Not that I actively tried to keep secret since my website and news articles have revealed mine)
thanks for the update, i'm not sure what to think about it to be honest. I run a couple of IDs online as you know... will this mean that they will have to merge?
There may very well be a simple way to maintain several aliases, all of which funnel in to a single identity. But, I'm clearly out of my depth when I get to that level of detail.
...if only people knew what is already known about how much has been learned and already done by online banking, commerce, telecoms. The box of Pandora has already been opened...
I have ONE persona/avatar on the Web,for video- music-interactivity in SL etc, and it is all me all the time. DoctorMetropolis! how can this be strategized into a form of digital brand that belongs to me? does this tool do that?
well I read the site's mission goals and stuff, but how and who would take ME and brand ME on the multiple platforms and cross reference/link them into a giant multiplexed puzzle that equals the megalink to the sum total of DoctorMetropolis on the web? am I being too wordy? I guess the simple version is how?
Do these kind of development signal the end of an individual having multiple online personalities...or should that be identities? If we are to converge all our social networking we will have to do it under one name. Some people aren't gonna like that!
If you Google the OpenID project you'll see the direction some of this is heading. Nope, some people aren't going to want to opt in to that world. Others can't wait for it.
Tom, I understand the interest in moving relationships, and the potential of interoperability between sites is interesting, but I wonder how does this play off against the privacy of the personal data they talk about? We need to have control over how and when identity data is used/shared.
Identity is an interesting concept in the online world -- because it has historically been flexible and transient. Thanks for posting this thread of vids.
I think we all realize that identity security becomes a huge issue when portability comes into play. Ever do any online banking? Ever buy from Amazon? Ever have a problem? Somehow, those folks have figured it out.
Sure. They have my credit card/account/credit history linking me to the real world. That's who I really am anyway, right? :-) And when that's compromised...
But should a person be able to have the freedom to create new identities that are equally valid? Coalesce identities? separate identities? I have reasons (which I consider valid) to keep separate online identities, but at the same time, I don't want someone else's ability to create a fraudulent identity to hurt me.
At some point, I believe the need of the society to connect an online identity to a physical person (for accountability, regulation/enforcement) is going to try to eliminate my ability to exist online as multiple persons.
But the goal of maintaining multiple personalities is not directly related to your topic on relationship portability. It's only a peripheral interest.
thanks for posting this.
mikehedge 4 years ago
You're welcome, mike.
tlg847 4 years ago
Sounds amazing, Tom! Of course, I can't completely wrap my head around it. This is one of those things, as was YouTube and the Ipod, etc., that I have to see in action in order to understand it. I look forward to doing just that!
JimmyHook 4 years ago
It's gonna be interesting to see how it plays out. If it keeps going to the way it looks like it's going we might be able to keep our real friends together as we move from site to site...kinda like bar hoppin' with your buddies!
tlg847 4 years ago
The people who think YouTube has it all... are not looking very far into the future... all of the big issues are about Community and it's the only asset that YouTube has that's wort a dam in the long run... it's a shame they don't know that...
renetto 4 years ago 2
renetto thank you for commenting. you rock.
mikehedge 4 years ago
I guess it all depends on what you're used to and the expectations that arise from that. Remember when we all had 3 channels? When UHF arrived, we were thrilled...for a while. Thanks.
tlg847 4 years ago
This data portability factor is precisely why I made the decision not to do personal vlogs. I want to keep my stalker in the dark (yeah, right) and not give anyone reign over my image for manipulation or misrepresentation in the future.
MomAngel7 4 years ago
Well, "data portability" doesn't refer to people copping your images, of course, but to your own ability to maintain the relationships you (and the other person) want to maintain across platforms. Stalkers don't care about these things: they simply rip and manipulate, legalities be damned. Thanks.
tlg847 4 years ago
Cool, now we just have to wait! Thanks for the info Tom!
f3xpgm 4 years ago
Should be this year.
tlg847 4 years ago
No doubt about it, Peter. Security is a key to data portability. Without it, we're all sunk. The good thing is that big companies like Google are putting their reputation (and their money!) on the line in this initiative. That's motivation to make sure it's done right. Thanks.
tlg847 4 years ago
Great! It was inevitable. I'd read articles about this being the future of "data/info sharing" since the days of Napster. Looks like it's all-but upon us.
NaturalTwentyFilms 4 years ago
I love the concept, and will be interested to see how this continues to develop.
kenrg 4 years ago
You and me both, Mr. rg!
tlg847 4 years ago
Thanks for the update, Tom. I can't wait to see what comes out of this -- sounds awesome.
Prepoceros 4 years ago
Thanks and Happy New Year, Natalie!
tlg847 4 years ago
My mouth waters to think YouTube may decide to give access to some of the database tables relating to us. (I don't think it will happen) They could do this without relinquishing some of the proprietary stuff. I wish the DBA of Google would at least kick this idea around. You can do this physically now, but how nice it would be if we could issue a SQL statement and get this data in seconds.
ockteby 4 years ago
What about Myspace..
xleax 4 years ago
myspace is over
jmeldon 4 years ago
yeah right
xleax 4 years ago
No word as of yet on what they'll do.
tlg847 4 years ago
I see both good and bad potential in such portability. The good is mobility, and independence from specific websites. The bad is the exploitation and abuse for the sake of accumulating personal information. That aspect scares me. Too much data, too portable. As JR mentioned, it's Pandora's Box.
Moosie
anmoose 4 years ago
Pandora was a free-marketer!
No doubt, Moosie, tricky stuff.
tlg847 4 years ago
its funny as I was watching this video Tom, the ad was for Idenity theft prevention. I was think how ironic.....lol
vmanvand 4 years ago
Irony is my hobby! Thanks.
tlg847 4 years ago
yes, but do you also do windows? :)
LeSaMilano 4 years ago
No...I'm a Mac guy!
8^)
tlg847 4 years ago
that's not very PC! ;)
LeSaMilano 4 years ago
That's 'cause I'm an iPhony!
8^)
tlg847 4 years ago
Thanks for the update.
tooomp 4 years ago
Google is a corporation, not a non-profit. They could be sued by stockholders if the things they were doing weren't aimed at making money.
Of course Google is in favor of interoperability. It gives them access to more databases of personal info to track your age, gender, geographic location, and interests. That tells them what ads to present and gives them demographic data to use to charge higher prices to advertisers. Remember, Google's primary business is making money from information.
theDave1956 4 years ago
Well, Google also has a large foundation, so not every single activity is necessarily profit-making.
I wouldn't slough off their support for interoperability so quickly. As the big dog in the information market they probably will end up providing more information than they receive.
tlg847 4 years ago
Sorry, I wrote that when I was very tired and it doesn't sound quite the way I intended. I've got to start making videos. The 500 character limit is too restrictive for a discussion like this.
I'm not anti-Google. I was just playing devils advocate and pointing out the potential down side of having that information concentrated in one company. Actually, I like Google and use several of their services regularly. (continued)
theDave1956 4 years ago
Being a corporation sometimes makes Google do things they don't want to do. For instance, as soon as Google, with their deep pockets, bought YT, the usual suspects started making noises about multi-billion dollar copyright infringement lawsuits. That's why we're seeing so many videos taken down and accounts closed. Google doesn't really have much of a choice.
They also had to implement it quickly, which is probably why we're seeing so much collateral damage. (continued)
theDave1956 4 years ago
Third parties also play a role in this. IIRC, some third parties are already using search engines to vet people for jobs and loans. I bet the insurance companies would like to search for any pertinent info before issuing policies but I've never heard of that happening.
Google has a lot of valuable information and that has to be tempting to a lot of people both internal and external to Google, no matter how nice they are. Bummer!
theDave1956 4 years ago
very interesting reading. thanks for providing this information and providing a venue for thinking (in general, but also more specifically, about this topic). personally i am torn on the issue because at some point, i don't care who accesses my information (it can only effect my life in the way i allow it), but on the other hand, there are numerous wackos out there.
jrt31169 4 years ago
I don't think any of us are completely of one mind on this issue. Security will be essential, yet we all know security is imperfect. People steal cars every day but the auto companies have chosen convenience over absolute theft prevention. Every one of these choices involves trade offs. Thanks.
tlg847 4 years ago
Im sorry I was too distracted by the opportunity to order flowers online to catch what you were saying
orju 4 years ago
Were they nice flowers? Just kidding...I know these things are irritating. Like Zappa said, "we're only in it for the money..."
tlg847 4 years ago
When I would talk with friends or family and laugh about how the way things were in the past seem so silly in the present, of course the question rises "what from the present, is gonna be laughed at when it becomes past itself."
I think the lack of interoperability of these kinds of sites might very well be one of these things. Internet services now are like mobile telephone services were a couple of years ago, you can only call those with the same service provider... I bet that made you giggle
funkwurm 4 years ago
That is very interesting. Thanks for the update!
PiFan7 4 years ago
I think the best you could do would be making a video saying "Hey, everyone who wants to keep in touch with me should join this mailing list or subscribe to my blog RSS or contact me on instant messaging." I can't really see any way to export subscribers that isn't like a violation of the individual subscriber's privacy.
bradzski 4 years ago
I see Robert Scoble has a video on seesmic about data portability. I've already imported all my Stickam friends into Facebook.
robrobbins 4 years ago
Very interested to see how all this pans out. Thanks.
thefrozenghost 4 years ago
Thanks for the update! I'm enjoying all the comments regarding identity and a "brand identity"... nothing really original to add aside from the fact that I am envious some YouTube users have been pretty successful at keeping their real identity private. (Not that I actively tried to keep secret since my website and news articles have revealed mine)
ghostwise 4 years ago
The times they are a changing.....
urbanblog 4 years ago
That'd be a heck of a song title...
tlg847 4 years ago
thanks for the update, i'm not sure what to think about it to be honest. I run a couple of IDs online as you know... will this mean that they will have to merge?
hellyersonline 4 years ago
There may very well be a simple way to maintain several aliases, all of which funnel in to a single identity. But, I'm clearly out of my depth when I get to that level of detail.
tlg847 4 years ago
thanks Tom
kidblood1 4 years ago
Welcome.
tlg847 4 years ago
This will either freak people out or please them depending on their personal point of view on identity.
jrsnyderjr 4 years ago
Bingo! It's an opt-in world at that point, with consequences to either yes or no decisions.
tlg847 4 years ago
Opting out really means opting out of a lot more than likely and opting in probably means never opting back out.
jrsnyderjr 4 years ago
*glacing back at comment thread*
...if only people knew what is already known about how much has been learned and already done by online banking, commerce, telecoms. The box of Pandora has already been opened...
jrsnyderjr 4 years ago
I have ONE persona/avatar on the Web,for video- music-interactivity in SL etc, and it is all me all the time. DoctorMetropolis! how can this be strategized into a form of digital brand that belongs to me? does this tool do that?
DoctorMetropolis 4 years ago
I think that's exactly the goal, Doc.
tlg847 4 years ago
well I read the site's mission goals and stuff, but how and who would take ME and brand ME on the multiple platforms and cross reference/link them into a giant multiplexed puzzle that equals the megalink to the sum total of DoctorMetropolis on the web? am I being too wordy? I guess the simple version is how?
DoctorMetropolis 4 years ago
Do these kind of development signal the end of an individual having multiple online personalities...or should that be identities? If we are to converge all our social networking we will have to do it under one name. Some people aren't gonna like that!
talk74 4 years ago
If you Google the OpenID project you'll see the direction some of this is heading. Nope, some people aren't going to want to opt in to that world. Others can't wait for it.
tlg847 4 years ago
Tom, I understand the interest in moving relationships, and the potential of interoperability between sites is interesting, but I wonder how does this play off against the privacy of the personal data they talk about? We need to have control over how and when identity data is used/shared.
Identity is an interesting concept in the online world -- because it has historically been flexible and transient. Thanks for posting this thread of vids.
DanPostropheL 4 years ago
I think we all realize that identity security becomes a huge issue when portability comes into play. Ever do any online banking? Ever buy from Amazon? Ever have a problem? Somehow, those folks have figured it out.
tlg847 4 years ago
Sure. They have my credit card/account/credit history linking me to the real world. That's who I really am anyway, right? :-) And when that's compromised...
But should a person be able to have the freedom to create new identities that are equally valid? Coalesce identities? separate identities? I have reasons (which I consider valid) to keep separate online identities, but at the same time, I don't want someone else's ability to create a fraudulent identity to hurt me.
DanPostropheL 4 years ago
At some point, I believe the need of the society to connect an online identity to a physical person (for accountability, regulation/enforcement) is going to try to eliminate my ability to exist online as multiple persons.
But the goal of maintaining multiple personalities is not directly related to your topic on relationship portability. It's only a peripheral interest.
DanPostropheL 4 years ago