Theories about Google’s acquisition of Jaiku

Jaiku LogoI think it’s pretty interesting news that Google ended up buying Jaiku. Can’t say I saw it coming, and it’s unexpected enough to make things interesting for a bunch of us for whom such actions cause reverberations in our work and also give rise to fair speculation about why they did it and what it means.

So earlier I just so happened to be talking with Someone Who Shall Remain Unnamed and he put my mind into circles about this thing. He pointed me to some of dotBen’s ideas about the acquisition. While I’m not really sure about his geographic assessment (given that my old roommate and coworker Andy Smith is coming back to San Francisco, which kind of blows the London-relocation theory), I do share his (and others’) concern that this acquisition could spell the demise of Jaiku in priority of other more average-Joe services:

Did Google buy Jaiku for it’s engineering talent rather than for the product? I’m betting the engineering team is going to be siphoned off into the GPhone project.

At the same time, I think that Google’s play will likely continue to be software rather than hardware. Here’s why:

  • Google makes a lot of software, most of it hosted on the web.
  • Google doesn’t make any consumer hardware.
  • Google wouldn’t mind being in the wireless business, but probably not the handset business.
  • And, Apple already has a bunch of deals with the existing phone carriers.
  • Apple makes good consumer hardware.

Yes, those last two are about Apple. Because the deal between Google and Apple is sweetening every day. And Apple doesn’t really buy companies, Google does. So that’s why Google bought Jaiku today and not Apple.

But I digress. Let’s throw some more theories and extrapolations out there.

Ok, first and foremost, the browser. In one of my many unpublished drafts, I talk about how Steve was right about building Web 2.0 apps for the iPhone and why he’s even kind of right trying to prevent people from building so-called “native apps”. Sadly folks don’t really think about the web as a “native” environment yet. It’s got crappy access to hardware and some pretty weak tools for building rich interfaces so they stick with what they know rather than embracing the rough-and-tumble world of designing and coding for web browsers. What’s there to love, really?

Still, Apple (and moreso Google) already think of the web as their native turf. And where the battle for the future will be waged (which incidentally puts Microsoft at a huge disadvantage, since it’s been fighting against the web all along). And the browser is key to this equation, which is why Apple has a world-class (and getting better daily) open source browser that’s had an awful lot of attention paid to its compatibility with Google Apps lately. It’s also mobile ready, as demonstrated by how insanely well Safari works on the iPhone compared to any other mobile browser. I guess to some extent, one can forgive any misgivings Google now has about betting on Firefox, the little engine that could have and should have and then, well, didn’t, at least when it came to having a mobile strategy. But I digress. Again.

Take a look at the iPhone’s Maps feature. Yes, it’s driven by Google, but I didn’t have to tell you that. What’s missing? Well, besides GPS for yourself, it’s missing GPS for your friends and family. Yeah, that sounds a little creepy to me too, but don’t kid yourself, it’s coming. Us early adopters have been geoplotting each other for years now, on sites like Plazes, Jaiku and — oh yeah — before them, on another Google acquisition: Dodgeball. I mean, Google’s full of tenacity. It’s nutty to think that regular people will ever adopt the that we currently check in to these services with. After all, that’s what computers are for.

What Google keeps getting closer to with first its acquisition of Dodgeball a year ago and now Jaiku is the socialization of presence. That’s what it’s all about. That’s how they’ll increase the relevance of their ads in situ. That’s how they’ll improve the quality of their services (like Google Maps). Tim O’Reilly has for some time called for the development of the Web 2.0 Address Book. I think belying that assertion is the fact that more people need to get in the habit and mindset of maintaining their online selves — thereby making their status — or presence — more widely known and available.

The Web 2.0 Address Book isn’t really about how you connect to someone. It’s not really about having their home, work and secret lair addresses. It’s not about having access to their 15 different cell phone numbers that change depending on whether they’re home, at work, in the car, on a plane, in front of their computer and so on. It’s not about knowing the secret handshake and token-based smoke-signal that gains you direct access to send someone a guaranteed email that will bypass their moats of antispam protection. In the real world (outside of Silicon Valley), people want to type in the name of the recipient and hit send and have it reach the destination, in whatever means necessary, and in as appropriate a manner as possible. For this to happen, recipients need to provide a whole lot more information about themselves and their contexts to the system in order for this whole song and dance to work.

If you think far enough into the future, and realize that the iPhone is essentially the Sputnik of next generation of computing and telephony, you’ll realize how important the development of presence technology will be in light of the 2.0 Address Book. Sure, the VoIP folks have known about this stuff forever, and CISCO even has a few decent products built on it, but I’m not talking about IP-routed phone calls. I’m talking about IP-routed people. Believe it or not, this is where things have to go in order for Google and Apple to continue their relentless drive towards ease-of-use and clarity of design.

In the future, you will buy a cellphone-like device. It will have a connection to the internet, no matter what. And it’ll probably be powered over the air. The device will be tradeable with your friends and will retain no solid-state memory. You literally could pick up a device on a park bench, login with your OpenID (IP-routed people, right?) from any number of service providers (though the best ones will be provided by the credit card companies). Your user data will live in the cloud and be delivered in bursts via myriad APIs strung together and then authorized with OAuth to accomplish specific tasks as they manifest. If you want to make a phone call, you call up the function on the touch screen and it’s all web-based, and looks and behaves natively. Your address book lives in Google-land on some server, and not in the phone. You start typing someone’s name and not only does it pull the latest photos of the first five to ten people it matches, but it does so in a distributed fashion, plucking the data from across the web, grabbing both the most up-to-date contact information, the person’s availability and their presence. It’s basically an IM-style buddy list for presence, and the data never grows old and never goes stale. Instead of just seeing someone’s inert photo when you bring up their record in your address book, you see all manner of social and presence data. Hell, you might even get a picture of their current location. This is the lowercase semantic web in action where the people who still hold on to will become increasingly marginalized through obfuscation and increasingly invisible to the network. I don’t have an answer for this or a moral judgement on it; it’s going to happen one way or another.

In any case, Apple will make these ultra-slim, literally stupid devices that don’t do anything but sport a web browser, a scratch-resistant surface and some RAM (and show off ads really crisply). And these devices that are popular today with 40, 60, 80GB will become our generation’s Edsel, when the future music device will be able to access all music from all time on demand, in crystal clear streaming vinyl-quality. Oh, and we’ll have solved Network Latency by turning every single device with any kind of antenna into a network repeater. Scratch that, we’ll turn every human into a repeater. And yeah, we’d have figured out the collision problems that might come with such a network as well.

Ok, all nice and fine. It’s coming and it’s not even that far off so I shouldn’t congratulate myself about being too prescient or anything.

But I do think that there’s a framing here that’s being missed in gawking over the acquisition of Jaiku.

In the scheme of things, it really doesn’t have anything to do with Twitter, other than that Twitter is a dumb network that happens to transport simple messages really well in a format like Jaiku’s while Jaiku is a mobile service that happens to send dumb messages around to demonstrate what social presence on the phone could look like. These services are actually night and day different and it’s no wonder that Google bought Jaiku and not Twitter. And hey, it’s not a contest either, it’s just that Twitter didn’t have anything to offer Google in terms of development for their mobile strategy. Twitter is made up of web people and is therefore a content strategy; Jaiku folks do web stuff pretty well, but they also do client stuff pretty well. I mean, Andy used to work at Flock on a web browser. Jyri used to work at Nokia on devices. Jaiku practically invented the social presence browser for the phone (though, I might add, Facebook snatched up Parakey out of Google’s clenches, denying them of Joe Hewitt, who built the first web-based presence app with the Facebook iPhone app). If anything, the nearest approximation to Jaiku is Plazes, which actually does the location-cum-presense thing and has mobile development experience.

That’s enough for now. I’ll stew on the Google-Apple-iPhone-gPhone-Presence-Jaiku-Dodgeball-Address Book-Maps a little more. But this should give you some fodder to contemplate in the mean time.

OAuth Core 1.0 Final Draft is out — now build stuff!

OAuth token -- not a final logo! by Chris MessinaI should have pushed this post out yesterday and no latter than earlier today, but what are you gunna do, y’know?

Anyway, I spent most of the day in #OAuth with Eran, Gabe and Mark Atwood and others plotting the release of the news about our release of OAuth Core 1.0 Final Draft. This news after three previous public drafts culminating the collective effort leveraged over four months of regular meetings, intense discussions and negotiations and constantly reminding ourselves to keep the scope creep to an absolute minimum.

We overhauled the website, got the blog going (with an official press release!), some initial tumbles, added some content to the wiki and ended up with an excellent Getting Started guide and an Introduction provided by Eran.

All in all, I want to quickly point out the technologies that are making this effort possible with just a small group of admin-advocates:

Without this technology and how far collaborative technology has come in just two years, it wouldn’t be possible for us to be moving as fast as we are and making as much progress as we have been, consistently, with as few person-hours as we have at our disposal.

Next steps

Of course, even with this Final Draft out, we’re only getting started. There are a number of things that still need to be done, and these are a few off the top of my head (I’m maintaining my personal list here if you want to help out):

  • Get the logo figured out. I’ve pinged like five guys about this. Why y’all gots ta be so busy! If you have an idea, please post it to the Flickr group. I’m patient on this one though.
  • Implement support for OAuth! If you can, replace your proprietary API access delegation protocol with OAuth. If you don’t code (like me!) add software that you think could benefit from OAuth to the Advocacy page.
  • Help improve the libraries. A bunch of folks have worked on the first open source implementations of OAuth but we need more testers, more implementors and more folks to get code running in the wild.
  • Spread the word! This is a grassroots-lead effort and if it’s going to be successful, has to spread from the bottom up. Early reviews suggest that the spec is clear and easy to implement. If you can promote this open protocol within your organization and get it adopted, please do…! And then blog it and point me to it so I can tumbleblog it!

I’m sure there’s more that needs to be done, but this is what I got now (yes Gabe, we still have to deal with IPR… I’m on it!).

Making history visible as it happens

I’d like to close by making a point of process explicit for the benefit of those just tuning in. Two defining aspects of successful community efforts with which I’ve been involved are 1) the ability of an enthusiast to tell a story about why some idea or technology is personally meaningful to her 2) and a large body of collected wisdom, notes, drafts, paper trails, ideas, struggles and all the things that went into the final product. Math teachers force you to show your work for a reason: it’s oftentimes not the answer that’s interesting, it’s how you got there.

So, I’m making explicit my intention to be as transparent, straight-forward and forthcoming about my experiences helping to usher OAuth forward. I’ve not really done this kind of thing before, but being surrounded by brilliant and talented people seems to bring out the best in me. That and I’ve watched what’s happened in the OpenID community for over a year now and, for what it’s worth, I want to avoid getting dragged down into endless loops and debilitating scope creep. In fact I’ve not been involved with the OpenID community for months because of this kind of stuff and I want to expressly make an effort to document openly the approach we take with OAuth to see if we can’t avoid the same fate.

Cheers and congrats to all the folks who helped to make this happen. It might be a relatively minor step in terms the development of new technology today, but looking out long enough into the horizon, I think we’re adding a significantly important piece of puzzle that’s been missing for some time.

Flywheels and spinning plates

Cables and Flywheels of San Francsico by Mike Sweeney
Photo by Mike Sweeney and shared under Creative Commons license.

Interesting conversation tonight with Greg Wolff and his wife about capturing social capital as a dynamic kind of “currency”.

I didn’t follow the discussion in its entirely, but going off on my own tangent, I did come up with a rather interesting framing of the idea… at least insomuch as it relates to the gift economy and participation in open source communities.

The example given had to do with choosing, let’s say, an ice cream store to shop at. Everything being equal save the size of the crowd gathered outside, the very size of the crowd (or social capital as defined by the amount of accrued activity) could well determine which shop you’d buy your ice cream from. Essentially, the premise is that in numbers lies preference, wisdom or the promise of something better.

Applying this to open source projects and open source communities, it does seem to be true that the amount of momentum or potential attention such projects or communities can generate determines its attractiveness or recruiting-slash-staying power (obviously quality, opportunity and interestingness also play a role among other things).

Spinning Plates by MerWhat’s interesting about this observation is that it can be modeled by imagining, first, a vast number of simultaneously spinning plates, representing all active open source projects. When someone sees a “plate” faltering, there is an opening to get involved and to contribute productively, keeping the plate “spinning”. Should there be a lack of interest or a lack of talent over time, that “plate” (or project) will fall (essentially going dormant). Now, fortunately, the value and progress made on that project has not been lost, since, as it is open source, anyone can come along later and start up the plate spinning again. An important principle in play here is the “conservation of attention” within a system run on social capital. Knowledge-based systems are infinite; what is limited is attention spread across knowledge-amassing projects. In thinking of open source projects as spinning plates, they require attention in order to keep “going” or producing more knowledge.

The second part of this observation is that, similar to the plate metaphor, successful open source projects operate like flywheels, spinning faster and faster in perpetuity the more that people join up and contribute.

However, this only works to a certain degree. If an open source project builds a community of active contributors and “gets the flywheel going” but then is unable to build infrastructure to harness the additional marginal effort that is contributed as social capital, eventually the excess social capital will dissipate and spread to other spinning plates (or open source projects). The result is something of a self-correcting equilibrium state where projects will continue to grow and flourish so long as they are able to sufficiently spend the capital that is being amassed.

This is a reflection of the self-healing, decentralized aspects of open source projects, where if they can not build large enough “buckets” to contain the magnitude of contributions directed their way, they will grow temporally only to revert back to a smaller and more manageable size.

In other words, if a project needs me for something and acknowledges and shows appreciate for my work in the context and view of other contributors, I’ll be happy to contribute more (to continue helping to spin the flywheel). If instead, I give my “gifts” of work to a project and they ignore, reject or otherwise devalue or fail to acknowledge what I’ve contributed, I will likely abandon the project and seek a more receptive audience elsewhere, that will compensate me with social capital in exchange for the work that I am willing to do — monetarily speaking — for free.

My contributions should be valued in direct relation to the degree that I am able to help “spin the flywheel”. And insomuch as the project is one that others are willing to work on, there is a derivation of social capital that comes predominantly from the shared experience of working together with peers. Thus I am able to produce more “wealth” (in terms of social capital) for myself and for others by giving away my work freely and by working on projects in which many others are willing to do the same.

In this we find one of the motivating factors for working in open source and reveal how people come to decide on which project(s) to contribute to: namely, the degree to which one can earn and spend social capital, both individually and collectively. The degree to which one derives personal satisfaction from the outcome of this exchange will in turn determine the longevity and ongoing success of a project.

Putting people into the protocol

I really don’t like the phrase “user-centric identity” and as I struggled to name this post, I came upon Pete Rowley’s 2006 phrase the people are in the protocol.

This isn’t much different from what I used to call “people in the browser” when I was at Flock, so I’ll use it.

Anyway, as part of another post I’m working on, it seemed useful to call out what I see as the benefits to services that “put people into the protocol” or, more aptly, those services that are designed around people who tend to use more than one web service and a single identifier (like an OpenID) to represent themselves across services.

Here’s what I’ve come up with so far:

  • I am me, wherever I go. I may have multiple personas, facets or identities that I use online, but fundamentally, I can manage them more effectively because services are oriented around me and not around the services that I use (it would be like logging into a new user account every time you want to switch applications!).
  • I have access to my stuff, wherever I am. Even though I use lots of different web services, just like I use lots of desktop applications, I can always access my data, no matter where I created it or where it’s stored. And if I want to get all of my data out of a service into another one, I should be able to do so.
  • My friends come with me, but continue to use only the services that they chose to. If I can send email from any domain to any domain, why can’t I join one network and then add friends from any other network?
  • I am the master of my domain. Both literally and figuratively, I should be able to choose any identity provider to manage all my external connections to the world, including running my own, from my own domain. While remote service providers can certainly set the standards for who they allow access to their APIs, this should be done in a clear and transparent way, so that even people who host their own identity can have fair access.

There may of course be other benefits that I’m forgetting or omitting, but I think I’ve covered some of the primary ones, at least so that I continue with my other post!

Announcing OAuth 1.0 Public Draft 1

Well, it’s been a long time coming, and if you’ve been following my Twitters at all, you’ll know that I’ve been working on an open, authorization protocol called OAuth for the past few months. Today we released the first Public Draft for review.

The idea started as a humble effort to accomplish two goals: first, to enable Ma.gnolia members who created their accounts with OpenIDs (and therefore don’t have traditional usernames and passwords) to be able to use Dashboard Widgets; and second, to enable Twitter to adopt OpenID when its current API requires a username and password to authorize access to protected status feeds.

In any case, both of these use cases were part of the same problem: the lack of a uniform and open protocol for what’s called “delegated authentication”. Another useful metaphor that I’ve come to like is what John Panzer and Eran Hammer-Lahav used before him, that of a valet key:

OAuth is like a valet key for all your web services. A valet key lets you give a valet the ability to park your car, but not the ability to get into the trunk or drive more than 2 miles or limit the RPMs on your high end German automobile. In the same way, an OAuth key lets you give a web agent the ability to check your web mail but NOT the ability to pretend to be you and send mail to everybody in your address book.

Arguably the value of OAuth as a technological innovation goes beyond that. After all, anyone can implement their own valet key system that works in their own universe of vehicles. The harder part is actually the social and political work of getting everyone to buy in and follow the same design pattern, leading to interoperability between systems.

In fact that’s where we were before OAuth: Google had AuthSub, AOL had OpenAuth (OAuth’s former name, by the way), Yahoo had BBAuth and Flickr had FlickrAuth (not to mention Facebook Auth and Windows Live ID Web Authentication). Which meant that if you were an independent developer (like Matt Biddulph from Dopplr) you had to pick which auth system you wanted to support unless you had money and time coming out of your armpits, you’d code against all of them.

Of course, that’s not reality. And no one has the time or energy to maintain support for every protocol, so instead, most people take the easy way out and just ask for the veritable keys to all the different services you use:

ShareThis | Import your addresses...

Now, don’t get me wrong, this gets the job done. And it works. But it’s a really really really bad idea.

Not only are people being trained into thinking that it’s okay to fill in any form that looks like a Gmail login box on any old website (trusted or not) but it’s creating an untenable situation where, as a member of these various services, you have no way to control the access you’ve given away without changes your password — which in effect will disable every one of these sites that’s storing your credentials — forcing you to revisit every one of them and share with them your new username and password. What a crappy experience!

Fortunately, Flickr got it right a long time ago and set the bar for user experience. In their model, you can try out a bunch of tools that help you upload photos to the service or use off-site mashups that do cool things with your photos all without giving away your most valuable credentials: your username and password!

Instead, when you sign in to your account, Flickr will assign special keys called “tokens” to each application that wants to access your account. Flickr then lets you configure how much access you want to grant to each app and lets you revoke that access at any time. No changing your password, no running around to have to re-authenticate all the apps that you still want to use if you want to disable one of them.

OAuth takes that approach one step further and extracts the best practices from the popular authentication systems I mentioned above and turns it into one elegant, unified authentication protocol that anyone can implement. And, because it’s an open standard that we hope many people will adopt and replace their own proprietary authentication systems with, it should be a no-brainer for developers to use and to support, resulting in fewer sites that, with a straight face, continue to ask you for your username and password (oh, and yes, it is compatible with OpenID, with Google Accounts, with Yahoo Accounts and any other sign-in system — OAuth doesn’t dictate how you sign-in, only how you delegate authentication).

Even though we’re only releasing the first public draft today, we already have pledges from Ma.gnolia, Twitter, Pownce, Jaiku, Dopplr and others that they intend to implement the protocol.

If you want to get involved, join our mailing list, take a look at the OAuth libraries under development for PHP, Ruby, Python, C# and others. We plan to formally release the final version the OAuth Protocol v1.0 on Oct 1, so watch this space for more news until then.

Stop building social networks

I started writing this post August 8th. Now that Dave Recordon is at Six Apart and blogging about these things and Brad Fitzpatrick has moved on to Google, I thought I should finally finish this post.

I fortuitously ran into Tim O’Reilly, Brad Fitzpatrick and Dave Recordon in Philz yesterday as I was grabbing a cup of coffee. They were talking about some pretty heady ideas and strategies towards wrenching free one’s friends networks from the multiple social networks out there — and recombining them in such a way that it’d be very hard to launch a closed down social network again.

The idea isn’t new. It’s certainly been attempted numerous times, with few successful efforts to show for it to date. I think that Brad and Dave might be on to something with their approach, though, but it begs an important question: once you’ve got a portable social network, what do you do with it?

Fortunately, Brian Oberkirch has been doing a lot of thinking on this subject lately with his series on , starting with a post on designing portable social networks lead up to his most recent post offering some great tips on how to prepare your site for the day when your users come knocking for a list of their friends to populate their new favor hang.

In his kick-off post, Brian laid the problem of social network fatigue as stemming from the:

  • Creation of yet another login/password to manage
  • Need to re-enter profile information for new services
  • Need to search and re-add network contacts at each new service
  • Need to reset notification and privacy preferences for each new service
  • Inability to manage and add value to these networks from a central app/work flow

I think these are the fundamental drivers behind the current surge of progress in user-centric identity services, as opposed to the aging trend of network-centric web services. If Eric Schmidt thinks that Web 3.0 will be made up of small pieces loosely joined and “in the cloud”, my belief, going back to my time with Flock, is that having consistent identifiers for the same person across multiple networks, services or applications is going to be fundamental to getting the next evolution of the web right.

Tim made the point during our discussion that at one point in computing history, SQL databases embedded access permissions in the database itself. In modern times, access controls have been decoupled from the data and are managed, maintained and federated without regard to the data itself, affording a host of new functionality and stability simply by adjusting the architecture of the system.

If we decouple people and their identifiers from the networks that currently define them, we start moving towards greater granularity of privacy control through mechanisms like global social whitelists and buddy list blocklists. It also means that individuals can solicit services to be built that serve their unique social graph across any sites and domains (kind of like a fingerprint of your relationship connections), rather than being restrained to the limited freedom in locked down networks like Facebook. And ultimately, it enables cross-sharing content and media with anyone whom you choose, regardless of the network that they’re on (just like email today, where you can send someone on Yahoo.com email from Gmail.com or even Hotmail.com, and so on, but with finer contact controls). The result is that the crosscut of one’s social network could be as complete (or discreet) as one chose, and that rather than managing it in a social network-centric way, you’d manage it centrally, just as you do your IM buddy list, and it would follow you around on any site that you visit.

So it’s become something of a refrain in the advice that we’ve been giving out lately to our clients that they should think very critically about what social functionality they should (and shouldn’t) build directly into their sites. Rather than assuming that they should “build what Flickr has” or think about which features of Facebook they should absorb, the better question, I think, is to assume that in the next 6-8 months (for the early adopters at least) there’s going to be a shift to these portable networks. Where the basics will mostly be better covered by existing solutions and will not need to be rebuilt. Where each new site — especially those with specific functionality like TripIt (disclosure: we’ve consulted TripIt) — will need to focus less on building out its own social network and more on how social functionality can support their core competency.

We’re still in the early stages of recognizing and identifying the components of this problem. Thus far, the Microformats wiki says:

Why is it that every single social network community site makes you:

  • re-enter all your personal profile info (name, email, birthday, URL etc.)?
  • re-add all your friends?

In addition, why do you have to:

  • re-turn off notifications?
  • re-specify privacy preferences?
  • re-block negative people?

AKA “social network fatigue problem” and “social network update/maintenance problem”.

I’ve yet to be convinced that this is a problem that the “rest of the world” beyond social geeks is suffering, but I do think that the situation can be greatly improved, even for folks who are used to abandoning their profiles when they forget their passwords. For one thing, the world today is too network-centric, and not person-centric. While I do think people should be able to take on multiple personas online (professional, casual, hobby, family, and so on), I don’t think that that means that they should have those boundaries set for them by the networks they join. Instead, they should maintain their multiple personas as separate identifiers: email addresses, IM addresses and/or profile URLs (i.e. OpenIDs). This allows for handy separation based on the way people already materialize themselves online. Projects like NoseRub and even the smaller additions of offsite-identifiers on sites like Digg, Twitter and Pownce also acknowledge that members think of themselves as being more faceted than a single URL indicates.

This is a good thing. And this is where social computing needs to go.

We need to stop building independent spider webs of sticky siloed social activity. We need to stop fighting the nature of the web and embrace the design of uniform resource identifiers for people. We need to have a user agent that actually understands what it means to be a person online. A person with friends, with contacts, with enemies, with multiple personas and surfaces and ambitions and these user agents of the social web need to understand that, though we live in many distinct places on the web and interact with many different services, that we as people still have one unified viewport through which we understand the world.

Until social networks understand this reality and start to adapt to it, the problem that Dave is describing is only going to continue to get worse for more and more people until truly, the problem of social network fatigue will spread beyond social geeks and start cutting into the bottom lines of companies that rely on the regularity of “sticky eyeballs” showing up.

While I will always and continue to bet on the open web, we’re reaching an inflection point where some fundamental conceptions of the web (and social networks) need to change. Fortunately, if us geeks have our way, it’ll probably be for the general betterment of the whole thing.

Bookmarks for Sep 17

<div class='magnolia_post'

A daily collection of linky goodness.

Collection Munchausen Lustre – Ugly home

Collection Munchausen Lustre - Ugly home

A very cool ceiling “chandelier”!

Rating: 4

Tags: chandelier, decoration

Halo 3 Believe

Halo 3 Believe

A very cool and immersive diorama of Halo 3!

Rating: 5

Tags: halo 3, halo, 3d, diorama, bungie

Lights Out San Francisco

Lights Out San Francisco

A hour when everyone in San Francisco is going to turn off their lights!

Rating: 5

Tags: san francisco, sustainability

O’Reilly Network — Women Who Risk: Making Women in Technology Visible

O'Reilly Network -- Women Who Risk: Making Women in Technology Visible

Where are all the women? Tara Hunt will tell you where we all are and why she thinks it is harder to find us than it should be.

Rating: 5

Tags: tara hunt, women

Cocoa Grove | Downloads

Cocoa Grove | Downloads

Cocoa Grove. Icons and Wallpapers download page.

Rating: 4

Tags: icons, design, mac

View all my bookmarks on Ma.gnolia

Bookmarks for Sep 15

<div class='magnolia_post'

A daily collection of linky goodness.

devizen » Blog Archive » Authorization, Oh My!

devizen » Blog Archive » Authorization, Oh My!

“OAuth, provides a valet key for the web.”

Rating: 3

Tags: oauth, authorization

What is OAuth?

What is OAuth?

A brief description by Mark Atwood.

Rating: 3

Tags: oauth, mark atwood

Cottyn | Fresh-Picked T-Shirts

Cottyn | Fresh-Picked T-Shirts

“That’s what she twittered.”

Rating: 4

Tags: tshirts, twitter

MySpace API

MySpace API

“Homebrew MySpace API was created because I had nothing to do and I wanted to take a break from doing other projects, so I wondered if there was some kind of API for myspace and no there was not. Facebook has an API they are cutting edge, haha….. Anyways here is my homemade/homebrew API. Now its easier to create small neat widgets.”

Rating: 3

Tags: myspace, api

View all my bookmarks on Ma.gnolia

Bookmarks for Sep 13

<div class='magnolia_post'

A daily collection of linky goodness.

Your copyright metadata on a GRDDL – Creative Commons

Your copyright metadata on a GRDDL - Creative Commons

As of yesterday GRDDL, pronounced “griddle”, is a World Wide Web Consortium recommendation. GRDDL allows one to describe in a standard way how to map information between different XML formats. The acronym stands for “Gleaning Resource Descriptions from Dialects of Languages”, which describes exactly what the standard facilitates.

Rating: 4

Tags: grddl, microformats, w3c

Near-Time : Welcome

Near-Time : Welcome

Near-Time integrates wikis, weblogs, and file-sharing to deliver the fastest ROI for your collaboration investments.

Rating: 3

Tags: collaboration, enterprise, wiki, ruby on rails

Between the Lines mobile edition

Between the Lines mobile edition

great write-up of the coworking movement!

Rating: 5

Tags: coworking

Microformats Would Benefit From a Pseudo-Namespace – Jens Meiert

Microformats Would Benefit From a Pseudo-Namespace – Jens Meiert

proposal for prefixing microformst classnames. Not sure i buy it.

Rating: 3

Tags: microformats

AntiRSI – TECH.inhelsinki.nl

AntiRSI - TECH.inhelsinki.nl

AntiRSI is a program for Mac OS X that helps prevent RSI (repetitive strain injury) and other computer related stress. It does so by forcing you to take regular breaks, yet without getting in the way. It also detects natural breaks so it won’t force too many breaks on you.

Rating: 5

Tags: rsi, macosx, application

Usability of Computer Security: A Bibliography

Usability of Computer Security: A Bibliography

The purpose of this web page is to provide a central resource list of published work on human factors in computer security.

Rating: 4

Tags: computer security, security, hci, papers, user experience

Non-Profits Web Tool Kit

Non-Profits Web Tool Kit

A great summary of available web apps for non-profits.

Rating: 5

Tags: nptech, non-profit, civicspace

MicroJSON – Welcome to the MicroJSON Wiki – MicroJSON

MicroJSON - Welcome to the MicroJSON Wiki - MicroJSON

An attempt to convert microformatted data in JSON.

Rating: 3

Tags: json, microformats

Fair Use Worth More to Economy Than Copyright, CCIA Says — Copyright — InformationWeek

Fair Use Worth More to Economy Than Copyright, CCIA Says -- Copyright -- InformationWeek

Fair use exceptions to U.S. copyright laws account for more than $4.5 trillion in annual revenue for the United States, according to the Computer and Communications Industry Association.

Rating: 5

Tags: fair use, economics, copyright, ip, intellectual property, creative commons

View all my bookmarks on Ma.gnolia