Social Network Aggregation, Killer App in 2008? 76
blogdig writes "Managing scattered online Social Life on multiple Social Networking sites, I sense, will become a Killer App Category 2008. There are several startups now in the "Social Network Aggregation" space and this App Category should diversify and catch momentum in 2008. Some startups are focusing on identity consolidation, others on messaging consolidation and on tracking friends. Some like Profilefly offer consolidation of multiple things like Profiles, Contacts and Bookmarks....The need for users to be a member of not just one but multiple social networks can be understood through Barry Wellman's concept of 'networked individualism'..." Unfortunately the most important use of these applications won't be seen for some time. I refer of course to using my warlock to murder the ongoing stream of hot girls who want to be my friend on these sites.
Social aggregators (Score:5, Interesting)
I even started exploring a couple of social aggregators last year to explore options for consolidating effort and one of the most promising I've seen is Lijit [lijit.com]. The premise behind their product is that people tend to look for answers from others they know or trust, yet current search engines (even the almighty Google) do not provide any sort of framework for trust inside social networks you are familiar with. Lijit provides for this intimacy of information allowing you and others to search not only information in your blog, but also information from posts that colleagues, friends and family have perhaps written when you are looking for information from sources that *you* know and trust. It is an approach that certainly has benefits in the social networking arenas, but I also find the potential for business and academics to be very exciting. The only question in my mind is how to exploit different services hosted on a variety of platforms to make the content indexable, but since text strings lend themselves to this quite nicely, the next problem is alternative data sources like image data, sound data, video, etc...etc...etc...
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Will never happen. Websites change all the times (can't automate away even a login, unless you play cat 'n mouse with the site) and they're mostly badly coded.
Re: (Score:2)
This is definitely one of the must-have features that I would need in any sort of social aggregation tool like the one you describe. I have other thoughts, but I'm interested in what others ha
Re: (Score:2)
the next problem is alternative data sources like image data, sound data, video, etc...etc...etc...
Ah, but that's where you come in. Study your retina and visual cortex or whatever, and hack together an algorithm to process an image to a standard contrast/color/saturation, split it into primitives, then analyze and classify those on multiple abstraction layers:
lots of lines and curves -> lines are parallel, curves form concentric ovals and some triangles -> a pair of ovals is below a lot of parallel lines -> a face -> with a certain symmetry and distribution of shadows -> a face of a youn
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
We'll see (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't want to manage a social networking site let alone have an app that collects all the data and sends it to multiple sites at once.
Re: going the way of the MUD (Score:1, Interesting)
MUDs are dead. Long live graphical MUDs (Everquest, WoW, etc).
(*Disclaimer: I still play text based MUDs.)
I agree... (Score:2, Insightful)
taking the MMO industry to the next level.
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder what the Social Networks will beget?
Missing links (Score:4, Informative)
Not a universal killer app (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe this idea can be taken further. Is there an open framework where I can create a personal profile on my own server or free hosting service and link to my friends profiles a la Jabber's open model but for the social scene? Could this service provide a comment space, photo sharing, private messaging (via email), and RSS feeds via a shared application API? It seems like this would be very easily to implement if Facebook, Myspace, Friendster, Hi5, and Bebo decided to open their networks to non-local hosted profiles and take the data from your profile and display it using their service's user interface. SPAM and privacy controls would have to be implemented but it would be as simple as: "If you would like to link your profile into the Facebook network please verify your profile via OpenID/OpenID2, email address, or mobile phone number." Granular privacy controls could be implemented by allowed users to group their friends profiles based on how much they want to share. Facebook has already started doing this.
Until this can occur, profile aggregation will be at the whim and mercy of the "terms of service" of the big walled gardens. As it stands, profile link list sites like My Mashable [mashable.com], ClaimID [claimid.com], Spock [spock.com], and Rapleaf [rapleaf.com] along with a mechanism to push your data to these services is just a hack. Unfortunately, its the only way to go for now.
Re: (Score:2)
FOAF is an RDF-based schema for linking "identities" together, but the only major service provider that supports it as far as I know is LiveJournal, and even then it's pretty limited.
Technically, FOAF+XFN+hCards+OpenID should make it possible to create everything that social networks (in their current form) have, although there might be one or two gaps which need filled. The biggest problem really is traction. In order to make it work, you'
Re: (Score:1)
Well, you can put up Your Own Personal Homepage using THE Social Networking System of the 21. century,
and most ISP's will give you FREE server space for a modest presentation in this fabulous arena,
where a number of BIG international search and indexing services will put links to your site in their
online directories for FREE and if you are unique (as almost all of us are) a search using YOUR NAME,
your interests or personal relationships (if specified sufficently or reasonably a
I'm not so shure (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
No, really, what we need is not just another aggregator, maybe the opposite [w3.org]
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Exactly what I've been searching for, thanks!
Killer app (Score:5, Funny)
What's the big deal anyways? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
An online journal can be a good way to keep trac
It's like the old saying... (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't know... (Score:1)
Jokes aside (Score:2)
It's bad enough to have a profile on one social networking site... if you have multiple profiles on multiple sites and need some kind of aggregating software... bah! 'Nuff said. We could beat this to death. Killer app? More like killer hype -- in the end, we'll be talking in December about how the promise of social networking aggregation was the greatest disappointment of 2008.
Please Go Away Now (Score:1, Troll)
How about... (Score:2)
I'd much rather have one app that lets me kill large amounts of MySpace *shudders* than one app to manage all of my personal information on multiple sites (that I'm not actually registered on) that might have different versions of 'me' on them.
If it gets to the themeing level as well then can you imagine the havoc? Facebook pages with MySpace-esque unreadable backgrounds, or MySpace pages with (shock, horror) readable colour schemes!
Or we could go the other way (Score:5, Insightful)
As far as killer apps go, I think the aggregation site aggregators will be the go. Imagine, a site that aggregated slashdot, digg, reddit, engadget, oh wait, that's rss, never mind.
Re: Quality Communications (Score:2)
However, re: "NetSpeak", I simply ban it. I announce that if an email (message, etc) has more than two "Netisms" I add a nasty note to my answer. (This is different if someone is working off a mobile device.)
I never signed up for a MySpace acct because it doesn't actually do anything. My email is not crypted here, so if any of you felt I had to know something, you would have emailed me. I don't need a giant list of people who I'
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately, none of them seem to do much for you if most of your friends aren't in such purported collaborative environments. At 38 I expected more to be utilizing it but then mainly they have their ear plugged with their cellphone. They can't type unless their career really requires it and unless they are in a technical field
Re: (Score:1)
It seems like going the other way, however, is a bit extreme.. why not just disable the Wall (definitely do-able) features of the sites? In addition, keep a minimum profile and do not update it-- with no updates on Facebook, one can easilly go incognito -- I've
Aggregation doesn't seem to be the problem (Score:3, Insightful)
Fast forward to today, and we see different behavior. People "friend" you all the time, and your social network becomes populated with many people, some of whom you've never met. At some point it becomes useless as an affinity group, and you'd like to cull the list to make it more useful. The trouble is you don't want to dismiss someone by removing them from your "friends" list, even though your relationship is tenuous at best. The cure appears to be that people abandon profiles and systems wholesale, and jump to a new system with a fresh profile. Friendster begat MySapce, then Facebook, etc. Abandoning the system alienates no one in particular, and lets the user start over with a fresh list.
I'd bet that the last thing users will want is to permanently carry all that baggage with them.
Facebook already does this (Score:2)
Now, while I don't use Facebook itself, I do have an account. Thanks to Facebook's application API, Facebook is already sort of a social networking aggregator
Less Aggrigation (Score:1)
Social Networking Sites and addiction (Score:5, Insightful)
I gave Facebook a try, but it really irked me so I deleted it. So, a little over 6 weeks ago, one of my
friends asked me why I deleted my Facebook AND Livejournal account, and I said I was so over the whole
social networking "phenomenon". This friend became quite a bit ornery over that fact, so this leads me to
a theory. I think people like being on several different social networking sites. It's extra places to check
email, events, etc. The lashing out was like that of someone wondering why someone else couldn't get "their fix".
People are actually ADDICTED to these sites. The sites aren't even that great! (Most are extremely poorly written,
like Myspace)
What ever happened to email or mobile phone text?
Re: (Score:1)
What ever happened to email or mobile phone text?
That's why I stopped using facebook. You get an email that says you have to log in to check your message when it'd be so much simpler if facebook sent you an email with the message. That's what led me to culling those 'friends' that you haven't talked since high school and putting a profile that only lists my email to contact me. The only new information those sites give me is information about people you wouldn't normally spend the effort to keep in touch with (In my opinion at least).
Plus those stup
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ahem. Ahem. You must mean email and cell phones? There is nothing worse than the douchebag at the party thumbing out text messages all night. At least with a voice call, you need to seek some kind of privacy.
Re: (Score:1)
LiveJournal at least has a lot more than "social networking" though, and isn't covered by emailing or texting (I'm not sure how anyone could see the latter as an improvement when you have online access btw). You might as well describe Slashdot as a "social networking" site because we have profiles, you can add "Friends", etc... People could also say the same things about being addicted.
But you're still here.
Re: (Score:1)
Killer App? (Score:1)
And 2009 will be the year of... (Score:3, Funny)
2008 will be the year of the Social Network Aggregators, and 2009 will be the year for the Aggregators of all the Social Network Aggregators!
Check the chart in the article. (Score:2)
The chart in the article [thebizofcoding.com], of the fraction of people on two social networking sites, shows what's really happening. There's Myspace and Facebook, and then there's everybody else. Whether Myspace and Facebook decide to interoperate is a major business decision. For everybody else, what matters is interoperating with Myspace and Facebook. Few people care whether Orkut and Bebo interconnect.
Social networking sites have a life cycle, like nightclubs. If successful, they become cool, they grow, the losers
These people are uninformed. (Score:2)
Potential (Score:2)
While it's true that most of what occurs on social networks today -- getting friend requests from strangers and spam, building ugly home pages that play 10 different songs / videos simultaneously when they load, the ability to tell a computer about your social relationships does offer potential.
An example: I recently talked to a friend of mine who is in a band, runs a recording studio, and works in one of the few remaining independent brick and mortar music stores in Iowa and he claimed if you make mus
Killer app? Depends on the definition of social (Score:1)
qdos, a first attempt ... (Score:1)
An example semantic web site which does attempt to combine your various social online identifies is http://qdos.com [qdos.com]. Qdos gives each person a rank score, based on your online persona, i.e. the higher your social activity the higher your Qdos, you can also log in using OpenID, and you can get all of your data back in a triple notation. You can claim your name, and add your various sites to the profile, and raise your ranking, if you are that way inclined:
Perez Hilton (what a waste of space) in html:
http: [qdos.com]
Aggregation will never be big, to most people. (Score:3, Interesting)
I still read slashdot, news.bbc, the onion and so forth, plus sites like Facebook and Livejournal, on their individual pages, I don't use an "aggregator", such as RSS feeds and my own interface. Firstly, because it's fiddly to set up, and secondly, each of those sites usually offers something different in their interface which suits the content they're providing - often the most interesting stuff is outside of the "headlines", which is all you get on an RSS feed. You may be an avid user of aggregation, but as a Slashdot reader you're probably a lot more geeky than most people, and killer apps are those used by the Great Unwashed, not just us nerds.
This is particularly true for social networking sites, in my opinion. While there are many out there, and many people have profiles on each (from Friendster to Orkut to Livejournal to Myspace to Facebook), most people are "on" one at a time. The fads come and go, the popularity for each application comes and goes - something new comes along and people either migrate to it or they don't. Something will come along in 2008 that everyone will leave Facebook for - just as happened to Myspace in 2006/2007. Most users don't want the overhead of managing multiple online profiles, aggregation will make *access* to each one easier, but not the management of each one.
Anyone actually read Social Networks TOS? (Score:2, Interesting)
So,what's the business plan, then? Ignore the TOS, u
And in 2009... (Score:1)
Mugshot? (Score:2)
More accessable social networking first (Score:1)
So before we get a hard on for aggregators, can we consider the point (more communication) beforehand so we this can go hand in hand.
Robes and Wizard Hat (Score:2)
Bad businesses model (Score:2)
Being first to this standard will provide some momentum and brand recognition
Aggregators.. (Score:1)
A name proposal (Score:1)
OpenSocial? (Score:1)
Isn't this the point of OpenSocial? If each of your social networks implement an open API, that makes aggregation easier.
The cool kids call this Lifestreaming (Score:1)
Noserub (Score:1)
It's great, and written in CakePHP