Posts Tagged ‘data’

Individual own data

January 14, 2011

I picked up last year that Tantek was using his personal website to author all his data from.  He is a champion of ‘fighting for the user’ but my initial take on this was that I need an ultra smart authoring tool to cater for all those publishing activities I can perform today and more and more tomorrow.  However, use third party tools then the data is then ‘owned’ by that service.  However, for some you will need to use local tools to get the data to the service e.g. hardware, camera and local uploading tool to get it to e.g. flickr.com   so I will have a local copy (my pc, Sony, local software microsoft and online yahoo flickr) so I need lots of local tools to get to the online service that now ‘owns’ my data!  This is a fascinating tension and a couple of blog post give th arguments, Decentralized tools and self aggregate, Zeldman and Tanteks, self publish and copy everywhere.

A conference is coming up in June this year, the IndieWeb unconference in Portland, USA for those fighting for individuals to own their data.

all information is relative?

September 6, 2010

The website PeerIndex.net have talked about their ‘relative measure of an individual’s online authority’ as the Semantic Web Blog puts it for them.  PeeerIndex are similar to Klout.com and others looking to establish an online influence measurement score online.  The idea of ‘relative’ is interesting, it is what we use on mepath.com and the lifestylelinking – open source project.   As far as I can understand the relative authority index combines three parts, authority, audience and activity.  I class this data as log data, that is data produce in serving up and interacting with a webpage.  It is valuable data as googles pagerank demonstrates for every search query.  What I have found out over the years of exploring data from such sources, it is the second best proxy for the real context or meaning authored in the text.  That is why, mepath and the lifestylelinking project use relativity based on the context of each blog post authored.  Put another way it uses nil log data in its calculation of relative.

Data Portability Policy

June 23, 2010

The Data Portability Project  released the Portability Policy  framework today.  The idea being that like a websites terms of use and privacy policy, the user has to accept them to allow use, a portability policy would set out the terms in which their data can be move around the web.  This is a welcome initiative but I prefer to see the VRM (vendor relationship management) thinking taken forward too, an individual centric portability policy that the website owner would have to accept.

Is openess all about monetization?

April 27, 2010

I have been reading in the blogosphere for a while now that the drive for website owners to make their users data open is down to monetization.  This assumes they own the individual users data or have given the individual the privacy controls to make themselves open.  Publishing a website is an open action.  Don’t want to be on the web, don’t launch a website.  OK, others will do it for you but web at heart is all about sharing.  In the dot.com era sharing was built around webpages, and the verb of choice was search, latterly renamed ‘googling’.  As all the webpages could be crawled and indexed (creating value in shared connections between the pages, ie. pagerank) meant that users could search across the web and in exchange for that attention a business model based around advertising, adsense or CPC was made real, as businesses saw the benefit of paying cash for ‘interfering’ in the users attention.  Web2.0 shifted the focus from the page to people.

This throws up a problem according to the Semanticweb blog for CPC advertising in a people centric world,

“1. Help me communicate better with people I already know. Facebook does this well but it is does not monetize well. And there are tons of alternatives – texting/SMS, mobile phone, email and Skype for example.

They go on to extend the case to the situation where there is no need to be mutually connected, i.e. twitter, follow people you don’t know but have an interest in.  In this model the whole system is built with open set as the default and in the case of Twitter a revenue stream for first access to that stream.  Both these business models seem limited and The Semanticweb blog suggests FB solution is,

“Consumers pay by buying stuff. And the social media revolution has reminded us that people buy based on recommendation of friends more than they do from ads (whether traditional or search based). That is intuitively obvious to everybody. What is different is a massively scalable way to deliver those recommendations to vendors selling stuff.”

They point out this is the market where Amazon.com rules.  An e-commerce walled garden of information that via FB ‘like’ button could be distributed across the social web, at least via FB and the developers using its API?  Ironically, we potentially have the case where a dot.com era business model is opened up and made distributed by a web2.0 social garden.  It ‘s progress and it is all heading in the direction of openness.  What about the individual users, is this their vision for web2.0 or are they just happy to follow the web visionaries along until they know what they have let themselves in to?

open or closed – it is all about data

April 22, 2010

The question: to be open or not to be open?  The GigaOM blog is going to be exploring this question in a series of blog posts.  The opening post sets out the scope of the debate from the desktop to mobile, servers and on the web.  For each camp both proprietary and open stance business/organisation have ‘leading’ positions. There don’t seem to be clear answer to the opening question.  But what about the questions itself. Is it the ‘biggie’ out there or is there a different way to look at the world now?

Time O’Reilly has already pushed the opensource movement forward to set the agenda to be about open data, as opensource code is sort of meaningless in a web2.0 world.  Upping the debate to the data level is where it is at.  Big ideas are out there like, VRM an idea focused on the individual and their rights and controls over their data.  If there is demand for this vision from individuals then there will be profound implication for all those, be it open or closed in their software, social connection or data freedom stance.