Category: markets

@cshirky > Promiscuous Reading > Contra Solipsism > Here Comes Everybody

Published June 1, 2008 by cgerrish

This isn’t a review. I’m not sure that reviews are very useful beyond the basics: Here Comes Everybody is an important book. Some people will choose to read it, but that doesn’t really matter because it’s in the air we breath. You’ll absorb the book’s insights through some sense organ within the next few years. Clay Shirky has written about network theory in a style that might appeal to a broader audience; and it will directly reach more people than books by Duncan Watts or Albert-László Barabási. However reading will not be the primary diffusion model.

One criteria I have for judging the quality of a book is the number of times I have to stop reading. This generally occurs when some string of words in the flow of the book makes a strong connection either to concepts from another text, or to something I’ve scribbled in one of my notebooks. The monologue of the text is interrupted by a conversation racing across a network of intertextuality. While this slows reading as an act of consumption, it opens the door to reading as a full-duplex, 2-way engagement. And that’s where its real value is revealed; in this sense, I found Here Comes Everybody to be a very promiscuous book. There were connections everywhere.

The obvious literary reference would be to Joyce, but instead Rilke provided the more forceful connection with his fragment “We are the bees of the invisible:”

Transform? Yes, for it is our task to impress this provisional, transient earth upon ourselves so deeply, so agonizingly, and so passionately that its essence rises up again “invisibly” within us. We are the bees of the invisible. We ceaselessly gather the honey of the visible to store it in the great golden hive of the Invisible.

There’s a sense in which this describes the process by which poetry is crafted, but it also seems to inform the way we build the collective experience and history of a group. We have a collective story we tell each other about the importance of the individual, but stories about family, tribe and society are on the rise again. Shirky points out that the transaction cost of organizing a group has declined nearly to zero through the tools available on the Network. He goes on to note that low transaction costs are not sufficient — a plausible promise around purpose and a mutually beneficial membership bargain are equally necessary for a living community.

Two factors suppressed in the current commercial infatuation with the social graph are the ownership of the products of the community and the emotional volatility of a group. These are high risk ingredients in the recipe, human elements that need to be purged to sell the current business models. And those services without explicit business models continually run up against these issues. Can you sell what isn’t solely yours to sell?

As we gather in tribes and loose associations across the Network, we invent ceremony, initiations, ritual, taboos and forms of justice to ensure the ongoing health of the system. We optimistically believe the rules, mores and sins of our fallen culture won’t simply be mapped on to the social space of the Network. Experience has shown that absent some form of persona or identity, the life of an online community will be nasty, brutal and short. Could the Network be the new world where individuals are judged by the character of their content? Or is it really just more of the same, a place where it’s not Metcalf’s law, but Sturgeon’s law that rules the day.

We’re in the middle of a shift in perspective. We’ve been focused on the individual, the physical limitations of an un-networked personal computer metaphorically defined the limits of our ability to think about the Network. In the area of identity we seem to only now be uncovering the idea of a relationship layer. The silo’d thinking of the technical community causes it to lay down cow paths on the well-paved roads of other disciplines. While Shirky’s book is written for the layman, its highest and best purpose may be in introducing technologists to the idea of society.

In the larger network of connections there are two that put themselves forward. In Saussureian Linguistics meaning is derived from the set of differences within a system. Here are a list of ideas that can help us overcome the solipsism of the hard drive:

“A sign is the basic unit of language (a given language at a given time). Every language is a complete system of signs. Parole (the speech of an individual) is an external manifestation of language.”
“A linguistic system is a series of differences of sound combined with a series of differences of ideas.”
“The connection between the signifier and the signified is arbitrary.”
“In language there are only differences, and no positive terms”
“Speaking of linguistic law in general is like trying to pin down a ghost”

????????
The other charged connection is to Ludwig Wittgenstein’s thoughts on the idea of Private Language. Like those who believe in Private Languages, we seem to be caught in the fly bottle. We don’t understand that language and communication is social at its core:

If the idea of a private language is incoherent, then it would follow that all language is essentially public: that language is at its core a social phenomenon. This would have profound implications for other areas of philosophical study. For instance, if one cannot have a private language, it might not make any sense to talk of private sensations such as qualia; nor might it make sense to talk of a word as referring to a concept, where a concept is understood to be a private mental representation.

Nor might it make sense to talk about identity apart from society, computing devices apart from the Network, or data (signifiers) apart from an economic and trading system of language. The end of our solipsistic weltanschauung is beginning; we are perhaps in the middle of the beginning of a general revolution. Some will ride the strong currents as they emerge, others will fight the current, grow tired, and eventually drown. And the looming danger ahead is the task of assuring and preserving the inalienable rights of the individual in this new Network. Once the technical perspective has been transformed from the one to the many, all the really important questions become political.

One Comment

Imagine a Business Model for a Real-Time Information Distribution Service

Published May 29, 2008 by cgerrish

Imagine a business based on real-time information provided to participants in an information market. The owner of the information flow charges for real-time access, and gives 15 minute delayed information for free. Perhaps it would look something like this. Individuals pay a fee (or look at contextual ads) and would get the real-time feed from resellers. Resellers would pay a fee to the information provider to sell the real-time feed through their system.

We recommend taking this lgo program to learn about managing a small business by yourself and how to make it grow online very quickly.

In order for these economics to work, real-time flow (plus the ability to track keywords in that flow) would have to have a demonstrable higher value than delayed information. For instance, real time conversations would only be possible in the real-time feed. The other important factor would be the completeness of the information. The flow of information would need to consolidate all publication via hyperlinks in all venues.

Some sort of messaging infrastructure would be required to receive and relay the information into the live data stream infrastructure. Historical data would be archived and charted, some firms would package and sell this view. Maps of volume of tracks would provide a kind of real-time zeitgeist.

Could there be a service that served as the public record for all publishing events on the Network?

3 Comments

A Venezuelan Moment: The Gillmor Gang considers nationalizing Twitter

Published May 11, 2008 by cgerrish

It must be an odd thing to run a company in the midst of a debate around the idea of nationalizing your core technology. In a Venezuelan moment, the Gillmor Gang considers the idea that Twitter has become so important that our national security requires nationalizing its technical infrastructure. In a two-part discussion about an open mesh / cross-service dashboard mashup and the role of Twitter as a sort of fundamental glue, the question surfaced of breaking up the centralized Twitter monopoly. You can hear the conversation here:

The conversation was provoked by some ongoing thoughts by Dave Winer around decentralizing Twitter. Initially the issues addressed were:

Backup of Twitter user data in the event of utter failure of the service
An alternative venue for the moments when Twitter is indisposed.
Improving reliability through distributing the infrastructure to multiple players
Redistributing Twitter’s monopoly power to multiple players for the common good

Discussion revolved around the general principle of open source standards and how Twitter should be re-created as a standard like ethernet, SMPT, POP, IMAP, XMPP, HTTP, etc. This would allow multiple vendors to compete with products using the same base protocols. For example, many vendors compete using a common standard for email, like 666casino.com/sv for having chat support to answers their online player’s concerns, give a quick solution, and sends promotions or rewards. Standards create a very useful interoperability in the case of email and web sites. Instant messenger has multiple protocols and requires debabelization services to enable conversation between platforms.

Chris Saad put forth an interesting proposal around the idea of publish/subscribe and Twitter literally as micro-blogging. His idea is to move Twitter to a model similar to that of blogging and RSS. Through a micro-blogging authoring tool, something like WordPress, an individual would publish Tweets. A group of followers who had indicated interest in receiving messages would be pushed a payload immediately on publication. A Tweet reader would be used to subscribe to the streams of various publishers.

On the Gillmor Gang call there was some confusion about the roll of RSS in Saad’s proposal. Because XMPP can be difficult to program against, Saad suggested authoring tools that output the RSS format into a gateway that would transform it into XMPP for immediate transport. The idea is to use RSS as XML, a simple transport markup that most blog authoring tools already know how to output. However this was confused with the common usage of RSS as a polling-based publish/subscribe blog syndication methodology.

In looking at decentralizing Twitter, the focus was on two aspects of the service, replicating the unique social graph Twitter creates through the ideas of following and being open to being followed; and the immediate stream of 140 character hypertext that is generated through that matrix of connections. These two elements of the service have created a rich fabric of relationship and information flow that satisfies and intrigues 80% of the users.

The stream of information can be followed in a number of ways. Most people use the Twitter web site which offers a stream through a periodic refresh and redraw of the screen. A number of Twitter clients have been created to automate that process based on a web/RSS model of updating and publication. This streaming model is the equivalent of 15 minute delayed stock quotes. The stream flows based on the polling intervals of the reader, not on the actual publication events.

Steve Gillmor has been championing the instant messenger model of Twitter consumption. In this method an instant messenger client like Google’s Gtalk or iChat is used to talk to Twitter through an XMPP server that relays the Tweets it receives as quickly as it can on the publication event. This also works on a teleputer via SMS, or as those devices are sometimes called these days telephones. This model doesn’t scale particularly well. Users like Robert Scoble and Jason Calacanis have well over 20,000 people they follow.

The consumption strategy that makes the instant messaging model of Twitter work is to follow a core group and then track keywords of interest. Tracking keywords adds people you don’t follow into your stream and provides a proper level of noise and negative feedback into the information ecosystem. This can also be accomplished through a diversified approach to following. In modern portfolio theory this is called covariance.

It’s tracking that makes a decentralized Twitter nearly impossible. Think of a 140 character Tweet as a series of space separated tags to which you can subscribe. In this model, you’re following everyone, or at least everyone who uses that particular tag. This feature radically changes the shape of the social graph underlying the information stream. Since you don’t know who might use a tag you’re tracking, the regular RSS style contract around publication and subscription doesn’t work. Track is not commonly used today, but it’s one of the more interesting features of the service.

The idea of building competitors to Twitter on the same platform, or redistributing Twitter to multiple players reminds me of the idea that New York City should be rebuilt in Ohio because it would be cheaper. Or perhaps we could distribute a little of New York City in every state of the Union. New York City is what it is because of the people who live and visit there. Building another New York City in Las Vegas doesn’t result in the phenomenon that is New York City. In a very important sense, Twitter is decentralized at its core, it is rhizomatic rather than arborescent.

48 Comments

Gesture Bank Robbed: Clues Point to an Inside Job

Published April 20, 2008 by cgerrish

It’s just been reported that the Gesture Bank was robbed, and officials tell us that everything is gone. The complicated security measures, the armed guards, the thick metal walls, the alarms, the hidden cameras and the lasers were all overcome in this daring daylight robbery. Some form of military-grade explosives were used in the dramatic breach of this highly-secure vault. Local law enforcement officials, however, speculate the perpetrators were amateurs, “when we arrived on the scene, there were gestures everywhere. Man, they were scattered from hell to breakfast. It doesn’t look like they actually got away with much.”

Thousands of ordinary Americans had deposited their hard-earned gestures into accounts using the portable attention recording equipment supplied by the bank. The promise of fungible gestures growing tax-free in their accounts fueled dreams of early retirement and a life of leisure for many.

In recent years, the Gesture Bank had faced controversy with its compulsory attention collection proposals. A number of politicians and advertising executives believed that achieving critical mass in the gesture market was a necessary step in transitioning to the new economy. Deposit growth was falling short of projections and some felt stronger measures were required for the safety and security of our nation.

Gesture experts have been puzzled by evidence at the crime scene, it appears all the gestures that have been recovered have been uniformly sliced into 140 character strings of hypertext. The recovery has been very difficult as the gestures seem to be re-absorbed into the the network through the web, IM and SMS. The gestures that have been traced inside the network seem to have formed into a continuous stream of 140 character units; investigators provided this visualization for the media.

Gesture Bank officials are concerned that it will be impossible to identify all these gestures and connect them back up to the people who originally made them. “What people don’t seem to understand is that without a bank and accounts, there’s no way to know who made what gesture.”

Some believe that the Gesture Bank robbery was an inside job, that the unidentified suspect wasn’t working alone. There’s a growing political movement that believes gestures should not be kept in vaults, that gestures should be out in the world and circulating among the people. Highly-placed sources within the bank have reported that this new political idea was spreading like a virus at the highest levels of the organization. One member of the Board of Directors hasn’t been seen around the plush executive suite in many months. Some felt that he signaled his intentions when left this image pasted to the door of his office as a final gesture.

Comments closed