Web 2.0 to 3.0 - I Want Discrete Controls

Facebook’s barrier is the wrong one. It is global not local, social or individual. Sometimes you see things in print (The Next Social Network, Theories about Google & Jaiku, How WebOS Evolves and think… hey they are just talking about what I was working on for a year in India. I’ve been down this path already, it will come.

A few things are required to make this dream a real reality.
1) Control before Access: Each request to make a connection must interface with the recipient. In telephony today tche caller has control Ditto for chat, SMS, email, etc. Control over Access control must shift to the receiver.
2) My Identity must be able to negotiate with your idenity. The phone call seems a pretty simple one. The same basic structure applies to data / transactional exchanges too. Example just because you could call me today when my context was work.. may not enable you tomorrow.
3) We require strong encryption. Without it I cannot control who sees what, their usage of said data, whether it should be updated, expire etc.

The Next Social Network? It’s Web 2.0, And It Knows Where You Are

Rather than calling somebody or sending an e-mail or a Twitter or an IM, you just open up your contact list and click on their name. Wherever they are, your communication reaches them via the most convenient and appropriate means. So, they’re walking on the beach, their iPhone rings. If they’re in a meeting, they get a text message. If they’re at their desk, they get an e-mail. If they’re in Asia, they’re probably asleep, so they get a voicemail. Another name for it is the “presence-enabled phone book.” Last month, Jaiku’s Jyri Engeström argued that this location-aware utility is the key piece of functionality missing from the iPhone. Not a surprising point of view considering it’s pretty close to where his company is headed. Jyri points to O’Reilly’s post which makes the same point.

Later in the same post Michael Calore writes

Not only do we need more secure and innovative ways of safely establishing and maintaining our identities, but we all need to get more comfortable with putting our information out there in the first place. More importantly, we also need to free up all of our personal data that’s already out there, languishing in closed networks like Facebook. Sadly, that might prove to be the most difficult hurdle.

I brought Nova’s Web3.0 link into this post as I see his chart as neglecting user benefits; the focus too much on technology. Yet I see these visions as complementary. I like the way Michael sum’s it up - we need more secure ways to maintain our identities. It’s wrong to believe otherwise or that the new emerging generation doesn’t want this.

We want control on a per relationship basis; based on our current state (what we are doing) without the hassle of changing everything all the time. I know when I’m at home the access I may grant is different to when I’m driving etc. I need to call these states what I want and I need simple ways to associate my relationships and groups with different states. However, access is not linear (example flickr, family, friends, …..) Similarly, I don’t have to give a precise definition of my whereabouts. In the area + or - 10 miles may be good enough for some… for others… Bay area, for others PST.

I believe in the directory… it is about to be reinvented. Anyone who looks at it as the White Pages or the Yellow Pages or my address book doesn’t get it yet. It’s the flow around an open directory that’s interesting. Facebook’s barrier is the wrong one. It is global not local, social or individual. Gabe argues it should be a supernod