Christopher Carfi

"Networks don’t have people.  People have networks." – Demian Entrekin

Was having dinner with Demian earlier this week, and the quote above was a pure moment of clarity.  He is absolutely, 100% right.  And, in those seven words, I think he summed up the next five years of our industry. 

Other data points:

Doc writes: "We have many relationships online. All of them, however, are defined and controlled (sometimes from both sides) within each company’s silo. What we don’t have are personally controlled global approaches to relationship, including privacy variables."

Dave McClure writes: "’Web 3.0′ is the condition which exists when someone is always ‘logged in’ on the web, and can move from site to site without ever having to re-enter a username/password."

And Kevin Werbach brings it home: "One of the key questions for the Network Age is the interplay of aggregation and fragmentation…should we own our own identity though some user-centric ID model? Will change happen top-down, or bottom-up?"

The points above seem to point in a clear direction.  We’re heading to an inflection point that is as significant as the move from mainframe to PC.

Having my information (social network connections, preferences, purchase history, etc.) stored in someone else’s silo makes no sense.  Having my information stored in (literally) dozens of silos makes even less sense.  (Yes, dozens.  Think about it.  Your information is in Facebook, and LinkedIn, and innumerable CRM systems like Salesforce — one for each vendor you deal with — and in Visa’s systems, and in…you get the point.)

The right point of integration is around the individual.  Each of us is the center of our own universe.

(image credit goes to the inimitable david armano.  cross-posted to the conversation hub.)

• Doc Searls: Who Is In Charge Of My Privacy? –  Great conversation going on in the comments

• Blogher: How Social Media Is Really Being Used – Survey results of a study covering over 5000 respondents (PDF)

• Guy Kawasaki: Ten Things You Didn’t Know About Facebook – Some good tips in here

Spatially Relevant: "Without common tribal understanding, you get inconsistent execution."

A must read from Mike Arrington, The Centralized Me.

Running out the door now, more soon.

Related: VRM Scenarios (the "Centralized Me" concept is relevant to the "Me-Ville" (top left) and "Global Village" (top right) scenarios)

This week is Net Neutrality week on the SuperNova ConversationHub.  What is "Net Neutrality?"  Here are a few resources and links that can provide the basics.

A Definition of Network Neutrality

"Network neutrality is the principle that Internet users should be in control of what content they view and what applications they use on the Internet. The Internet has operated according to this neutrality principle since its earliest days. Indeed, it is this neutrality that has allowed many companies, including Google, to launch, grow, and innovate. Fundamentally, net neutrality is about equal access to the Internet. In our view, the broadband carriers should not be permitted to use their market power to discriminate against competing applications or content. Just as telephone companies are not permitted to tell consumers who they can call or what they can say, broadband carriers should not be allowed to use their market power to control activity online. Today, the neutrality of the Internet is at stake as the broadband carriers want Congress’s permission to determine what content gets to you first and fastest. Put simply, this would fundamentally alter the openness of the Internet.”

Source: Students for Net Neutrality

Net Neutrality – An Overview Video from Public Knowledge

(Permanent link to the Publc Knowledge Net Neutrality video)

Now, that said, there are cogent counter-arguments as well, mostly from a "let's keep the government out of as many things as possible" view.  One point of view, from Will Richmond in the comments here.  Richmond:

"I'd remind everyone of three critical things.

First, there is no substantive evidence of broadband ISP bias today, so while it's tempting to reach for net neutrality as a preventive medicine, suspicion of nefarious intentions is not a sufficient basis for government intervention. Start down this preemptive road and you’re quickly on the slippery slope of unchecked government intrusion into our daily lives.

Second, for those who don't think it's appropriate to give big broadband ISPs the benefit of the doubt, let's not forget that they privately financed the multi-billion dollar investments required to bring broadband Internet access to virtually all American homes. There’s been no government funding of this massive infrastructure build-out. It’s all a result of the free market system at work. And the record speaks for itself, there’s no evidence that ISPs have bias against anyone to improve their economic return.

Third, let’s not lose sight of the fact that multi-billion dollar content and technology companies are behind this net neutrality push. How ironic is it that this community of ardent free marketers should now be looking to the government to preemptively impose regulation? Would they want to be pre-judged as bad actors, requiring preemptive government intervention in their industries? No chance. They want the government as far away from their operations as possible.

I’m far from an apologist for big cable operators and telcos. I know their warts as well as anyone. And I’m not against regulation when it’s appropriate. But I am opposed to it when there’s no evidence to warrant it. Such is the current situation with net neutrality."

(N.B. And, for a more humorous view, here's an Ask A Ninja video on Net Neutrality.  And, for the record, I too would like some backup singers.)

I’m heading to DC for the Wednesday meeting of the Certification Network Group, where our customer Brian Finnegan from SAE / PAMA will be talking about the work that we’ve done together over the last year.  In particular, Brian will be sharing his real-world experiences of using a combination of blogs, social networking and traditional marketing techniques in getting the word out about his organization’s certification for aviation maintenance professionals.  (Back story here.)

See you there!

Bonus link:  Would you like to play a game?

Seth: "The world’s worst toaster."

When are you done designing?  When you can’t take anything else out.

Heh.  This post from last year is the top post on Google for how to cancel an Xdrive account, well above any of the official sources.

Just finished reading a thought-provoking piece by Anders Albrechtslund entitled Online Social Networking as Participatory Surveillance.

The abstract, by Albrechtslund:

“In this article, I argue that online social networking is anchored in surveillance practices.  This gives us an opportunity to challenge conventional understandings of surveillance that often focus on control and disempowerment.  In the context of online social networking, surveillance is something potentially empowering, subjectivity building and even playful — what I call participatory surveillance.”

This is a powerful piece, and worth a read.

Historically, I think many of us think of “surveillance” as something that is done by a more powerful authority to an individual who is comparatively less powerful.  One of the classic examples of this is the concept of the Panopticon, a prison where a single watcher could observe the actions and activities of a great number of individuals.

However, Albrechtslund argues that (perhaps not unlike a subjugated group taking back derogatory words) online social networking has the possibility to enable a new type of peer-to-peer “surveillance” that is actually empowering to individuals.  He writes:

“As mentioned earlier, a hierarchical conception of surveillance represents a power relation which is in favor of the person doing the surveillance.  The person under surveillance is reduced to a powerless, passive subject under the control of the “gaze.”

[Koskela] introduces the concept of ’empowering exhibitionism’ to describe the practice of revealing your (very) personal life.  By exhibiting their lives, people claim ‘copyright’ to their own lives, as they engage in the self-construction of identity.  This reverts the vertical power relation, as visibility becomes a tool of power that can be used to rebel against the shame associated with not being private about certain things.  Thus, exhibitionism is liberating, because it represents a refusal to be humble. Many amateur exhibitionism examples can be found on sites like Nu Bay, with both parties fully consenting of course.

Online social networking can also be empowering for the user, as the monitoring and registration facilitates new ways of constructing identity, meeting friends and colleagues as well as socializing with strangers.  This changes the role of the user from passive to active, since surveillance in this context offers opportunities to take action, seek information and communicate.”

So what does this mean?  This means that, as our offline and online lives become increasingly intertwined and networked, the more open we are, the more individual power we have.

What I’m now wrestling with is how this plays at the place where organizations, employees, and customers meet.

Remember, in a networked world, we all play different roles at different times — employee, customer, company representative, parent, friend, person.  And everyone with whom we interact does the same thing.   We are all creators, and all watchers.  Perhaps the more we create, and the more we connect, the more say we have in our own futures.

Related: ArtTartare

photos: 3blindmice and wikipedia

cross-posted to the conversation hub.

Etsy, the online site for cool handmade stuff, has just brought back a service called Alchemy that touches on at least a few of the resonant points for VRM.  What is Alchemy?  Etsy says:

"In an historical sense, Alchemy is the pursuit of transforming common metals into valuable gold. In an Etsy sense, Alchemy is the pursuit of transforming your creative ideas and designs into tangible items.

Alchemy is a space on Etsy where buyers can post requests for custom items. Sellers then bid on the opportunity to make the item and win the sale. It’s your opportunity to collaborate with a crafter or artisan to get exactly what you’re seeking. Buyers can even make private requests to a specific seller within a shop."

Very cool.  I’ve always felt that one of the fundamental tenets of the VRM movement is the enablement of a customer to define the terms of his or her interactions with vendors, and examples of these "reverse markets" where the customer calls the shots are certainly waypoints on the journey.

hat tips: alan patrick and fred wilson