Another post on Defrag. Part of the Defrag format involves open discussions on topics suggested by the audience. One of these that I attended was on the topic of "Real" Innovation/Disruption. While much of the material presented at Defrag and picked up by discussion in the audience related to social web topics, it was all firmly in the context of making money. Doc Searls expressed frustration at being locked in to 1-1 relationships between his online identity and a vendor - why couldn't he, for example, be able to broadcast his need for a new lens for his camera while he was driving across Iowa and be able to pick it up 2 hours later en route; Esther Dyson presented some thoughts on giving the user more control over where there information goes after they accept the legal disclaimer that jumps up prior to access to any new account for a web service - while admitting that she sits on the boards of the three top advertising companies.
What was reassuring about the discussion in this round table on disruption was the surfacing of ideas about how social networks could be used for social and human good - not just individual gain - one end to end example being the use of a network to solve a product problem (how to build a better water filter to better ensure a supply of clean water in developing nations) and how to finance it (use the network as a micro-lending infrastructure).
My perspective here is that social networks are only social in structure. The individuals in these networks are often trying to use them for individual goals (find a job, sell something) and the hosting systems are exploiting them any way they can (selling invisible 'gifts' on Facebook!). How about a social network that was actually about society?
Amen. With apologies for the blatant though highly relevant plus, our company is called matchmine, and we make personal preferences portable.
It turns out the key to this is to de-couple the concept of identity (who you are) from the concept of preference (what you want,) but the rest kind of flows from there.
We think we're on to something, and that it will solve exactly this problem.
Posted by: MikeTrap | November 08, 2007 at 06:14 PM