Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Diaspora Project: Building the Anti-Facebook

readwriteweb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 97 posts

Re: Diaspora Project: Building the Anti-Facebook

#51

Post by there »

thefool wrote: post #40

Meh. I don't think software people understand just how disinclined a non-software person is to do anything requiring configuring serverside stuff. Even torrents, where clients have essentially become good enough that all you have to do is install them, most people get a friend that has some understanding of computers to set them up for them. The cloud is really a better model if you want to achieve widespread adoptio…

it'll probably be like openid. a few big names will host a data for a large number of people that don't care to setup their own, but for those that want more control, they can host their own data.

even if those non-technical people don't host their own data, they'll be able to switch to something else that may have different privacy policies.

Re: Diaspora Project: Building the Anti-Facebook

#52

Post by runevault »

Raphael wrote: post #29
runevault wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Considering you are now allowed to permanently store data extracted from FB with their API, I wonder just how easy/doable this would be now...

This policy was just changed. Now apps can store data as long as they like because they are in a contract with the user.

I misphrased I guess, that's what I meant is now you CAN hold onto data permanently, before it was only for 24 hours. Which is why it is now possible to make export easy.

Re: Diaspora Project: Building the Anti-Facebook

#54

Post by anthonyb »

viraptor wrote: post #28
alttab wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I played with this idea a full year ago. The ability to own your own data and share it out as a web service or data host. There would be no need for a centralized server, and it would provide many competitive opportunities to host what I came to call "identity servers." This would create innovation as each value added provider can experiment with the direction. I won't be the first to call it now - but I can imagine…

> Remember, the internet itself is decentralized. I think it's a common misconception. You can be decentralised with friends. With the whole world, you need a single entity. Just look at Facebook, Twitter, Google, MSN -vs- Jabber (even gtalk is not a jabber in the mind of users - it's gtalk / google chat), money transfer services, iAnything from Apple, etc. People seem to like centralisation - they know where to go a…

Email, the web, DNS, routing and TCP/IP are all decentralised. I think the push is to try and do that for social apps like Facebook as well, instead of having AOL-email style monopolies...

Re: Diaspora Project: Building the Anti-Facebook

#55

Post by anthonyb »

runevault wrote: post #3

I wonder how many people have considered building something along these lines. I know I did when I started hearing about what came out of f8, and I don't even use Facebook currently.

I have, although I have limited free time to work on it right now. My 'market testing' page is here: http://openf.oarsum.com/

The idea is that there needs to be a protocol such that I can friend you, even though you're hosted on a completely different server. I suspect that it's a difficult concept to wrap your head around unless there's something that you can actually play with (although it's not too dissimilar to email). Perhaps the Django/Python choice might throw people too...

Re: Diaspora Project: Building the Anti-Facebook

#56

Post by paulbaumgart »

eavc wrote: post #43
paulbaumgart wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the Kickstarter page: After we open source our source code, we hope to also provide a paid turnkey hosted service in the vein of Wordpress.com to make it easy for people who want to use Diaspora, but don’t want to deal with the fuss of setting it up.

If the only way for the average person to use the service is to pay for it, that's going to be a very tough hill to climb.

Unless someone else hosts an ad-supported version that turns out to be viable. But I agree that their business model needs work.

Re: Diaspora Project: Building the Anti-Facebook

#57

Post by viraptor »

anthonyb wrote: post #54
viraptor wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Remember, the internet itself is decentralized. I think it's a common misconception. You can be decentralised with friends. With the whole world, you need a single entity. Just look at Facebook, Twitter, Google, MSN -vs- Jabber (even gtalk is not a jabber in the mind of users - it's gtalk / google chat), money transfer services, iAnything from Apple, etc. People seem to like centralisation - they know where to go a…

Email, the web, DNS, routing and TCP/IP are all decentralised. I think the push is to try and do that for social apps like Facebook as well, instead of having AOL-email style monopolies...

DNS, routing and TCP/IP are things you never see. They're technically decentralised and they stay like that in practice.

Email and web? Not so much really. Everyone serves their little page from their own site. But as soon as you want to interact / share, you're back to hubs like dropbox, facebook, twitter, etc. The data may flow through decentralised links, but it's still coming from FB.

Re: Diaspora Project: Building the Anti-Facebook

#58

Post by anthonyb »

viraptor wrote: post #57
anthonyb wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Email, the web, DNS, routing and TCP/IP are all decentralised. I think the push is to try and do that for social apps like Facebook as well, instead of having AOL-email style monopolies...

DNS, routing and TCP/IP are things you never see. They're technically decentralised and they stay like that in practice. Email and web? Not so much really. Everyone serves their little page from their own site. But as soon as you want to interact / share, you're back to hubs like dropbox, facebook, twitter, etc. The data may flow through decentralised links, but it's still coming from FB.

If I want to view a web page that you've created, I go to a server which you control (or your ISP controls). I don't have to go to web.com and click through to an account that you've created on the web.com service.

If I want to send you an email, I talk to my server, my server talks to your server, and you get an email in your inbox. Maybe I use GMail and you use Yahoo, but the underlying protocol is the same, so it doesn't matter.

Services like Facebook and Twitter have been written as a closed protocol right from the start, so you're not used to thinking of them in open or interoperable terms, but it looks like it's happening - it's just a question of time and the right impetus.

(Perhaps you're thinking of 'decentralised' as being able to host stuff on any computer in some sort of cloud, but I prefer to think of it as 'not controlled by any one entity' - maybe that's where some of the confusion is coming from?)

Re: Diaspora Project: Building the Anti-Facebook

#60

Post by anthonyb »

thefool wrote: post #40

Meh. I don't think software people understand just how disinclined a non-software person is to do anything requiring configuring serverside stuff. Even torrents, where clients have essentially become good enough that all you have to do is install them, most people get a friend that has some understanding of computers to set them up for them. The cloud is really a better model if you want to achieve widespread adoptio…

Sure, just like non-software people are disinclined to configure web/email servers and set up large wired/radio communications networks.

They still surf the net, send email and talk to people on the phone though.

Post reply on HN