Avoiding Walled Gardens on the Internet

The Internet is so big… so badly indexed… For the moment being social networks like linked in, facebook, myspace, livejournal and others are the chosen way to build and integrate subnets which are based on shared interests and other elective affections. These private island make the Internet smaller so that we can find each other more easily. They’re like instant Internet homes. You register and pop! you’ve become part of a few neighborhoods.

Maybe what’s really missing is an effective way to link in various people and websites, something decentralized that’s truly open. It could be a new service, a new initiative or just an innovative way to use something like FOAF. I don’t know yet.

Or we could think of these services as simple front doors to your Internet (and real life) presence…

AOL had the world by the short curlies…and they BLEW IT!!! Their business model and culture prevented them from adapting to the internet. I’m seeing the same pattern with Blockbuster video and with cable companies. Many companies that are practically monopolies tend to “defend” their way of life instead of innovate and adapt…and then the wave of change eventually comes crashing over them (Netflix, VOD)…and then they become followers.

You also don’t have to consider Facebook to only enumerate friends. Sure, they label the links ‘friends’ but I see it as more of a collection of people that I may want to contact or may want to contact me. People I went to school with, or worked with, and would add them to an address book, but it maintains that for me.

The self-updating address book idea mentioned before was a good analogy.

You folks saying you weren’t interested in SN until Facebook, please just admit that it has nothing to do with the technology or convenience, and everything to do with crossing the threshold of popularity from being part of an obnoxious fad to avoiding social isolation. - Aaron G

but for those who are in college, it’s the best way to keep in touch with friends and have a bit of fun while doing it. - Nick

The best (or in Aarong’s case - ONLY) way to keep in touch with people is through SN sites? That’s a shock. From the tone of lots of people here, it almost seems that calling family and friends is pass. And that’s a shame, because it’s much more gratifying - for BOTH people.

I have purposely turned down all of the invitations that I have received, because I’d rather not be another person who resorts to such impersonal and passive forms of communication. I have a phone, and my friends know that they are worth the $2/mo that it costs me to call them.

Greate post…but i disagree…Reason-Orkut.I love orkuting…its defenitly a better way of keeping in touch with friends and to know what they are doing easly…i do agree u can mail or make a call…but just be practical…how many childhood friends name u remember atleat…u might have interacted with 100’s of children of ur age…i had so many childhood crush of gals inmy class…this is the best way to peep in and see what they doing now…just kidding…but the network is so powerfull u can kkeep in contact with nay one,more importanly digg ur old friends out…

Steve-O,

Say you were out at the mall or a concert and you ran into someone you haven’t been in touch with since high school or college. Say you used to be good friends or there was that one time you went on a road trip to a concert/party together. You just drifted apart as you got older. They got a job in another city or went to a different college. You started dating someone and spent all your time with them instead of this person. Would you shun them just because they ran into you at the mall instead of calling you up?

That’s how a lot of people use these social networks. A way of keeping in touch with people or catching up with people.

The ones who just want to amass as many “friends” as they can so they can brag about how many people have “friended” or “linked” to them because the had the misfortune of being born with … shrinkage, well they aren’t the real users of the network and they actually benefit the least.

On reading the post, my thought is that the distinction between technology and sociology is blurred in the discussion. From a technology point of view, open will win. From a social point of view, there’s a place for both public and private discourse. Three (or everybody) can be a crowd, and I think there will always be a need for the private, even in an online, open technology, world.

**The little prince went away, to look again at the roses.

“You are not at all like my rose,” he said. “As yet you are nothing. No one has tamed you, and you have tamed no one. You are like my fox when I first knew him. He was only a fox like a hundred thousand other foxes. But I have made him my friend, and now he is unique in all the world.”

And the roses were very much embarassed.

“You are beautiful, but you are empty,” he went on. "One could not die for you. To be sure, an ordinary passerby would think that my rose looked just like you-- the rose that belongs to me. But in herself alone she is more important than all the hundreds of you other roses: because it is she that I have watered; because it is she that I have put under the glass globe; because it is she that I have sheltered behind the screen; because it is for her that I have killed the caterpillars (except the two or three that we saved to become butterflies); because it is she that I have listened to, when she grumbled, or boasted, or ever sometimes when she said nothing. Because she is my rose.**

Antoine de Saint-Exupry, The little prince

I found this so interesting that I decided to share it on Facebook.

Actually, I understand both sides of this. I avoided social networking sites for years. Now I use the social networking sites I do use to control the information that people find out, and how. My myspace page for example is very different from my facebook page which is different from my Zoints profile. Each one has a different purpose, and recieves different information.

On the other hand, I often also participate in many open resources, of which I use to disseminate, or accumulate other information. I have a blog, I am a member of many forums, and even am an admin of my own forum. All or almost all information I put up there is free for anyone to see without signing up. I would have to say that in general, these two sets of resources have served different needs, each site serving it’s own set of needs.

I use the open sources more as a way of collecting information about others, or letting people get to know me who would not have been able to get to know me otherwise. I use the closed sources to put out information to those I already know, but I do not collect much information from other people using them.

That is where I stand on all this.

Oh, and you said to message you, make a public interaction, and you might interact back. Here is my public interaction. Something Profound (a href="http://profoundforum.com"http://profoundforum.com/a) is my forum. If you feel inclined to come in and check it out please do. I wanted to invite you, not just because you are knowledgeable, something we always need a little more of, but also because this is not an invite to a private thing, it is to a public thing. We are small, and sometimes abrasive, but we are in our own way a social network. Maybe you will check it out and take my offer, maybe you won’t. I just thought I would invite you.

It was said many ways by many commenters on here, but Facebook is different in that you can find people you otherwise would never have found or even remembered to look for. I had the same attitude as you about social sites, but I finally relented in the Facebook case because I was getting so many “invites”. The interface is what attracted me first (nice and simple), and the fact I was finding loads of people I had actually forgotten about is what kept me on. Sure, the thing might get hijacked at some point, in some way (whether by the community or by the company itself adding more than the single “ad widget” or charging a fee). But for now, it’s a great way to keep in touch with your friends. I totally agree with the on poster who mentioned sending messages with it… it is a quick and easy way to send and receive “e-mail” without worrying about spam.

Social networking sites have their place, and it mainly goes back to the point that you don’t always want everything you write on the internet to be totally public. In its original concept, Facebook would only allow you to join a school’s network if you had an e-mail address from them as proof of your studentship. It not only protects kids from paedo’s on the internet, but also all the other dangers facing the naive; compare the girl who put out an open invitation to her house party on MySpace last year and had tons of people turn up. On facebook, she’d at least have been restricted to her schoolmates.

Also, sometimes they make you more discoverable to people you could potentially meet one day. That’s why I joined facebook myself at uni, and I found myself put in contact with people’s profiles and blogs who actually lived near me.

The same function is provided by niche sites like Gaydar, which helps you find gay people in your area, and keeps your profile safe from people you wouldn’t want to see it (your mum? your boss? whatever). It’s certainly changed the nature of dating for me.

You don’t have to spend all your internet-time in a gated community, but sometimes it’s just what you need.

I think my previous comment, and some other peoples, can be summed up in “Facebook makes it simple”. But for the simplicity you have to pay the price of generalisation, and one of those generalisations is finer privacy controls.

Check out Mark Andreessen’s post on why he had started Ning:
http://blog.pmarca.com/2007/07/why-ning.html

Quote:
“I also think that in time, many people will decide they want to create their own social networks – echoing the 1990’s, when tens of millions of people who were introduced to the online world by proprietary online services like AOL, Compuserve, and Prodigy ultimately decided they wanted to create and live in a world of millions of web sites, not just a world of a few large walled gardens.”

Thats the thing about walled gardens: they die. The Hanging Gardens of Babylon that you showed a picture of is gone, isn’t it? But it was a spectacle! It was amazing, and became apart of history. Myspace, facebook, youtube… These gardens are spectacles in themselves. I have a facebook account, just so I can be apart of the spectacle. So that I can see inside these walls and observe the paradise. But thats just because I’m easily amused. I don’t actually find purpose or dire need for these walled gardens, but I like playing around and exploring them.

I would like to point out (not that anyone accused me of saying such things, but I would like to point it out anyways) that I never said that walled gardens are a good thing. I think they are just another tool. I have gone through many blog sites over my years on the internet. Each one served a purpose, and when that purpose was done and served I found a better site that could better serve newer more prominent needs of mine.

Much like my open sources like blogs, my walled garden sources service certain needs as well. That does not make them good or bad. That does not make them anything else besides a tool. Open garden sources are the same. Both are just tools, which when used correctly can make you prosper (in whatever you are trying to acheive with them from bringing in traffic to a website, to making money, to keepinging in touch with friends or trying to scare off a few annoying younger kids), and when used incorrectly may give you a headache.

FxFibben, I ask that you take a look into my forum as well. This time I am asking not to promote the site or anything, but rather to give you a solid example of a open garden social network with no ads. The closest thing to an ad we have up is the occasional newsfeed reminder that we have a store. A store that is there more for fun than anything else because we never expected to be able to support ourselves on any earnings we make, and so far we have been right.

Social Networks come in open and closed as well. Or at least I consider them to come in such. I welcome a differing opinion on this. Forums would be a good example of open social networking. It is usually a group focused on a specific topic, or has areas for a specific topic. People interested in such a topic can access that information, signed in or not, or can add to the information by singing in, which is really only to help keep spam down.

Really, the heart of the division between people all for open gardens and closed gardens that I am seeing is the same dividing line between those who choose freesom over security and those who choose security over freedom. I think personally, I ride the fence. I like a little (or a lot) of both. The honest truth is that you can get both out of an open garden model if you are smart, I will nto pretend that you can’t.

In my final point I would like to agree with FxFibben in a sense. I personally have been known to use my walled garden accounts most for self promotion. Or rather, in a sense, free ad space. I mention my forum, my projects, or whatever information I think my built in database of readers will be interested in and may benifit them, giving them value that will then be returned to me in continued prosperity through their assistance, or busininess or whatever else that account is for. I do this a little bit less in open garden settings. That could just as easily be reversed however. This is not a set in stone way of using these tools and I know many people who use their open garden tools the way I use my cwalled garden tools.

I have a question for anyone willing to answer it. What do you view as the main purpose of walled gardens? Open gardens?

Jeff, I think I would even challenge you to something you challenged the world to in an earlier post. We don’t need to be learning the programs necessairly. Someone well versed in several open garden or closed garden sites can usually tell you that they are usually all formed the same at the basics but serve different fuctions. What we need to learn is how to use any site, to our advantage. Individual sites accross the board, closed or open will have their peaks and their downfall, each with a different time scale. What we need to be learning is not how each site works and why, or why a site is bad, but how to use the tools a site give to the fullest advantage

Jeff, here is my challenge, and anyone opposed to closed garden sites, this is for you as well. Find a popular one. Facebook seems to be on the rise. If you can’t think of one off hand use Facebook. Now my challenge is this, choose a goal. More traffic to your personal web site, a better relationship with some group of people, making more money for your company. Now use that closed garden site to acheive your goal. I know there is no way to really measure if this works, but I can tell you that if you are doing things right and you choose the right apporaches and network right using the site it won’t take you much time a day, and it can give you a large presence in that community. A presence that will bring prosperity. If nothing else, it is a good test of your marketing skills.

How did that connect to any of your previous posts? I got the inspiration from your post about learning how to learn. We don’t need to learn the sites, we need to learn how to use the sites (open and walled), like we need to learn how to use Wikipedia.

I’m not going to say that every walled garden site is for everyone. Many places I set up a presences on and then never updated it again because the atmosphere was too stifling. But for those first few weeks I would see a burst of traffic, or a onslaught of people contacting me about something or another. It may have been coincidence, or it may be that I’m lucky, I don’t know. All I know is that in my experiance, the effort pays off. How it differs from a open garden site I can tell you too.

If you want people to come to your open garden site you promote and you promote and you push and you do all you can to get your google rating up and your search engine rating up and you tell people about it and you push it with everyone you know and plenty of people you don’t know. With a walled garden the people come to you. And they will stay if you have something they want. That is why I would say that FxFibben is right, it is all about (f)ads. Isn’t it time people learned to use the tools to promote their wares for free?

Sorry this has been long, and was not nearly as good a post as my last one. It also didn’t entierly stay on topic, for that I apologize. It was more a collection of thoughts and ideas that came to me as I read the responses to my post and built into something largs and unweildly. I also apologize for the spelling. I am not at my regular computer today, and have no spell check. I will now be on my merry way and get back to my original intention which was to post a link to this in my forum.

Another great post. The main reason behind social networking is social engineering geared towards selling (f)ads, getting eyeballs and grabbing unsuspecting users by their winsocks (adware, spyware and such). It has nothing to do with social networking.

Yeah I tend to agree with Belak. I like my walls. Different things happen on Myspace than what happens on URNotAlone, which is specifically for transgender people. I can’t think of a better example of the reason for segregation than that. I’m sure the people on LDSRomances don’t want a tranny in the mix. Social networking sites are not an extension of the web, they are not sub-webs or whatever… they are reasonably segregated communities which are segregated because they want to be. Myspace has lost its original focus, which is why it no longer seems like a specialized community and more like AOL…

I almost choked up reading three variations of “seggregation” in one sentense (see previous post, the one that agrees with Belak). First come the walled gardens, then come the pedophiles, spammers and other “walled garden trash”.

It is actually great that such “clubs” work by invitation only. Main advantage of the Internet over previous concepts is The Open Concept. You can look for, find and contact whomever you want - provided there is a mutual interest in communication. Walls are not known to improve communication except if you don’t want to talk to your “neighbor”.

If you like seggregation and dodging ads, walled garden is for you.

I regularly read your articles, it’s the first tech feed on my google homepage. I really enjoy all your articles. They are not just programming examples. They have easy to follow links and I can stay busy for hours, and it’s not just wasting time, I think I am really learning as well.
I just wanted to say thanks for every article, I look forward to them every day.

Keep up the good work,

Shane Calhoun

Would you shun them just because they ran into you at the mall instead of calling you up? - Scott
In fact, yes: I did just that this passed x-mas to a number of people. It was sad, because these were friends that I’d had for a long time; not just people I lost touch with. I don’t need friends who can’t be bother to BE friends. I can make more - I’ve never had problems there - and it’s much easier now that people don’t expect others to actually DO anything anymore.

Aaron: I had NO idea that things had gotten to that point (with respect to your friend’s wedding). I’m sure that this trend will change, and that society will eventually level itself off again: People have a tendency to over use/abuse anything new. I am just surprised that only a few people have realized the problem.

And when you say: “I think the main attraction of social networking (in contrast to the BS rationale that people try to feed us) is the opportunity for pure unabashed laziness.” - Truer words were never spoken.

But the upside: No-one actually interacting might mean that the population will start thinning…