h a l f b a k e r yBite me.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Blog 2.0
Blog that works on your turf (e.g., server), yet has all the social networking and social media conveniences. | |
Social media is blocked in various countries, due to political reasons.
However, social media are increasingly evolving, and they provide a variety of advanced viewing rights for content (both the posts and each comment).
Unfortunately, there is no single platform, except potentially -- a personal
blog -- where where you could write and expect that everyone won't have a problem to see it.
Hence, an idea of Blog 2.0.
In Blog 2.0 you would define your friends even before their registration on your blog, by providing their identities in different social platforms.
Then, no matter which social-login the friend uses to register or log-on to your blog, he or she would immediately be recognized as a particular friend, and only the posts that were supposed to be visible to the user would actually be visible to the user. Moreover, comments would have many visibility options, such as "only chosen people can see the comment", or "only mutual friends on a chosen set of social networks can see the each other's comment" would also be options available.
[link]
|
| |
The definition of a Blog is to be public. You might otherwise just set up a private peer to peer network. Anyway, half hidden conversations is much, much more annoying than people not getting a point. |
|
| |
// hidden conversations is much, much more annoying than people not getting a point // |
|
| |
True. However, there is a number of situations, when getting a point is not the point of communication. For example, sometimes people just want to share their excitement about some private experiences, and avoid others being jealous or laughing about them... or, do you suggest some major upgrade to the psychology of human beings? |
|
| |
// The definition of a Blog is to be public // Yes,
but Inyuki is defining Blog 2.0 to allow restricting
access to some or all content. It could still
maintain the flavor of a blog without being
completely public. |
|
| |
And while anyone COULD set up a private web
page or private peer-to-peer network, that's a lot
of work. It sounds like what this needs is a
software package (either cheap or free) that sets
this up for you with negligible effort. It might also
make sense to have client software (or web page)
that allows easily aggregating/checking for posts
on multiple Blog 2.0 sites, or maybe integrate to
FB and other sites by semi-automatically posting a
link to the blog (visible only to the select few of
course). So are we sure that such software
doesn't exist already but just hasn't become
popular? |
|
| |
// Anyway, half hidden conversations is much,
much more annoying than people not getting a
point // As long as the interface for comments
was done right, this wouldn't be a problem. Here's
one possibility: By default, a comment being left
would go to everyone who can see the Blog2.
With a single click, it could be restricted to the
author, with multiple clicks the list of viewers
could be restricted to a more complex subset.
Replies to comments would only be visible to the
people who could see the original comment or a
subset of those. The option to expand the
viewing list could exist, but no comment (and
subsequent subcomments) would be visible to any
new person without approval by the author of the
comments. |
|
| |
// while anyone COULD set up a private web page or private peer-to-peer network, that's a lot of work // |
|
| |
// So are we sure that such software doesn't exist already but just hasn't become popular? // |
|
| |
Btw., it seems to me that such software would not be in the interest of any major social media platform provider. It would only be in the interest of the individuals wanting communicate with each over conveniently crossing various national and social-network platform borders and controlling their content based on social identities. Perhaps a non-profit would be needed for such an effort. |
|
| |
//avoid others being jealous or laughing about them... // |
|
| |
Isn't this the opposite definition of being social and growing as an adult, on the way to that psychological upgrade. |
|
| |
It still seems that your new Blog 1.0 replacement wants to diminish the origin worth of what a blog is.
Call it a new name, a new piece in the social media scene. |
|
| |
[wjt], I did not intend to diminish what a blog is. By
definition, it is a "web log", and a log, is a series of
entries. The access rights to a log is not conflicting with
the definition of a log. System logs, for instance, may are
available only for systems administrators, and not the
public, and they are still logs. A "web log" by definition,
would mean it is a log available to the web. |
|
| |
The word "web" originally meant "public", but once
cookies and sessions were invented, the user registration
came about, and any web content, including logs, started
potentially being a subject of access control. |
|
| |
I appreciate the spirit of the original meaning of the word
"web", and "public content". With "Blog 2.0", I just
intended something like a file system, where you can
control the access to your content. You surely can protect
the access to certain files on your server, but not very
conveniently based on social identities yet. |
|
| |
Anyway, how would you suggest calling it? A Homepage
2.0? |
|
| |
I see the design is fundamentally a blog that is further reaching but more secure and policed. |
|
| |
In my mind a Blog 2.0 would try and make all the nuances of log reach as many people as possible in a more complex set of interconnections than that of Blog 1.0. Two people, that hardly met in the office, can talk about the log even though they are reside on different social media sites. A dimension up on the previous iteration. |
|
| |
I can not see how policing say, helps achieve this.
Maybe Clubboard 1.0. |
|
| |
[wjt], these days, people are going towards integration of
things, and universal tools, which make sense: why would
you need a camera, if you can have a smart phone? |
|
| |
Why would one need to have different platforms for
publishing publicly, and sharing privately? |
|
| |
How is enabling sharing your log entries exactly what you
want with exactly whom you want from your domain,
based on social identities, is policing? Sure, I see a
problem with content modification. For instance, if your
friend commented something, you should not be able to
change that comment. So, comments should be
cryptographically signed, and there should probably be
many other improvements. |
|
| |
Say things as you are you are saying them to everyone else 'think' why you can't. That's the gift of thought. |
|
| |
Well, on your server you almost certainly can... |
|
| |
... or hiding your private methods from the public. After all,
you don't want your buildings be made of highly transparent
glass. The object oriented programming has private and
public methods for a reason. It makes the overall thinking
more efficient. You share something with the public, when
you have something useful to say. Or ... do you think we
just should spit out whatever insignificant byproducts into
the noosphere? |
|
| |
I had my fishbone out the moment I saw the title but I'm
going to have to bun it instead. |
|
| |