|
Sorry, for some reason this post touched a nerve, and not even because I disagreed with a lot of what was said. Like ryanwaggoner said, props on putting this out there, its obvious you care a lot about the future of the internet and are genuinely trying to make it better. My problem is with the attitude that the internet is 'broken' and that we should just redo it. That, and the suggestion that someone should give you money to play around with hypothetical e-utopias. Anyway, my rebuttals: 1. Hundreds...really? If you regularly use more than 100 accounts, that puts you in the top .1% of internet users. Normal people just let firefox remember their passwords and also probably spend more time outside. 2. API's, facebook connect, openid. If I meet someone at a conference, I spend 30 seconds each adding them to twitter, linkedin and maybe facebook. Do I really need (or want) to automatically see their flickr feed? 3. Again, the multiple modes of content consumption is perfect. I'll friend you on facebook if I care about you socially, I'll add you to my rss if your blog interests me, and I'll follow you on twitter if you're not terribly annoying. We all get to apply filters to everyone else. 4. Totally agree, improved data portability would be great. 5. "We should stop building new social networks, services and adding entropy to the system. We should stop trying to patch a model that has proven multiple times to be broken by design." Umm, what? I couldn't be more excited about the future of web apps and services. The internet is one of the only places where the free market is truly at work. Its glorious. Entropy is a problem, which is why we've seen recent efforts directed at reducing it, but at the end of the day the web, like any market, is about value creation and capture. You don't even mention capturing value, which is why pg, or anyone else, is not likely to fund you. |