The CEOs of the Red Herring 100 have all been invited to blog as part of the the Red Herring Spring Eventspace. You can go directly to a list of the blogs in a drop-down menu or list of hyperlinks.
This is a great concept, and could be pretty intriguing. The blogs are open for participation to the public, so you can post and have public dialog with the CEOs of these companies.
The real question, though, is what kind of participation it will get from the CEOs themselves. The site’s been up for about four days, and so far, there are a whole lot of questions and not many answers. In fact, the only CEO response I could find so far was LinkedIn CEO Reid Hoffman’s response to Marc Canter’s challenge about LinkedIn supporting FOAF:
I guess here’s the short-hand: we’ll add FOAF when it seems to be the next most important feature to add in our list. And, not seeing an immediate application for it (we have two years of features to build, all of which have immediate application), I’m not certain it’s any time in the near future.
Good answer. Stay focused on what your users are asking for. I know LinkedIn has a long list of those things — I’ve sent in quite a few myself.
Canter counters in his own inimitable style on his blog:
So dude - you know I love yah - right? But your answer is [bleep]. It takes no time to implement FOAF and it provides a basic, compelling solution that all humans (read: end-users and/or customers) need.
Why don’t you just say why you really don’t wanna support FOAF? Come on - be a man about it.
By locking all your customers into LinkedIn - they’re YOUR customers - mwah hah hah hah hah!
I can really see both sides on this one. Would it be more convenient for me for LinkedIn to support FOAF? Absolutely. I’d love to not have to port my profile from one network to the next, and, at least in theory, ditto for my relationships.
Here’s the problem, though, Marc — my relationships on LinkedIn are NOT the same as my relationships on Ryze are NOT the same as my relationships on Ecademy are NOT the same as my relationships on Tribe, etc.
On Ecademy, being “connected” just means that we’ve exchanged private messages. On LinkedIn, it means that there’s been a confirmation of a trusted relationship. Someone who I would count as a friend on Ryze, I wouldn’t necessarily list as a connection on LinkedIn. Who I’m willing to make an electronic record of my relationship with DOES depend on the context in which that relationship is going to be used.
Furthermore, as big a supporter of openness as I am, I recognize that not everyone wants to make all their relationships public. Having an open FOAF file is fraught with the potential for abuse. For someone with absolutely no boundaries between personal and professional spheres of your life, that may work. It won’t play in Poughkeepsie. I support the basic concept of interoperability, but it’s going to take a standard with more granular security control than FOAF to garner widespread adoption. [online business networks blog]
Then we got some more followup from Reid......
Reid Hoffman, May 20, 12:35pm
Scott Allen actually took the words out of my mouth on FOAF:
http://www.onlinebusinessnetworks.com/blog/2004/05/19/100-ceo-blogs-linkedin-and-foaf
And, while, yes, while I certainly wouldn't just give away customer relationships (being a man about this), I believe that customers are kept most happy by giving them functionality.
And, frankly, I remain unconvinced of any FOAF application that I've seen thus far. (Including, my regrets, the one posted here.) If there was a web-app that I could offer my customers, that having FOAF would enable me, then I would do it -- if it was good enough to be a high priority.
And no feature is free Marc -- it all takes work. (Release, QA, plan with security, analyze corner cases, etc.) Hopefully you'll blog about Scott's post above... best thing that I've seen on FOAF in a blog yet. [
Reid Hoffman on SocialText Wiki]
OK Reid - let's start off with....
Compelling usage for FOAF - that's relevant to Reid. So EDS has this great deal with Plaxo (or Spoke - it doesn't really matter) and some EDS employees are on LinkedIn as well. However since the Spoke users are in a groove and getting allot of value out of Spoke, they don't see a need for LinkedIn.
One day they wake up and wow! LinkedIn supports FOAF now. "You mean I can move my net over to LinekdIn - without having to enter them one at a time?" Oh gee, maybe LinekdIn benefits from that. And the EDS folks do too!
Now to bean counting....
You raised how many millions from your buddy Mr. Moritz? Adding FOAF, QAing it and printing 1,000,000 CDs would cost less than the lawyer fees for your VC funding round. So PLEASE don;t tell me how expensive it is - how busy you are - and FOAF is not important to you.
Give me a break! What more important than giving your customers what they want?
Scott is a customer. He uses your network and HE sees the need for interchange - why can't you? I see you all over the place - on Orkut, on Tribe, on Ryze -yet you're sitting there - clicking away adding friends just like the rest ofus. Aren't you gettign tired of that yet?
Scott very eloquently points out the difference between each social network. He points out that trying to match how each social net treats friendships, relationships, etc - is different.
Scott elucidates the value added differentiation between Ryze and LinkedIn - and you know what? That's why they're different, that's why different people go to each service. Vive le Difrance!
Social Networks ARE NOT going to line up convieniently and work together or interchange without some level of conversion, adjustment, mapping, reconciliation and transcoding. You don't have to listen to Clay Shirky or danah boyd to figure out that for every context, they'll be a different way of using explicit relationships, hard coded computer systems and soft edged human intervention.
Each system is different. You know what can connect them together. FOAF!
But instead of using difference and non synchronization of concepts (of friendship, of trust, of interests, etc.) as an excuse why you DON"T WANNA CONNECT to anyone else - how 'bout we work together and make this interchange notion work? It's actually quite an interesting challenge.
And this matter of privacy is another just another lame ass excuse (excuse my French as my real friend Loic would say.) It doesn't matter where you're at - whether you're in Ryze, LinkedIn or Tribe - everyone wants to protect their meta and profile data. . FOAF gives everyone the power to control their profiles - not open them up to the world. NO -FOAF doens't have privacy built-in. Would you use it? I don't think so.
FOAF is a just an object wrapper technology - which can hold any kind of unqiue ID, meta data or profile info. Its up to us to do something coolio with that potential. So please don't start claiming FOAF means giving everything away. It doesn't.
The PEOPLE want the feature Reid. Give it to them or end up like Friendster. What happens when Plaxo and Spoke support FOAF and you don't?
I don't have millions of dollars in my bank account (anymore.) We don't have VC money either. What we have is what humans want. That's what our business model is. To me that means profits. Giving people what they want.
Digital ID doesn't work on it's own. There's no clear application for digital ID by itself. That's all FOAF is. But to use FOAF to interchange entire social nets. NOW THAT ROCKS! Just ask around.
Have you ever met Doc Searls before? How 'bout David Weinberger?
- - -