Google tried the open social protocol not too long ago. A social protocol is still not only likely, but inevitable. Bypassing gatekeepers is what the Internet does best. Even our legislation bends to keep it that way. Net neutrality will not only pass, but be actively pursued as a technological embodiment of liberty.

Great post, thanks for keeping your eyes open.

Google tried the open social protocol not too long ago. A social protocol is still not only likely, but inevitable. Bypassing gatekeepers is what the Internet does best. Even our legislation bends to keep it that way. Net neutrality will not only pass, but be actively pursued as a technological embodiment of liberty.

Great post, thanks for keeping your eyes open.

“So what is my only issue with this rosy picture? It's the fact that Twitter is a service built inside a single company, that has full control over how people are using it. Envision a world without e-mail. Now think today someone will come up with this cool idea of a one-to-many push idea and name it “Twiemail”. How comfortable would you be living in a world where there's that company that is the sole proprietor of your main way of communicating with people, and can ban you out any minute, censor your messages or what not? Why are we still comfortable with it when it's “one-to-many pull” rather than push?”

It was especially vivid when Google released Wave and showed how it's done, with Wave Federate etc. (unrelated to the fact that Wave itself is a bad idea

As for RSS, the problem is that its user experience *really* sucks. Only nerds could ever figure it out, while following via Twitter or Tumblr is easy and fun.

Also, Twitter and Tumblr have sharing, retweeting, and making friends baked in, while RSS has a one-way “broadcasty” feel.

Do you consider Google “owning” search quantifiably different? While they don't own a search protocol, the barriers to competition are extremely high.

One more thing: I also share bsiscovick's optimism, and am fond of thinking (using the long era of railroad building as an analogy) that we are only about 15% of the way into this. And I'm thrilled to have picked up a couple phrases from this thread: “social graph” and (this latter one may be bsiscovick's original coinage?) “microblog piping.”

I don't think my arguments re: google are saying they are getting too much – more that higher in the funnel is getting a bum deal.

Still, if the data shows that Twitter is in fact displacing RSS readers, then I'll accept that my perspective is unrepresentative. Hopefully that doesn't mean that my tools will also be displaced by inferior ones.

One thing is certain, innovation occur in incremental steps. Considering this whole web experiment is still in the early teenage years of its long lifecycle, my money says there will be mid- / longer-term opportunities for the open web to reclaim such critical fundaments such as the social graph and microblog piping.

First, I don't think RSS is totally being killed by Twitter. I really like to use them for two different things: RSS for subscribing to content and Twitter for sharing. So it doesn't matter to me if Google has lame sharing features. I can use Twitter or Facebook or anything else to share.

Second, if somebody came along and made RSS as easy to use and understand as Twitter, and differentiated how to use both technologies, I think RSS could thrive.

For context: I use RSS as an inbox for content. I don't like content cluttering my e-mail inbox. I also don't have time to read Twitter 24/7. So Google Reader is sort of like my content inbox with read/unread status. I can declare “blog bankruptcy” in during very busy periods without worrying about missing something critical, whereas I simply can't do that with e-mail.

So I think there is space for both technologies, and don't forget that RSS also feeds a lot of content onto Twitter! Every move Twitter makes has to be weighed against free competition from RSS for subscribing to content. I would argue that the network effect only applies to the sharing and communication aspects of the service.

It's funny how many RFC's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Request_for_Comments) were created during the Golden Years of the internet, for the sake of the entire medium's growth, compared to now where altruism is in rare supply. Sadly, API's are the new RFC, but there's a huge difference between a proprietary REST call and an open protocol.

I believe there's still life is some of those old, forgotten protocols like USENET, talk, and most recently, finger. Google's WebFinger project could be very impressive indeed if not only made open source, but also truly IETF approved.