[p2p-research] [OK] Re: [VBbuilders] Why and how work together?

[Samuel Rose]

Marc

On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 7:44 PM, Marc Dangeard <marc at dangeard.com> wrote:
> Talking about standard data format, distributed database and protocol:
> one thing that I would love to see for Entrepreneur Commons and I am
> sure that it would help this group too is an "Open Deal Protocol"
> allowing us to document projects and then share them across the
> various groups that have access to funding.
> From this data, we would get a lot, and matching would become a lot easier.
>
> I have not seen anything like this so far being discussed here.
> As I started working on it on my side, is anybody here interested in
> this discussion?
>

Marc, what do you think the essential, core data in an "open deal
protocol" would look like? What data points would be most useful to
you as an entrepreneur?


> Best,
> Marc
>
> Marc Dangeard
> @mdangear (Twitter, Status.net)
> www.entrepreneurcommons.org - www.melcion.com - www.dangeard.com
> +1 415 287 7654
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 2:59 PM, Matt Cooperrider
> <mattcooperrider at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Sam, I think you are right on about protocols, and am glad to hear that you
>> think Wave has what it takes. I have a gut feeling about this, but not the
>> expertise to evaluate it.
>>
>> I was lucky enough to have breakfast with lead Wave engineer Stephanie
>> Hannon in Sydney recently. She says they are working hard to extract
>> proprietary code from their Wave client, so that others can get their own
>> clients up more easily.
>>
>> But they have a lot of other pressures and deadlines, and need to show mass
>> adoption first and foremost. So use those invites!!!
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 3:36 AM, Sam Putman <atmanistan at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 4:38 AM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > So where we are is with this flourishing of myriad initiatives, each
>>> > trying
>>> > to re-invent the wheel and duplicating efforts,
>>> >
>>> > BUT, we can use each other's differential strengths to rally around
>>> > certain
>>> > initiatives for certain goals, and around others for other goals,
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > at this stage, this is unavoidable,
>>> >
>>> > Michel
>>>
>>> This is an invisible consequence of poor protocol design on the part
>>> of the Internet community.
>>>
>>> Back in the (g)olden days, the trend was to solve a communication
>>> challenge by designing a protocol that was robust, easy to implement,
>>> and would therefore let any server anywhere implement the protocol.
>>> Such are email, usenet, IRC, and HTML, and the suite of lower-level
>>> and supporting technologies.
>>>
>>> bittorrent is an example of a protocol from the more modern era which
>>> was developed correctly. It is inevitable, unstoppable, and
>>> democratic. These protocols can succumb to poor design (as usenet
>>> largely has) but when executed well they are what let us organize in a
>>> peer-to-peer fashion.
>>>
>>> Internet existed in competition with many walled gardens: Compuserve,
>>> Prodigy, AOL and the countless bulletin boards. All are gone, or
>>> assimilated into the collective; for the most part, the work that went
>>> into making them, the content they hosted, is lost.
>>>
>>> Facebook may look 'too big to fail' but AOL once bought Time-Warner. A
>>> walled garden is simply not an Internet-compatible solution; what's
>>> needed is a Social Networking Protocol, something that works in a
>>> fine-grained way to let someone define their own social network across
>>> the entire Internet, without prejudice of provider, and interact with
>>> that as they move from node to node.
>>>
>>> Wave, from my perusal of it, has (more than) what it takes to do this.
>>> Modern Internet standards tend to have the relatively obese quality of
>>> Wave, with XML as the shining example. Wave has a long way to go
>>> before we can set up a Wave server as fast and easily as we can throw
>>> up Apache now, but when that time comes, Wave may well have what it
>>> takes.
>>>
>>> In the meantime, we'll muddle along with forums, Drupal sites, and a
>>> thousand and one passwords. However, if we keep in mind the kind of
>>> architecture we actually need, it will be faster and easier to
>>> eventually get it.
>>>
>>> cheers,
>>> -Sam Putman.
>>>
>>> --
>>> This is a message from the OpenKollab Google Group located at
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/openkollab?hl=en
>>> To post to this group, send email to openkollab at googlegroups.com
>>
>>
>> --
>> Matt Cooperrider
>> Strategic Account Manager, Collabforge pty ltd
>> collaboration ~ mass collaboration ~ social software
>> + 61 (0) 468 954 779 ~ 239 Rathdowne St, Carlton, Melbourne 3053
>> collabforge.com ~ twitter.com/mattcoop
>>
>> --
>> This is a message from the OpenKollab Google Group located at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/openkollab?hl=en
>> To post to this group, send email to openkollab at googlegroups.com
>



-- 
-- 
Sam Rose
Forward Foundation
Tel:+1(517) 639-1552
Cel: +1-(517)-974-6451
skype: samuelrose
email: samuel.rose at gmail.com
http://forwardfound.org
http://socialsynergyweb.org/culturing
http://flowsbook.panarchy.com/
http://socialmediaclassroom.com
http://localfoodsystems.org
http://notanemployee.net
http://communitywiki.org
http://p2pfoundation.net

"The universe is not required to be in perfect harmony with human
ambition." - Carl Sagan