Tom Coates
- works for Yahoo
- rapid prototyping group in London
- MySpace: “eye-bleedingly horrible”
- alphabet & writing, the invention of money
Social Software
- an individual should get value from their contributions
- these contributions should provide value to their peers as well
Two types of social software
Consensus & Polyphony
Consensus: Digg & Wikipedia
Believes Polyphonic works much better:
Flickr, Hollywood Stock Exchange, last.fm
Only motivations in life:
- get laid & please jesus
Community motives
- anticipated reciprocity
- reputation
- sense of efficacy
- identification with a group
Random people edit wikipedia w/o ego boost or $$$
When people contribute to a group effort, they overestimate their total contribution (% wise) to the success of the whole.
Why people contribute to open source:
#1. Learning to code
#2. Gaining reputation
#3. Scratching an itch
#4. Contributing to the commons
#5. Sticking it to M$
Sharing without really knowing it
Sharing for personal use
Sharing with friends
Sharing with interest communities
Self-expression / showing off
Altruism / for the good of the world
Be wary of clumsy incentives like:
- money, points & competition
Types of people who engage in MUDs / MMORPGs
diamonds, spades, hearts, clubs
How to open up social value:
- expose every axis of data you can
- give people a place to represent themselves
- allow them to associate, connect and form relationships with one another
Be wary of creating a monoculture:
- digg and delicious/popular
Not all your users need to participate to generate social value
Where’s the money?
- attention and advertising
- premium accounts
Rise of aggregate data?
- proprietary data sources own a space
- they license their data initially selectively
- increasingly fluid and commodified services emerge with flat rate-card data provisions