DISQUS

Concept-wise ... Identity (mine) & Open (shared/ours) -somebody/something has to give ... "OpenID" should be about defining "privacy" in view of "user generated content" (the "mine" & "ours" thing needs full transparency), IMHo ...

because there is no such thing as a long tail ... 10 mil of 13 mil authorized music tracks had ZERO sales last year! Just because *accessibility* is high, legal or not (though I prefer "authorized" as many of the artists are still screwed by bad accounting), does not mean the business will grow revenues indefinitely! Been to an opera lately? What about a gladiator event (LOL)? What needs to happen is a way to define *my network* separate & apart from "others" - including iTunes, YouTube, Twitter - & also *my bandwidth* which is already paid for & should not be artificially restricted by arbitrary rules & "best efforts" under typical terms of service...

Interestingness? No ... willingness to pay (could the spam filter complexity one day exceed the user's knowledge - nahh)

ah ... Bandwidth is Currency ... Accounting matters so why not define the network & determine basic utility value of telecom so folks can understand what is worth paying for ... This is an important debate for both industrial policy & such things as attribution for promoting innovation ... (Bilski decision could have been more logically consistent with the reality of value creation in our economy & the contradictory positions of the Coalition for Patent "Fairness" (CFP) in member amicus briefs filed should be open to serious discourse) ... Facebook = $15 bil in what equivalence to bandwidth plus coding / value-add?

well anecdote military studies & studies in mgt show it is difficult to effectively manage more than 200 people & a group of about 20 is ideal - should not be that different in communications networks especially that it is electronic not physical as per all of the studies on optimal human resource management - signal or noise - it takes effort to manage largely effortless micoblogging communications ... FWIW

or ... you could trademark your name ... using all of the suggestions above to decide on what your applicable trade is & enforce the tradename against those who might cyber-squat or worse ... it is even helpful in resolving liability in ID Theft &/or getting some traction in the currency of recognition that we are all able to monetize using the intellectual property protections that larger entities take for granted and use successfully for their own gain ... this is not legal advice, express or implied ... but while the big boys attack the patent system, copyright & trademark protections get stronger ... so, why not? we are all analogs & intangible!

sharing without attribution however is where the rubber meets the road ... I love to share with blogs, hey doin it now & I'll do it again, & aggregator sites (plurk karma? kudos? likes? golden stars? brown jellybeans? reputation?) - BUT as has been pointed out much of this sharing is time the sharer never considered a value ... those that can equitably share value with the creator/writer will likely win the battle as trust is still the ingredient that remains inherently fungible ... And sharing in the upside is a bit more of what it means to monetize (let's start by monetizing bandwidth)

in "bitches" I am expressly referring to people not women or female dogs ...

bitch & whine won't get us out of our mess ... ironically if the site succeeds it'll prove my point ... our nanny-ish approach to problem solving will hopefully be replaced by a renewed interest in community & rolling up our collective sleeves ... wonder who will provide ad support to that site? let's see if they can bring the bitches to the polls to VOTE - that would be interesting

Sounds like entropy ... I'd prefer to know willingness to pay if I was seeking profits & an ability to collect payments for particular tweets & the like ... what is the value if bandwidth? who adds value?

bandwidth is not oil ... if you do not use it ... you lose it ... period !!!

tim wu and his awkward (to be kind) comparison ignores the bills paid by users who get far less than even so-called "quality of service" guarantees - which are nether quality (in any objective sense) or services (they can be denied under best efforts or worse, simple contract language) ... even the googles of the world do not offer network neutrality over ad placement ... so what is the real issue?

we all pay for electricity - on demand. a network, like a grid MUST include the access points & computation fed into said network by the users themselves.

we do not generally feed the electricity grid - actually some folks do ... but the notion that a telecom // isp should get a pass on opening the kimono and letting the actuarial light in is simply ludicrous.

the cost to provide wired landline service is about 2 cents per month.

telecoms is simply an immense billing, customer "service" and marketing/lobbying cabal - true competition would force transparency to define bandwidth in terms akin to kilowatts for electric power or BTUs in gas ... anything less is bad public policy for all Americans.

solutions which cannot introduce double entry accounting for enabling true measurable, objective competition over bandwidth resources is a riddle wrapped in greed.

if you don't use the bandwidth - it is gone ... time you see is really money ...

its figuring out a granularity of relevance ... We know we must pay the kilowatts & legacy computation & SLA from some pipe provider so... how do we map these different services to predictable business models namely, monetization of the bandwidth being managed by users themselves ... friendfeed is invaluable in providing a bridge for new interpreations of what people pay for or believed willing to pay ... at least you should know the value of your own time (& bandwidth)