There’s quite a bit of discussion (not here yet) of “data portability” (DP). DP involves a user creating and controlling specific data, able to move it from place to place with ease. The idea is novel and forward-thinking.
Also, there’s what @alisamleo has labeled, a “paradigm of streams.” Basically, the web is becoming less place, more conduit as more people use third-party clients or sites to retrieve information that interests them (RSS, TweetDeck, etc).
These are great ideas. They keep the web a democratic place where vast resources can be accessed instantaneously. Unfortunately, to maintain that will take more work than most are willing to admit.
Why?
These streams of data and the portability therein are not only convenient for the user, but insanely valuable. Facebook (FB) already made their stance clear when they claimed ownership of it. Google makes billions based on a superior search of similar data.
The transition from radio to television should show us (big radio names became the only TV names) that media are not intrinsically democratic. Quite the opposite. The DP movement must provide value to these controlling bodies.
In a sense, they must grant license to the data and ownership to users. That may sound obvious or revolutionary, depending on your perspective (which is partly my point).
Without this value-add these streams will be diverted or blocked by too many. The interweb may be democratic, where all can prance freely, but the conduits or access to it are not.
Do you want to go back to walking miles daily for well water? or would you rather just turn on the tap? Because, soon, enough value will be found in the pipes and faucets to make access limited and/or expensive.
Cross-posted at SD&IF.
Tags: corporations, data portability, digital reputation management, social tools