8 Comments

I think Twitter is the open commenting system for the web, in a different form factor: the comments box is centralized and you need to include the URL of the page you are commenting on. This has much lower "activation energy" (great term!) because of stronger ties with people who see your comment (classic social network effects).

An interesting path to go down might be to search for these "comments", filter+rank, and show them on your webpage.

Product reviews seem to be in a similar situation (I think?) except Amazon has strong incentives to maintain tighter control on their reviews.

Expand full comment
author

I agree that Twitter is the closest thing we have to an open commenting system so far. But it's still pretty far from could be. It's not open at all. It's controlled by a centralized company which manages an API which was recently shut off to 3rd parties with no warning: https://www.macrumors.com/2023/01/20/twitter-bans-third-party-apps/

Instead of relying on users to use sophisticated search/filters we should be able to just use the web and get the information assembled in custom ways we want.

Expand full comment

Definitely not arguing that Twitter is the best solution here or the right kind of open. By "open" I meant free for anyone to use in any form. Ultimately, centralized + low activation energy will win over decentralized + high activation energy.

The ingredients have existed when Twitter had an open API or even Disqus. My guess about a commenting system is that it is missing an audience you have ties to, and hence all the commenting activity goes to where that audience is. Perhaps a Twitter-clone on nostr might be the right middle ground solution.

Yes, users shouldn't have to search+filter themselves: was suggesting website owners could do the search+filter on top of another social network if this commenting activity already exists there.

Expand full comment
author

yeah, that makes sense. I think we basically see this the same way. But the main reason I think there's opportunity is all the new ways you could filter the information to make it more useful now. Maybe it can encourage new applications/clients and more open experimentation around how/when/what-context it published back to the global feed and/or how it might be consumed on a global feed. So many degrees of flexibility... I don't have the specific winning proposal in mind, but I'm optimistic it can be done.

Expand full comment

Yeah — it opens up a very interesting design space.

Where we might disagree is the feasibility of applications that are really appendages to a common feed : comments, reviews, etc. Something that aggregates attention / engagement / status / various incentives is quickly going to attract all such activity, whether centralized or decentralized.

Fragmentation doesn't work. Nikita said it well here: https://twitter.com/nikitabier/status/1618294904538685446

Expand full comment
author

the appendages to common feeds should work differently here. since it’s not the centralized application maker’s decision about what to share/show. new structures/consumption interfaces allow for a lot of ways to rethink how data flows and where it shows up. the tweet you shared seems to be describing how fitting subordinate features into a centralized app would suffer from discoverability/understanding. but we’re talking about something different here: other primary surfaces composed of data assembled based on other activities from other apps. really have to restructure assumptions around these new primitives.

Expand full comment

Aye, that's the dream! Curious if you've seen any early examples of breaking old assumptions / new primitives being applied in the social space?

Expand full comment