The success of Web 2.0-Sites depends on the amount and benefits of the content that creates and accessible the user community: More use leads to more usefulate leads to more users / potential customers
To complete the Web 2.0 Expo in San Francisco represented Jyri Engestrom, Co-Ground of the Twitter-Similar Webservice Jaiku, in his lecture a crisp theory: The successful are exactly that Web 2.0 companies that not only create a social network, but the this network "social object" To create the users who make, share, act, reward, comment can. The social object of eBay is the auction with its sales assessments; The social object at Wikipedia is the lexicon page with its talk Page; The social object of Flickr is the photo with its comments.
ENGENTROM thinks, for example, that Linkedin Fruher had no social object; As a pure social network, it was initially relatively fast a coarse number of users, many of which soon arose again, because without objects no long-term bonds between them emerged. Some time ago, they apparently defined the job as their social object; the service, so close flow, pulls again more users again. In other words, Engestrom’s concept of "social object" Just seems to me fairly very.
Even before Flickr was founded, ranging various photo sharing sites in the web for attention. Then Flickr came and made the photo to the object by every single one of them got his own webpage: the Permalink. Where a permalink is, a social object is; You can pass it on, comment, Geo-tagging, integrating in galleries, albums, blogs and so on. Flickr stiled the web programmers an interface to make the functionality of the Flickr objects in their own programs and made usable.
Caterina Fake was co-agent in 2004; Co-earnings when Yahoo Flickr bought a year later for $ 35 million; until June 2008 then as a general manager of Flickr employees at Yahoo. She knows her social objects, and one could be curious which she became as a nuclear election. Especially because the social objects promising the most obvious profitability are already occupied several times: YouTube, Vimeo, Hulu and so on competing around the video as a social object; load.FM and other internet radios around the music piece; on Facebook, Twitter and similar "Personal pr"-Sites is the object of the status of the user who is updated by status messages and made programatically usable. We have many experiments and some successes in Web 2 in the last five years.0 seen, and it requires some originality, with the choice of a social object as a basis for a new web 2.0 service to surprise.
Well, surprised I was when I was on 27. Marz read, which social object she echolished: the decision tree. Nobody had come to that! Well, Caterina Fake is now Chief Product Officer at a startup called Hunch, where user users help to drop decisions, with the help of failing. We are asking questions like: "Which Linux distribution should I use?" – "Which ‘World of Warcraft’ class should I play?" – "Should I change from Windows to Mac?"
Other knowledge, because they have the existing information and therefore have effective decision criteria. And such knowledge can now be used as members of the Hunch community to provide it by encoding it as a decision tree, or by improving encoded decision tree. The consumer, or "naive" Hunch user, elects a category – "Computer Internet" about or "entertainment Media" -, seeks a question and gets a number of questions followed from this question, for which you can select the right answer from a list of a list. Every possible answer, everyone "branch" of the decision tree, is associated with a certain probability of the applicant of a particular solution, and thus results in the next questions whose response scale the for the case of this particular user rectifies correct solution. Mostly between eight and twists questions and answers, then one ends up at a particular "sheet" of the tree, on which the for this user probably "best" Answer to the crucial question is written. If that works? How to test the test?
On the third day, I fall up that there is now a few questions at Hunch, in which I believe from the outset, to say what part decisions should lead to a specific total decision. The question "Which Distribution of Linux Should i Use?" For example, I decided a year ago, and if I invest the criteria that I guided to choose from Ubuntu then, I should answer the questions so that the system in the end of me to use advice to use Ubuntu. So I try that, and hello, Ubuntu comes out. Not bad, I think.
One week later I play the same question – the same topic, in hunch-speaking – again: This time comes Fedora 10! Hello? I realize that the decision tree was changed; The User Antonio d’Souza Alias Quik had on 2.April the question: "Do You Expect Multimedia and Flash to ‘Just Work’?" added, and I had her with "Yes" answered because I expected then that Flash in Ubuntu "easy" became. But then did not do it, but I first had to find out that you have to elect one of several alternatives at Linux systems, and according to which criteria. So there has been the wisdom of the crowd, in the form of Antonio d’Souza, in fact, that someone who expects flash under Linux "just works", not more long on Ubuntu, because you can not do that from Ubuntu. And as a skeptical user, I can inspect the decision-making mechanism with its creation and change history and determine time and causer every change in a luckless. I like that.
As a next test topic I wahle "Which World of Warcraft Class Should I Pick?", because I have researched to WOW and believe enough to know enough about the system of character classes to answer the questions so that the system at the end the class "Rogue" Suggest. That works perfectly, on the third as well as on the eleventh day after the Hunch Open. Some of these decision tree are paid by companies like Blizzard and thematize products like World of Warcraft; That’s why the topic then carries a small WOW logo next to the title. The Linux Topic carries a little penguin – but I do not think that someone has paid for it. In any case, Hunch has a plausible business model from the beginning, one, one not based on ads, and that is usually far from surprising, because even more rarer than a new cool social object.
Will pick it up? Will Hunch reach the critical mass of active users who need to make the decision tree from the Arbor Obscurum to the burning bush? The blog says you at the 27.Marz with 30.000 invited users started and has since grown daily; Each user can distribute five more invitations. On the twelve day I pay on your index 1.569 Topics, structured in 22 categories. In addition, the young municipality within five days has 1.5 million "Teach Hunch About You"-Questions answered, questions about the rough of the household, taste ies, moral questions, all possible. These are currently the data, and if we look at you, then we see that we can not see anything yet, at least nothing for a future refrainable, but the opposite spectacle is spectacular enough: How again a spontaneous virtual crowd is a spontaneous virtual crowd in a short time produces a huge amount of new data through himself, on devil Come out what we do with it, we see later. And I’m sure we have not seen everything from it yet.