Google brand pages now appear in Google Search results.

Is this an anti-trust violation? If Google+ is one product, and Google Search is another, then I have no idea.

http://mashable.com/2011/12/20/google-brand-pages-search/

If Google+ is a product, and Google Search is a feature of that product, then definitely not.

http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9222547/Why_Google_will_become_Google_s_only_product

Who gets to decide what's a product and what's a feature?

and Reputation Circle



Nevertheless, according to Gibson, the human idea of "self" in our hyper-connected era remains little more than a cultural artifact.

"I sometimes doubt that we have selves. I think our idea of self is very much a cultural artifact," he opined. ??"We [currently] live in this vast LED soup of messages offering to help us define ourselves."

http://www.tgdaily.com/general-sciences-features/52310-cyberpunk-master-weighs-in-on-augmented-reality-and-human-evolution

In many cases, yes, they are. Too bad its not as glamorous and fun as the Spy vs. Spy I grew up with. Bloggers at risk may want to make sure that they have security and fallback plans like these from EFF.org: http://bit.ly/v2o2K1

All bloggers should:

* Consider providing someone outside the country with the following information:
--- Login credentials to your social media, email, and blog accounts
--- Contact information of family members
--- Information about any health conditions

* Regularly back up their blog, Facebook, email, and other accounts

* Consider mirroring your website if you want to ensure it remains up without your attention to it

* Encrypt sensitive files and consider hiding them on a separate drive

* Consider using tools like Sweeper (for Android users) to secure/erase your mobile data

* Consider preparing a statement for release in case of arrest-- This can be helpful for international news outlets and human rights organizations

* Consider recording a short video identifying yourself (biographical info, scope of work) and the risks that you face and share with trusted contacts

* Develop contacts with human rights and free expression organizations

* Think about a strategy/contingency plan for what to do if you're detained (see below)

and Reputation Circle


The perils of reputation in a social world.

Will social networks kill off the ripoff artists of the world? Or will they simply evolve?
And isn't this response a form of digital vigilantism? Is that awesome or scary?

http://level343.com/article_archive/2011/12/22/online-reputation-new-orleans-computer-repair/

via +Zev Lexryder and +Gabriella Sannino

Predictions for where the tech growth will be:

1) Intelligence comes of age
2) Consumer Brokers prepare for prime time
3) Behold the proliferation of the Managed Service Provider

Mashable seems to think so:
Quora Adds 'Boards' and Becomes a Little More Like Pinterest http://on.mash.to/v2LTY7

I have my doubts about level of interest to the public, but I do like them as a curation tool!

Check out this resource for and Reputation in a Digital World:
http://b.qr.ae/rxOnCk

That begs the question, do we need this type of functionality right in Google+?

and Reputation Circle



If you read my posts, you know I am a champion of transparency. But when is it ok to be someone else? Only in games? Need that really go away in a transparent future? Or might pseudonyms, connected back to our base identity by an identity provider be just what we need to satisfy our desire for attribution?

More great images at Robbie Cooper's Alter Ego Project: http://www.robbiecooper.org/small.html

and Reputation Circle

I'm interested in reading this when it comes out:



http://www.amazon.com/Return-Influence-Revolutionary-Scoring-Marketing/dp/0071791094

+Mark Schaefer (The Tao of Twitter)

and Reputation circle



They are actually analyzing message content as well as the ways and amounts and collaborators with which you participate.

What does it mean? Well, its a start on a much more credible way to measure online reputation and influence.

and Reputation circle



And don't forget Google, Facebook and Twitter, because they all want to know what info to display for you in your stream.

It's nice so see so much activity here: the competition will give you and I more transparency.

from Ad Week: http://bit.ly/uygt2M and via +Esteban Contreras

How Do We Design Effective Video Games for Learning? (VG Series Part 4/10) - NEOACADEMIC - looking at the psychology of video games by Richard N. Landers.

"There are few topics so hotly debated on the Internet as the value of video games. Are they the next generation’s artistic advance, as film was for the last, or are they a blight that makes children overly aggressive and dangerous? In this 10-part series, I’m reviewing a recent special issue of the Journal of General Psychology on video games."

The fourth article in the series is Leonard Annetta’s “The “I’s” Have It: A Framework for Serious Educational Game Design.”

Annetta begins by introducing several terms that I myself have struggled at times to distinguish: serious games, serious educational games, simulations, and virtual worlds. To Annetta, serious games include all games that are designed to train someone in a particular skill set. To me, this is a very limited definition – what about games designed to change attitudes or provide perspective? He continues by defining serious educational games as serious games in a K-20 context – an unnecessary distinction, I think. A simulation is defined as a serious game without either 1) score-keeping or 2) the use of virtual or real currency to trade in-game items. I suppose a serious game examining stock market trading would not be a simulation, while Minecraft would be a simulation. Finally, virtual worlds are large, open-ended environments designed for social interaction (although I generally think of these as MUVEs). In this article, Annetta focuses on serious educational games alone, although I see no reason that the other categories would not apply as well.

Within this context, a 6-I model is introduced as a way to consider game design, with each progressive I a larger category containing the previous I:

1. Identity. This is the narrowest category, focused on establishing individualism in virtual environments. A study is cited in which students could not pick very different avatars from their classmates, and thus never were able to establish a unique virtual identity for themselves, which in turn led to negative engagement and immersion outcomes for the students. Which brings us to…

2. Immersion. Most of the value from serious gaming, according to Annetta, comes from their “ability to capture the player’s mind and trick him/her into believing he or she is a unique individual in the environment.” Doing this (i.e., establishing identity) creates a sense of immersion, or presence, in the virtual environment. A poor sense of immersion means that a student is never fully engaged (although no empirical evidence of this seems to be presented).

3. Interactivity. A very interesting study is briefly discussed under this heading – apparently, people experience the same sorts of social inhibitions in the presence of nonplayer characters (NPCs; game characters controlled by the computer) as they do in the presence of player characters (PCs; game characters controlled by real people). I’m not sure if the players were aware when the other characters were PCs or NPCs, but it is certainly a provocative finding. It is, unfortunately, the only empirical finding really discussed that directly applies to this “I”.

4. Increased Complexity. I’m not sure what to think of this quote: “There is a balancing act when designing complex SEGs. This is not unlike designing a complex science activity. It involves juggling multiple objectives, choosing what to prioritize and when, what to defer, and what conceptual levels to tap.” That’s true of all instruction, isn’t it? What is unique about serious educational gaming?

5. Informed Teaching. This section discusses the difficulties in collecting accurate research data on what students are doing when playing educational games. I’m not quite sure what that has to do with “informed teaching,” but it presents a feature as a disadvantage that I consider an advantage: there can be a vast amount of collected data from studies of educational gaming. One of the advantages to all interaction taking place on a computer is that you can collect a record of literally everything the player does. I suppose this is a disadvantage if the only kind of data analysis you’re familiar with is ANOVA, but the types of data modeling that could be used here make this a very promising area indeed.

6. Instructional. This I pushes that all of the previous Is are necessary to make quality educational games, which I’m not sure merits its own category. More interestingly, the concept of adaptable video games is discussed, and I agree that there is real possibility here: “Content that comes easily for the most gifted students causes those students to get bored as they wait for the teacher to work with their peers who did not assimilate the content as easily. Conversely, students who grapple with difficult concepts or content are often left behind if the teacher decides to challenge the students who understood the material with ease. An SEG with artificial intelligence could challenge the students who ‘get it’ and scaffold learning for those who do not.” This, I think, is the most promising area of both video games and web-based training (i.e. my) research – educational systems than can adapt themselves to the needs of the learner could dramatically alter the instructional landscape. Imagine a classroom where every student learned as their own pace – quick but not too quick – and everyone received the individualized attention they needed to excel. A bright future indeed.

"So overall, is this model a good framework for educational game design? Sort of. The principles listed here are certainly interesting, and it may provide a starting point for research in this domain. These are certainly provocative issues to consider. But the use of a multi-layered circles-within-circles model? Probably not justified."

More information at the link below, including the author's analysis, and links to the other nine articles in the series.

image and text via: http://neoacademic.com/2010/09/22/how-do-we-design-effective-video-games-for-learning-vg-series-part-410/

and Reputation Circle



Are you ready to let the pseudonyms in, officially? I am.

Pseudonyms, trolls and the battle over online identity :: http://bit.ly/zpioF3 via +Mathew Ingram Image from Discus.

A very well-written article by +Marc Canter about how Google sees Facebook, G+ and the Internet. Most important idea that cleared things up for me is that Google has a big stake in keeping the internet open and creating ever richer points of view from which to understand our world. h/t to +Gideon Rosenblatt

After playing with Search Plus, I was pretty stunned to find the Google+ suggestions show up even if you're logged out and anonymous to Google. There are serious issues in how it's pushing Google+ this way. And it also means, for marketers, you'd better have a Google+ account.

NSTIC, Google & SEO : http://bit.ly/x40l1D via +Search Engine Watch

The National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace framework now has federally recognized and certified identity providers.

More info here: http://www.nist.gov/nstic/ and here: In Google We Trust (Your ) http://bit.ly/w0NllG

Check out +Rand Fishkin in the latest edition of Whiteboard+ - Why Every Marketer Now Needs to Employ a Google+ Strategy

and Reputation Circle



You are valuable. Your online data, decisions and content are worth something to the world. As thinkers like Ben Cerveny have pointed out, each of us leaves a trail behind us as we travel through the “luminous bath” that is the web. This data says something about us, leaving a set of footprints others can potentially follow. It’s unique, and it has value.

So who makes the rules around how that value gets spent?

More of OpenMatt's thoughts http://bit.ly/ztheLu about what Mozilla is doing in the area of : http://bit.ly/AwtNlk

I think that browser-based efforts ultimately fail, but features like BrowserID could be key to larger open systems. I like the effort from Mozilla.

Forrester says this and more in new paper:

* Individuals see different types of data differently -- they're most worried about what we consider individual identity data, and far less concerned about the capture and use of their behavioral data.

* Most consumers are willing to share their data in exchange for value. But, what they consider "valuable" is very age-dependent -- in other words, the same consumer isn't equally motivated by discounts and cash rewards.

* A surprising number of consumers "just say no" if a privacy policy doesn't pass their sniff test, and the numbers seem to be rising.
+fatemeh khatibloo http://www.forbes.com/sites/forrester/2012/01/18/how-data-sensitive-are-your-customers/

and other decisions that seem irrational.

I'n really enjoying this Theory of Decision-making: 'who we are and who we want to be may shape our economic lives more than any other factor'

http://www.amazon.com/-Economics-Identities-Shape-Well-Being/dp/0691146489

and Reputation Circle



For the first time, I saw this axiom get turned on its head. Amit Singhal responded to a persistent barrage of pointed questions from Danny Sullivan about Search Plus Your World. The kernel he kept uncovering was that content is only part of the picture. Now Content is a knight at the round table along with and Relationship.

“…it’s not just about content. It’s about identity, relationships and content.” – +Amit Singhal

http://www.rimmkaufman.com/blog/content-is-not-king-key-takeaways-from-amit-singhal/31012012/ +Adam Audette

CircleCount Chrome Extension
v0.7.1
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/gfehmiknpngmjkhiieampgfppicbncid

New feature:
You can update the statistics on demand directly within the hovercard and will always see the age of the last update there.

Thanks to +Martin Matysiak for the help!
Good luck tomorrow ;)

High on my list of books to read in the next month: +Rebecca MacKinnon's Consent of the Networked: The Worldwide Struggle for Internet Freedom. I heard her on Spark not long ago (thank you, +CBC Radio!) and she sounds like a very thoughtful voice in a space that's become sharply polarized.

and Reputation Circle



Some would argue that this is not really us giving love to brands or people or ideas as much as defining ourselves...

what we are doing is giving shape to our identity. What we like, if you will, is the projected identity, or better yet, the perception and affirmation of that identity by others.

I like this insight too:
When we think about social media as a field for the construction and enactment of identities, we tend to think of it as the projection, authentic or inauthentic, of a fixed reality. Perhaps we would do well to consider the possibility that identity on social networks is not so much being performed as it is being sought, that behind the identity-work on social media platforms there is an inchoate and fluid reality seeking to take shape by expending itself. - +Michael Sacasas

http://thefrailestthing.com/2012/02/18/liking-loving-and-identity-on-facebook/

image cortesy of Luca Curci & Fabiana Roscioli, “senza titolo”, mixed media, 2005
http://www.lucacurci.com/artexpo/events

and Reputation Circle



I would pay a lot if you have the right popularity curves and big profiles...

Seriously though, would you take $25 a month for all of your data?

It's a truth of the modern digital age: If you're using a Web service for free, you're not the customer. You're probably the product. But what if Web users could reclaim their online data and benefit, or maybe even profit, from it? -- Doug Gross, CNN

Manage (and sell?) your data online: http://bit.ly/Atzet9

Identity's Increasing Cognitive Dissonance

The quest for identity has gotten much, much more difficult thanks to the Internet. We are no longer just real human beings living in real lives, visible to sound, sight, and touch – we are now a Twitter persona, a Facebook persona, a Google Plus persona, and so on.

This is an interesting observation from +Mahendra Palsule. I think this is an issue many are dealing with whether they realize it or not.

Our selective sharing and ability to project a certain image online may have unknown psychological consequences. When who we are online differs from who we are offline, which 'self' ultimately emerges as the strongest one?

cc: +Jeff Jockisch

#identity #psychology

and Reputation Circle



You can get a Google+ one here: http://mygoogleplus.de/id/ (unofficial of course, but pretty cool)

But my question to you is more about should we, can we allow social networks to become the de facto identity providers for our digital world? And can we even stop it?

What are the risks? What are the benefits?

Facebook ID cards foresee a future where Zuckerberg is your evil overlord:
http://on.io9.com/A29TIt

and Reputation Circle



What does that mean then for those that only reshare others content? Or for social networks like Pinterest designed to share things that are not yours?

The distinction might be fine, but it is interesting. We define ourselves with each action we take online.

+Bonnie Stewart shares her thoughts here:

See, the difference between Pinterest and most of the major social media platforms that have come before is that Pinterest is set up to encourage us building identity and reputation primarily on the basis of other people’s content.

That’s the problem, Pinterest. You’re a grownup version of dress-up, of playing cotton-candy princesses. It’s fun. Play is healthy. But when we build broadly networked aspects of our public selves based largely on these tickle-trunk identities? Especially with stuff that we’ve lifted finders-keepers-style from other people’s equally aspirational magpie nests? We may eventually find ourselves with the identity equivalent of tooth decay.

Because make no mistake: the way social media works, our Pinterest practices ARE shaping our digital identities.

and Reputation Circle



This is brilliant, just needs a hook to start the ground well.

If you want to try it out, post your twitter handle below and I'll endorse you. And recommend a few tags for yourself if you can.

On Twitter I am @Jozian

nice writeup by +Marshall Kirkpatrick brought this to my attention. He says:

Lots of people have tried to create a discovery-through-endorsement website, but I'd be willing to bet that the TastyLabs team is going to bring some extra special insight and creativity to this seemingly simple space.

The portable identity angle that Schachter mentions could be the first example of that dynamic: imagine taking your Skills.to endorsements with you to sites around the web. That could prove useful in all kinds of circumstances - from establishing credibility to targeting content to powering recommended social and content connections.

and Reputation Circle



I say yes, though of course that will not make it fair and everything can be gamed.

Whit.ly thinks so to: "… we track your use of ingestion and perception words, which allows us to divine a particle of your personality and attitude. Combined with other factors we calculate like lifestage, class, income and more, we can paint a pretty good picture of who you really are."

More on memeburn: http://bit.ly/zVge9Y and at https://www.whit.li/

and Reputation Circle



But can it work? Can it solve these big problems?

1) Google's search ranking algorithm is exploitable, not yet tied to authors.
2) Social filters are are dominating our experience, and they are based more on popularity.


Hypothes.is wants to do something amazing :: If we could filter the Web by reputation, we could turn it into a meritocracy.

On the plus side of the equation: It's a project that has drawn in the likes of Wikimedia, the Internet Archive and the Electronic Frontier Foundation. The stewards of the free Web want this problem solved.

Friends here like +Jeff Sayre and +Damilola Oni have been arguing for distributed identity for a while. While we seem to have lost much of that battle to siloed systems like FB, at least for this cycle, there may still be time to figure out Reputation.

I love the concept here, but I think this task feels gargantuan:

Hypothes.is needs relatable identities to build a reputation system. It will have its own reputation algorithms, mechanisms and moderation strategies. It will implement its trusted users' contributions as a layer of reputation that can apply to all the content on the Web. Hypothes.is users will be like Wikipedia editors, but for everything.

read more here from +Jon Mitchell on +ReadWriteWeb : http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/hypothesis.php

and Reputation Circle



Hey, its part of your identity! It has value to you. Does it have continuing value?

How about as AuthorRank has a greater impact on SERPs? How might Google handle that? And could you spoof it? Create a new form of theft? Or are there use cases where I could continue posting as a relative?

"People are starting to incorporate their digital property and online presence into their wills," says Michaelanne Dye, who holds an MA in cyberanthropology from Georgia State University. "Although this has not yet become a common trend, I think that one day it will be fairly common for people to make plans for their digital real estate before passing.

Lets get deep. Some interesting thoughts on Identity and Morality:

We need reasons to act and to live. You are a creature that stands at a “reflective distance” from your motives. You are not simply determined by your desires to act this way or that, but you can and do choose which desires to act on.

When you choose to act on a given desire, you do so because this is justified by some or other of your practical identities. Typically, one has many practical identities—a philosopher, a parent, a neighbor, a citizen, a student, a teacher—and each one gives rise to reasons and obligations.

thanks +Avery Archer

The technical side if as it is being formulated. I'm interested in understanding this new Zero trust concept +Eve Maler speaks of:



The new universe of open APIs that need serious protection – Accessibility with Security, as Google engineer Steve Yegge termed it in his famous rant– is yet more reason why I believe the “identity singularity” is on its way. We’ll be publishing some research soon on this phenomenon writ large, which we’re calling Zero Trust . For now I’ll leave the obvious comparisons within the Venn as exercises for the reader, and I welcome your thoughts, questions, challenges, and use cases.

http://blogs.forrester.com/eve_maler/12-03-12-a_new_venn_of_access_control_for_the_api_economy

and Reputation Circle



How are human phenomena like trust, identity, privacy, freedom, power, relevance, value and discovery embedded in the software designs?

A provocative question, and some answers, from the very interesting +Aleks Krotoski. I like this point about the power we are giving Google:

...the qualitative ranking given to sources of information -- like whether it lives on the The New York Times or Jane Blogger's Home Page -- carries with it an enormous value judgement about what is "reliable", and carries with it into the online world the power structures of offline information hierarchies. This is where Google’s political and commercial allegiances become very important.

http://www.dmlcentral.net/blog/aleks-krotoski/reflexivity-why-we-must-choose-shape-and-not-be-shaped-technology

and Reputation Circle



Are there big down-sides to expanded social competition?

Are topics of discussion, already crowded with egos and brains, exhibiting similar problems?

Before social networks, we mostly had images of impossibly perfect celebrities. .. but we weren't sitting around staring at them for hours every day ... the field of competition has expanded dramatically. Now you're competing with the best pictures and the ebullient status updates of every girl you know.

a nice chart from +Phil Windley shows some of the complexity and how different roles interact:

http://www.windley.com/archives/2012/03/roles_in_an_identity_ecosystem.shtml

and Reputation Circle



Internet memes become weapons for making identity claims online. Individuals lob them at one another through the digital commons, making claims and counterclaims of authenticity, seeking to prove “true” allegiance to an act, band, celebrity, or subculture through mockery, wit, and sarcasm.

In the digital realm, identity is partially constructed by such texts, whether in the form of a meme or more directly as a status or tweet. These public pronouncements act as expressions of taste.

Maybe too academic for some, but is really interesting to me.
http://thesocietypages.org/cyborgology/2012/03/23/the-crisis-of-authenticity-symbolic-violence-memes-identity/

and Reputation Circle



+Brian Solis says social media influence metrics are not about influence directly but only the 'capacity to influence.'

He also points out that current influence metrics have issues, like +danah boyd's thought that Social influence conforms to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. The more precisely you try to measure one's influence, the more you muck up the entire system of influence. Klout and Peer Index and similar services function through game mechanics.

Yet despite the semantic difficulties and the problems with measurement, Solis says that In the next two to three years, digital influence will become a vital staple in the marketing and service of businesses around the world. and Social capital is the key that unlocks digital influence and new customer touch points.

I think Solis is simply arguing for more nuance, more access to the underlying data, and he is right. I like the model he proposes that focuses on Reach, Resonance and Relevance.

Reach and Resonance sound a lot like what Klout presents as True Reach, Amplification / Network Impact. What is missing is the understanding of Relevance based upon the issue or topic.

Altimeter Report on SlideShare:
http://www.slideshare.net/Altimeter/the-rise-of-digital-influence

Mashable article that tries to pit Solis against +Klout and +PeerIndex:
http://mashable.com/2012/03/23/klout-influence/

via +John Kellden +Jeff Sayre

Art



I'm constantly formed, influenced and shaped by others, sometimes they push and pull on me. I learn and adapt to society, my friends, my family etc. I have many shapes, many faces which can be different depending on the people I am with. But what is my real identity?

This is a selfportrait for an identity artwork series. So there are propably one or two pictures more to come. I didn't start with them yet, so it can take a while.

It feels good to do something personal again.
http://moonshine90.deviantart.com/art/-I-212547776

It was the hoodie that was at fault: Every time you see someone sticking up a 7 Eleven, the kid's wearing a hoodie. - Geraldo Rivera

from +Scott Greenfield

http://blog.simplejustice.us/2012/03/25/lawyer-fashionista-haute-hoodie.aspx?ref=rss

Photo from: http://mphilipphotography.deviantart.com/art/Secrets-of--108733474

and Reputation Circle

and you are the one getting hurt

Cameron’s Laws of foreshadowed today’s identity, privacy quagmire +John Fontana on ZDNet:

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/identity/camerons-laws-of-identity-foreshadowed-todays-identity-privacy-quagmire/352

Cameron’s laws are being broken today with an increasing regularity and enthusiasm that gives him reassurance he was on the mark when he wrote them seven years ago.
The reassurance comes from the fact that the counter forces he predicted in 2005 are now taking up positions, including law and policy makers in Europe and the U.S., who are questioning how data collectors handle identity and privacy.

The Original White Paper from Kim Cameron
http://www.identityblog.com/wp-content/resources/7_laws_whitepaper.pdf

and Reputation Circle



I agree with +Jon Mitchell on this one, especially 'The Even Bigger Problem' of .

But all comments are broken, and no one in existence has been able to fix them. Google and Facebook think their real-names policies encourage stronger communities, but they're wrong.
These siloed identity providers exclude people who don't want their identities publicly known, and they don't allow people to express themselves naturally. It's an upside-down model. Our reputation on Google+ is not necessarily the one we want to bring with us to ReadWriteWeb, and Google+ and Facebook take away that freedom.

Moreover, there's no reason to believe that Google+ or Facebook identities even make the discourse more civil. Comment threads on Google+ and Facebook are just as vicious and awful as anywhere else on the Internet. The only way to fix online comments is to back them with platform-independent reputations and flexible identities owned by the user but verified by a trusted authority.

Though I have to say, I will be using the new Google+ comment system myself and expect to enjoy it.

h/t to +Lisa I. Smith

and Reputation Circle



I never really thought about this aspect of identity on Facebook, but they really did nail it. Rocky Agrawal on VentureBeat says:

Computers need unique identifiers, but people don’t. Most people don’t have namespace collisions within their friend circles. To the extent that they do, they’re easily resolvable by context. (For example, I know two Mike McCarthys from two different companies.)

Facebook has a unique identifier to address the needs of its computers, but I don’t know what mine is or the IDs that Facebook computers associate with my friends. I don’t have to.

...Twitter only searches against the handle when you start addressing someone. And the search algorithm doesn’t even make sense.

http://venturebeat.com/2012/03/27/secrets-of-facebooks-success-identity/

and Reputation Circle



Yet apparently this single peice of evidence is enough to draw the conclusion that It's bullshit. But it's bullshit that's increasingly accepted a serious currency.

Anything that can be gamed will be gamed. That people want to game it proves the opposite point.

Sure, there are big flaws in these current measures of Influence, but learn to live with the idea, because its not going away. In fact, Google is already doing it in more seductive and subtle ways; but they are not publishing a number.

I think reputation metrics are going to influence everything soon.

and Reputation Circle



Cool things are being done with subsets of the social graph, but is there going to be one company to rule them all? Put another way, web graph is to Google as social graph is to … what?

Mark Johnson, CEO of Zite asks all the rights Qs. And he thinks that Discovery may be part of the answer.

I agree, but in order for Discovery to work well, to recommend effectively, we need more than a Social Graph, we need to meld it with an Interest Graph and create a true topic-based Reputation Graph.

I've discussed before, with many of you like +Gideon Rosenblatt and +AJ Kohn and +Bill Slawski, that G+ gets something unique and powerful by blending the Web Graph with the Interest Graph. +AJ Kohn has a great post about how that works via AuthorRank: https://plus.google.com/u/0/115106448444522478339/posts/Vdes9Gqe3Ec

I think that same process can be applied to the melding of Social and Interest, again effectuated via attribution and the weighting of influence and reputation and contributiveness.

Thanks so much to +Jeffrey J Davis for putting this in my stream!

image from Ollapus: http://ollapus.deviantart.com/art/-72322932

Is There Social Stress In the Metaspace?

This interesting article about social ranking in non-human primates and the resultant stressors -- or lack their of -- made me think about the very really possibility of stressors caused by online interactions in the Metaspace.

From the article:

[there is] a link between social status and genetic regulation in primates on a genome-wide scale, revealing a strong, plastic link between social environment and biology.

Since human primates, in other words the animal Homo sapiens, are equally affected by social status in the Meatspace reality, could the successes and failures that individuals have in cultivating relationships in the online world be having an similar affect? After all, the Metaspace realm has a growing number of indicators of social status: number of followers; number of circlers; number of comments; Klout score; number of retweets, shares, likes, and +1s.

Is the evolutionary reality of in-person, group social status pervading the artificial realm of online social networking? Do we need to start thinking about Metasocial stress? I believe that the answer is yes.

What do you think?

#SocialWeb #MeatSapce #MetaSpace #influence

and Reputation Circle



Is it more important than a resume? than previous employment?

Sorensen argues that because a ‘job for life’ is no longer a realistic outcome for most people the reputation they build up in the work place is less important that it used to be and now people should be more concerned about maintaining an excellent online reputation to best serve them throughout their numerous job, and even profession, switches.

http://www.educationnews.org/higher-education/online-reputation-important-for-grads-in-new-job-market/

and Reputation Circle



Some provocative questions raised in the article Living in the sharing economy: Is the Internet making us more honest? +Courtney Boyd Myers on TNW: http://j.mp/HB3w9u

What is your take on this quote from +Rahaf Harfoush :

“I think honesty through forced transparency will eventually lead to a more curated online identity as our generation becomes more adept at navigating these digital landmines. We are moving towards a distorted reality where we can control the narrative better. While in some respects we will always have the threat of getting caught, we will adapt and take better care to cover unwanted behavior… As with the rise of VPN use, I think there will be a host of new services aimed specifically at helping us hide or cover our online tracks for potentially shady offline behavior.”

Let the thing we mean to be
know the thing we feel we are.

Wrap your head around that this morning!
http://carrieola.deviantart.com/art/-188656835

"Pegasus, this is Galactica Actual. Authenticate identity with recognition codes immediately."



Coming to a Universe near you? Maybe. A new development on the Earth I know is a new legal responsibility to authenticate identity. Interesting and maybe scary; it may mean more financial liability for you:

if a bank satisfies certain security requirements, including those directly related to authenticating identification, its customer will be liable for fraudulently transferred funds, even if the transfer was initiated by a criminal hacker.

The Duty to Authenticate : the Online Banking Breach Lawsuits
http://www.infolawgroup.com/2012/04/articles/reasonable-security/the-duty-to-authenticate-identity-the-online-banking-breach-lawsuits/

Uniform Commercial Code Article 4A (Funds Transfers). Section 202

image and BS sound clip! here: http://j.mp/HRi9YW

Help me out here +Anne-Marie Clark. Sounds like customers getting screwed...

and Reputation Circle

+Klout
Do they undermine Alimeter's new metric w/ Brand Squads?

Klout Launches Brand Pages To Help Companies Engage Influencers | TechCrunch http://tcrn.ch/J9RqIx

Brand Squads is a different twist on brand pages, where top influencers for brands have a chance to be recognized and have an impact on the brand.

It is one of the earliest impressions of the human body taken by a person in power with the explicit purpose of using the trace to identify and verify a human subject.

It was taken in lieu of a signature, to affix the identity of Konai to a document. It was felt, at the time, that subaltern subjects were way too slippery when it came to the presentation of their identities to the authorities.
Disinformation: http://bit.ly/HT1swk

and Reputation Circle



And Deeper Q, do you think that Handles will die out with all the corporate and silo pressure to 'be yourself'?

They call me Jozian. Back in the day of arcade high scores, I was JOZ, a play on The Wizard of OZ, b/c that was cooler than JGJ. :)

Gamer site Kotaku: Crisis: How Did You Choose Your Online Handle?


http://kotaku.com/5903547/identity-crisis-how-did-you-choose-your-online-handle

and Reputation Circle



Millions of Dead People Apply for Credit Cards! http://goo.gl/DJqbh

"...800,000 are cases where the thieves intentionally tapped the death rolls for data to fill in the credit applications, according to ID Analytics."

and Reputation Circle


...whether you know it or not. whether you like it or not. whether you think it measures anything of value or not.

And as Google moves to do the same with AuthorRank, which already impacts page rank, the world is about to change.

My advice? Embrace it. Learn to use it. Take the first mover advantage.

http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2012/04/ff_klout/

cc/ +Klout +Mark Traphagen +AJ Kohn

and Reputation Circle



Who ultimately decides who we are? Can you imagine opening a bank account using your Facebook account as social proof of identity?

service to be extended to private sector use :: http://goo.gl/sYFHK
Consumers could be using RealMe, a proof-of-identity service developed by the Government and marketed by New Zealand Post, to open bank accounts, arrange loans and deal with utilities and government agencies online, later this year.

and Reputation Circle


or – basically – who we are in social media spaces

How many of you are there? :)

Bonny Stewart says:
...below are six key digital “selves” that I’d like to discuss and explore this coming week. They’re by no means an exhaustive list, so input and additions are very welcome, but they introduce some of the ways in social media norms and affordances impact identity practices.
http://theory.cribchronicles.com/2012/05/06/digital-identities-six-key-selves/

1. The Performative, Public Self

2. The Quantified – or Articulated – Self

3. The Participatory Self

4. The Asynchronous Self

5. The PolySocial – or Augmented Reality – Self

6. The Neo-Liberal, Branded Self

This great image is from http://insideme.deviantart.com/art/Clone-New-Generation-45863210

Search results have to be about more than document analysis (the original way Google pioneered it with Page Rank). Google is on the way with effort already -- Author Rank and Google+ as an platform.

Now Microsoft jumps in too. Its the future. Time to grab your piece!

Microsoft Weighs in on Ranking Authors in Social Networks
http://www.seobythesea.com/2012/05/microsoft-on-ranking-authors/
by +Bill Slawski

Author Ranking in social media is more than just a popularity contest, and can include things like how frequently an author surfaces content that subsequently becomes popular, topical authority on different subjects, and popularity and influence signals.

See his post about it here: https://plus.google.com/u/0/106515636986325493284/posts/27di46uuhED

and Reputation Circle



The Spectrum gives a understanding of the different kinds of identity that are possible in digital systems. They are not exculsive - you can mix and match

Where are you on the spectrum? Do you think we still need anonymous options?

I like this a lot. We need places for privacy. Does anyone really think every transaction need be validated by your full identity?

http://www.identitywoman.net/the-identity-spectrum

Thanks for your work here, +Kaliya Woman

and Reputation Circle



Conceptually, the Kardashian is the amount of global attention Kim Kardashian commands across all media over the space of a day. In an ideal, frictionless universe, we’d determine a Kardashian by measuring the percentage of all broadcast media, conversations and thoughts dedicated to Kim Kardashian.

Don't forget the 'Jolie' Multiplier

A Jolie is unit that denotes the amount of international aid a country receives when it becomes the cause celebre of a prominent celebrity...a Jolie can be thought of as a 27x increase in aid receipt.

thanks for the heads up on this +John Hagel and the thought-provoking blog +Ethan Zuckerman !

cc/ +Gideon Rosenblatt +Max Huijgen +Mark Traphagen +Gregory Esau

Still true today, and a good thing to revisit, since we cant see to even get #1 right!



Read more on Kim's blog here: http://www.identityblog.com/

and Reputation Circle

Letting Banks decide who we are doesn't sound like the best idea ever... but then who should we trust?



Citigroup is the only financial institution that has clearance to sell the identity cards and grab a piece of a market whose annual sales could reach into the billions of dollars.

But the badge business is just the beginning. Citigroup's hope is that the contractors will eventually use the plastic on which the badges are issued for more than just identity verification.
...
"Banks can make money from this, but most have shied away, because what happens if they get it wrong?" said Avivah Litan an analyst with Gartner Research. "No one wants to take full legal responsibility for these identities."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303506404577446543938056690.html#

 and Reputation Circle

Who knows about the numbers, but I love this concept. I wish it had a skill-matching component.



I came out pretty high - 79.  How about you?

http://www.identified.com 
http://techcrunch.com/2012/06/05/identified-series-b/

and Reputation Circle



Already happening in Europe: Schufa, Germany's largest ratings firm, wants  data from Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter accounts of its customers “to identify and evaluate opportunities for and threats to the company.”

Outrage erupts. But can we really stop it?  

Should we expect a business to ignore available data that would allow it to score credit-ratings more effectively?

http://gigaom.com/europe/credit-agency-mines-facebook-data/

and Reputation Circle

 My vision is below. I call it the Dashboard of Me.

I had a great discsuion with +James Barraford +Randy Resnick +Gregory Esau +Jeffrey Raskin +Ellen Molenaar and more about a week and a half ago: http://goo.gl/KgMO3

While there is a lot ot complain about, I think the opportunities for understanding and quantizing digital reputation are enormous. Here is where I beleive that +Klout, or someone like them, needs to go:

I think the real value of Klout is an an API, as a layer that will be used to filter the firehoses of data that Social and the Internet of Things will bring us.

The layer and those scores have to be much more granular and topic-based, so the +K system has to evolve quickly -- it cannot stay a crowdsourced game but rather must be generated based on document and transaction analysis (what I refer to as contributiveness).

I also see an opportunity to merge in skill tagging and certification (for job hunting) and even transaction experience (like eBay ratings), such that people that look at me via such an API can instantly evaluate proxies for reputation, influence, interest and skill.  Think of it as a 'dashboard of me'.

The world is changing fast. To own or broker such data is to be in a very key position.

I would have to think more about how to get Klout from here to there. Part of the issue of course is that there are are no existing consumers of such an API, though that should evolve fast.

What do you think?

image from http://www.senseiwisdom.com/Home/PostID/223/bID/3/

Some thoughts from @datruss +David Truss on :



Although we share different things in different places, we are who we are, and slowly our online identity is becoming a fabric of our being.

'I’ve had my digital and physical contexts merge'

we are sharing more and more of ourselves online and that ‘person’ that we share online is becoming a bigger & bigger part of who we really are

is my @datruss hat taking this social media thing too far? Or is it more an expression of me as a blended identity?

http://pairadimes.davidtruss.com/blurred-identity-lines/

News of the Weird... for my and Reputation Circle

To throw off the scent to data marketers?

How would this help the average Joe? I supposed that it could blur the ability of law enforcement to connect someone to any untoward acts...  Or keep marketers from tracking key employees like Tim Cook...

It's a interesting idea.  But why is Apple patenting it?

Apple will take someone’s digital identity and make various copies of it to “pollute electronic profiling.” If one of these “Little Brothers” is trying to collect information about a person on the Internet, these multiple versions of that person are designed to throw the tracking off by flooding the network.

The person being cloned can even give their other selves a brand new identity, with different interests and attributes, but which is enough like them to fool whoever is trying to track them.

Apple files digital identity cloning patent || http://vator.tv/news/2012-06-20-apple-files-digital-identity-cloning-patent

and Reputations Circle: Are you ready? This is the game I want to play.



What’s Mine Is Yours by Rachel Botsman

“I envision a real-time stream of who has trusted you when, where and why … that all lives together in one place,” she told the audience at TED Global. As opposed to services like Klout, which measure online influence, Botsman believes online reputation is ultimately universal; something that allows anyone in any location to instantly get an accurate picture of an individual’s trustworthiness.

What will make that type of interaction between strangers safe and secure, Botsman says, is “reputation capital” — a quantifiable metric that pulls together your reputation, intentions, capabilities and values across a wide variety of communities and marketplaces.

http://mashable.com/2012/06/28/collaborative-revolution/