Why "Lift"
I read the new laws of the Habrasiariat rules for the publication of texts and was horrified. Recalls the traditional efforts of effective managers to optimize the work of programmers, as a result of which all good programmers quit. Citizens (exclamation mark is prohibited). I suggest everyone to make my project “Social Lift” together and go there (the smiley is prohibited). Self-promotion is also prohibited, but I’ve only timidly and quietly in my personal blog (I’m not promoting myself because I don’t allow karma) to refer to my previous post - I already wrote about Social Elevator. But, as usual, at the end you understand where to start. Those. I found a not very intelligible justification for why this is actually an elevator, whereas this should be the basis of the whole narration. In the proposed text I correct this flaw. Moreover, having added this option, I realized that one important, practically central thing still remains vague. But I will single it out in a separate text. Moreover, this time it turned out just as long as in the first version.
If the results of one activity are needed by many, this contains the criterion of social self-realization. Social elevator - the mechanism that ensures its acceleration. From the definition we see a range of questions - how many, how much are needed, many now or many in the future, affect the results of many, directly or indirectly, and so on. Answers to these questions form a picture of the factors or conditions that contribute to the self-realization of people in society, the disclosure of their potential. The Social Lift project projects these factors onto the Internet space, using the specific advantages of the Internet to increase the efficiency of the process.
Growth
')
Again, it follows from the definition, first of all, that the larger the social environment, the more consumers. The conclusion from this is simple - we need a set of conditions that ensure the growth of the environment.
The semantic network of objects of arbitrary types, expressed in the simplest model “objects + connections”, is capable of adequately displaying “real”, real society, since the latter is in fact such a network. This in itself can be a promising fact. But the Internet reflection acquires new properties, we operate with virtual network objects in a way that we cannot do in real life (or we can’t always, or we can, but it’s much harder). It resembles the situation in mathematics, when Rene Descartes came up with a coordinate system, as a result of which it became possible to write geometric figures in the form of formulas and then operate only with these formulas, obtaining new results.
The potential of the object-communication model is that it in a fairly general form solves the problem of resource structuring, which has all sorts of applications. Partly because of the general thesis that many processes improve the efficiency in a structured environment, partly because human activity in general is largely confined to structuring various resources. But in its simplest form, this model can be interpreted as a tool that satisfies users' need for structuring and organizing content. This need is already manifested at the level of individual users and is further scaled for small communities, large, and however large, as the scale increases, only gaining relevance. Such an approach does not have full-fledged alternatives — competitive services or software solve particular aspects of this problem within specific scales and goals. Those. we have the relevance and scalability of the model, which is a stimulator of unlimited growth. Hence, an important consequence is that the project does not require the initial large “critical mass” of users in order to develop.
Growth also contributes to the possibility of belonging network objects simultaneously to different clusters. Combining them into a new cluster on a different basis is worth nothing (the functionality allows), but it can significantly change the focus, the context of user activity. Such a spontaneous shift in the semantics of links as a result of the creative activity of users means multidirectional growth of the network. Of course, this requires that the ability to create new clusters become familiar to users.
As was (almost) mentioned above, any project means the structuring of resources (human, informational, financial and other). In this sense, the object-relationship environment allows users not only to structure the content, but also to create their own (copyright) projects, including business projects. The opportunity to earn money using the service is a stimulator of the development and growth of the network - the interested authors-owners will take care of this themselves. The described so far had little to do with social self-realization. However, business projects (and not only them) are aimed at producing something demanded by many, so the factor of self-realization is included. Note in brackets that the definition of social realization adopted here in terms of results (products, etc.) and their consumers brings its task closer to the tasks of business.
One of the conditions for growth comes down to the question of how many have the opportunity to be useful to many others. Large social environments are differentiated by function, they inevitably turn into a system of interconnected parts. Therefore, it is important to use different skills and talents of users. Being the author of popular content is one of the most sought-after skills on the modern Internet, but it does not exhaust all user activity. It should be noted that the Internet as a whole loses here to real, because cuts off the area of ​​all connected with the material world. This reduced space is even more narrowed due to the uncharacteristic for the Internet environment of vertically hierarchical structures that are widespread in real life, which suppresses the use of managerial and managerial talents. Abnormality, however, does not mean impossibility or unnaturalness. I think this is just a consequence of the lack of sufficiently large and diverse systems. What does the elevator offer in this regard? - As a prerequisite, the basis for the emergence of hierarchical relations between users is proposed the operation of delegation of authority, valid within user projects. What is especially important for business projects, since the hierarchies in real life are mainly based on money. This also shows the need for cash transactions between users, and therefore the intraservice payment system.
In the context of social realization, those areas of activity that can be rated are interesting first of all. In this regard, a large number of users will be covered if we evaluate their abilities as evaluators of the activity of other participants (I will write about this another time). You can evaluate the traditional production of content (objects) and the less traditional production of links, types of objects and clusters, i.e. structuring activity itself. In various projects, there are various types of activity. In the spirit of the SocialLift service, it’s not so much to list and implement all these possible types as to give users the tools to organize their own rating systems within user projects.
The overwhelming majority of users, however, do not think about self-realization, about their business projects (and projects in general) and are engaged in the most popular online activities - communication and self-presentation. However, this activity introduces a lot of information into the semantic network, structures its specific areas. In addition, these users are the main consumers for most projects and make a major contribution to the growth of the network. Therefore, their participation should also be stimulated by something. Here you can say the following.
1) communication and self-presentation fit well into the object-communication model, probably even better than in services specifically devoted to this. First, because it allows you to maximally generalize the functionality of the “communicative-presentation” services: the user determines which clusters or types of “active” objects (users, communities, organizations) are his “friends”, who can create, see and perform other operations with objects and connections in its space, clarify exactly what objects / connections are, their specific clusters or types. And also to divide their space into subspaces and define rules separately for them, and so on.
Secondly, because all this is complemented by the specific advantages of the semantic network of objects. For example, two main types of objects in communication and presentation - “post” and “comment” in different contexts (spaces) can have different positioning. Comments, usually having a “secondary” role and limited functionality in a foreign author space, will (at the same time) become full-fledged objects in other spaces. Moreover, if the commentary contains a certain thesis or argument on the topic, it can be tied to a cluster of “arguments” related to a specific topic, and be of greater importance there.
Interesting is the opportunity to frend not only people and communities, but also objects of any type, thereby expressing your interest in them. Creating a traditional bookmark on the site, we are in a sense, "frend" this site. The list of interests in the LiveJournal user profile is also actually a “faked” object of various types. In the case of Sotslift, this list can perform the traditional function of friendlists for aggregating information from a common network on the basis of specified interests. If, say, an iPad is listed as “friends”, news and other useful information about it will be regularly posted in the tape.
In a more general perspective, a service based on the object-communication model fully allows to realize a promising trend for the development of information aggregators, providing highly accurate (multi-criteria) filtering of information. This feature is associated with the multiplicity of types of objects (and relationships) created by users. For example, right now I can’t create two friends in my LiveJournal according to two criteria - the author and the tag on his blog to read only what he writes on topics of interest to me. This is still a problem for LiveJournal, because not all authors tag their posts and plus there is the problem of fuzzy tagging: for example, the machine interprets the post as “Internet, Internet, web, web” as different, and people as one. In order for the machine to be perceived as one, additional efforts are needed - let’s say, merge tags into a cluster and, when mentioning one of the tags, load all objects marked with tags from this cluster. But this kind of activity is not organic (and difficult to implement) for LJ and organic for the semantic network, since in a similar structuring its meaning is concluded.
Interesting opportunities lie in the "expansion of functionality" for third-party sites. For example, in various scientific (and not only) online publications there are no discussions at all associated with published articles. In the object-linking system, an object of the “link” type will contain a link to such an article (and any other material) and it will be possible to discuss this object, build various links for it with other objects and relate it to different clusters as if we were dealing with a full intraservice object.
2) Usually, without thinking of their own projects, communities at times actually organize them around spontaneously arising interests, doing it in unsuitable formats, such as a forum. To organize a charity event, Internet support for any local event (for example, creating a HOA), a service (also geolocal) for joint purchases for any discounts, etc., etc. The proposed SocialList service allows you to arrange this kind of social activity, at the same time highlighting and stimulating activists and organizers. Note to the side: in general, there are many socially significant projects that are poorly monetized and to which the attention of neither large Internet businesses, nor “garage” start-ups, nor the state due to its traditional inertia, short-sightedness, fears, etc., is “turned around”.
3) In a more glamorous aspect, the masses always follow their idols. If the service uses a different kind of elite, the masses will catch up with it.
Ensuring the attention of the relevant audience.
Practically everything that stimulates participation results in the growth of the network, so it would be possible to enumerate further. However, the task of the “Social Elevator” is not limited to one ensuring growth and diversity, this condition is necessary and primarily important, but essentially indirect.
Creation of copyright projects within a common space implies the embodiment in some kind of ideas of encapsulation and data hiding, inherent in object-oriented programming, when the internal interacts with the external through some definite interface. Public access is potentially available to many, and subject to quality, is also needed by many, i.e. (potentially) the condition of social self-reliance is fulfilled. Potentially, because we need additional measures to get this product to those consumers who are interested in it. On the Internet (and not only) to get to consumers means to start getting into the field of their interested attention. This is a more immediate task "Lift". How is she solved? - 1) Due to the properties of the model objects-communication. Structuring means the concentration of resources around different attractors (network nodes), the principle of “all in one”. In particular, the concentration of relevant materials around a variety of topics (tags, taxa). Such a concentration actually represents a local thematic top, hit on which for relevant objects is almost guaranteed, simply on the basis of belonging to the topic. This in itself guarantees increased attention to the relevant audience. However, whether it will be maximum depends on the size of the stamp, its “degree of locality”. Too big top ceases to be top. What to do in this case? - Structuring implies including the division of thematically related objects into subgroups according to more and more specific features, i.e. the division of the big top into "podtopy" is smaller. In the proposed version of the object-relationship model, this means the production by users of new types of objects and the creation of new clusters.
2) But if the differences between the types become too small, and the number of objects of such types is still too large, additional measures are needed. Probably, the approach used in social media is suitable here - rating the authors, the objects they generate (and various activities in general). An open question regarding ratings - in what space do they operate? It used to be said that inside user projects. (An unauthorized, authoritarian sorting option is possible inside them). But themed tops are common space. About this I plan a separate note.
3) By creating types and clusters, you can position objects so that they will attract increased attention. For example, an object of the “argument” type, tied to a specific topic, may claim more attention than an object of the “opinion” type. Just because there are as many opinions as their speakers; they are listened to only if the carrier has authority. While there are few arguments on any topic and it is difficult to add something new to them. Similar can be said about the objects of the type (thematic) "summary". This is essentially the format of an encyclopedic article on a topic - you need to briefly summarize all the knowledge in this area. Collected in a common cluster, such objects would perform the function of articles on Wikipedia and, accordingly, were in demand, at the same time adding a rating to the author. (Ie, the author’s rating can be made dependent on the type of objects produced by him. If the community agrees that a new argument has indeed been added to the discussion, the rating increases significantly, but if the person under the guise of the argument gave only his opinion, his rating, on the contrary significantly reduced).
4) Contextual advertising is a traditional means to attract the attention of potential consumers. It could not be mentioned in connection with the Lift, if not the fact that it can be particularly effective in an environment with thematic tops, where increased attention is provided to all relevant objects, including advertising. Especially if it takes into account the direct (object molding) and indirect (with multi-parameter filtering / aggregation) indication by users of their interests. This is in line with the general statement that in a well-structured environment, the efficiency of all processes, including advertising, is increased.
If the results of one activity are needed by many, this contains the criterion of social self-realization. Social elevator - the mechanism that ensures its acceleration. From the definition we see a range of questions - how many, how much are needed, many now or many in the future, affect the results of many, directly or indirectly, and so on. Answers to these questions form a picture of the factors or conditions that contribute to the self-realization of people in society, the disclosure of their potential. The Social Lift project projects these factors onto the Internet space, using the specific advantages of the Internet to increase the efficiency of the process.
Growth
')
Again, it follows from the definition, first of all, that the larger the social environment, the more consumers. The conclusion from this is simple - we need a set of conditions that ensure the growth of the environment.
The semantic network of objects of arbitrary types, expressed in the simplest model “objects + connections”, is capable of adequately displaying “real”, real society, since the latter is in fact such a network. This in itself can be a promising fact. But the Internet reflection acquires new properties, we operate with virtual network objects in a way that we cannot do in real life (or we can’t always, or we can, but it’s much harder). It resembles the situation in mathematics, when Rene Descartes came up with a coordinate system, as a result of which it became possible to write geometric figures in the form of formulas and then operate only with these formulas, obtaining new results.
The potential of the object-communication model is that it in a fairly general form solves the problem of resource structuring, which has all sorts of applications. Partly because of the general thesis that many processes improve the efficiency in a structured environment, partly because human activity in general is largely confined to structuring various resources. But in its simplest form, this model can be interpreted as a tool that satisfies users' need for structuring and organizing content. This need is already manifested at the level of individual users and is further scaled for small communities, large, and however large, as the scale increases, only gaining relevance. Such an approach does not have full-fledged alternatives — competitive services or software solve particular aspects of this problem within specific scales and goals. Those. we have the relevance and scalability of the model, which is a stimulator of unlimited growth. Hence, an important consequence is that the project does not require the initial large “critical mass” of users in order to develop.
Growth also contributes to the possibility of belonging network objects simultaneously to different clusters. Combining them into a new cluster on a different basis is worth nothing (the functionality allows), but it can significantly change the focus, the context of user activity. Such a spontaneous shift in the semantics of links as a result of the creative activity of users means multidirectional growth of the network. Of course, this requires that the ability to create new clusters become familiar to users.
As was (almost) mentioned above, any project means the structuring of resources (human, informational, financial and other). In this sense, the object-relationship environment allows users not only to structure the content, but also to create their own (copyright) projects, including business projects. The opportunity to earn money using the service is a stimulator of the development and growth of the network - the interested authors-owners will take care of this themselves. The described so far had little to do with social self-realization. However, business projects (and not only them) are aimed at producing something demanded by many, so the factor of self-realization is included. Note in brackets that the definition of social realization adopted here in terms of results (products, etc.) and their consumers brings its task closer to the tasks of business.
One of the conditions for growth comes down to the question of how many have the opportunity to be useful to many others. Large social environments are differentiated by function, they inevitably turn into a system of interconnected parts. Therefore, it is important to use different skills and talents of users. Being the author of popular content is one of the most sought-after skills on the modern Internet, but it does not exhaust all user activity. It should be noted that the Internet as a whole loses here to real, because cuts off the area of ​​all connected with the material world. This reduced space is even more narrowed due to the uncharacteristic for the Internet environment of vertically hierarchical structures that are widespread in real life, which suppresses the use of managerial and managerial talents. Abnormality, however, does not mean impossibility or unnaturalness. I think this is just a consequence of the lack of sufficiently large and diverse systems. What does the elevator offer in this regard? - As a prerequisite, the basis for the emergence of hierarchical relations between users is proposed the operation of delegation of authority, valid within user projects. What is especially important for business projects, since the hierarchies in real life are mainly based on money. This also shows the need for cash transactions between users, and therefore the intraservice payment system.
In the context of social realization, those areas of activity that can be rated are interesting first of all. In this regard, a large number of users will be covered if we evaluate their abilities as evaluators of the activity of other participants (I will write about this another time). You can evaluate the traditional production of content (objects) and the less traditional production of links, types of objects and clusters, i.e. structuring activity itself. In various projects, there are various types of activity. In the spirit of the SocialLift service, it’s not so much to list and implement all these possible types as to give users the tools to organize their own rating systems within user projects.
The overwhelming majority of users, however, do not think about self-realization, about their business projects (and projects in general) and are engaged in the most popular online activities - communication and self-presentation. However, this activity introduces a lot of information into the semantic network, structures its specific areas. In addition, these users are the main consumers for most projects and make a major contribution to the growth of the network. Therefore, their participation should also be stimulated by something. Here you can say the following.
1) communication and self-presentation fit well into the object-communication model, probably even better than in services specifically devoted to this. First, because it allows you to maximally generalize the functionality of the “communicative-presentation” services: the user determines which clusters or types of “active” objects (users, communities, organizations) are his “friends”, who can create, see and perform other operations with objects and connections in its space, clarify exactly what objects / connections are, their specific clusters or types. And also to divide their space into subspaces and define rules separately for them, and so on.
Secondly, because all this is complemented by the specific advantages of the semantic network of objects. For example, two main types of objects in communication and presentation - “post” and “comment” in different contexts (spaces) can have different positioning. Comments, usually having a “secondary” role and limited functionality in a foreign author space, will (at the same time) become full-fledged objects in other spaces. Moreover, if the commentary contains a certain thesis or argument on the topic, it can be tied to a cluster of “arguments” related to a specific topic, and be of greater importance there.
Interesting is the opportunity to frend not only people and communities, but also objects of any type, thereby expressing your interest in them. Creating a traditional bookmark on the site, we are in a sense, "frend" this site. The list of interests in the LiveJournal user profile is also actually a “faked” object of various types. In the case of Sotslift, this list can perform the traditional function of friendlists for aggregating information from a common network on the basis of specified interests. If, say, an iPad is listed as “friends”, news and other useful information about it will be regularly posted in the tape.
In a more general perspective, a service based on the object-communication model fully allows to realize a promising trend for the development of information aggregators, providing highly accurate (multi-criteria) filtering of information. This feature is associated with the multiplicity of types of objects (and relationships) created by users. For example, right now I can’t create two friends in my LiveJournal according to two criteria - the author and the tag on his blog to read only what he writes on topics of interest to me. This is still a problem for LiveJournal, because not all authors tag their posts and plus there is the problem of fuzzy tagging: for example, the machine interprets the post as “Internet, Internet, web, web” as different, and people as one. In order for the machine to be perceived as one, additional efforts are needed - let’s say, merge tags into a cluster and, when mentioning one of the tags, load all objects marked with tags from this cluster. But this kind of activity is not organic (and difficult to implement) for LJ and organic for the semantic network, since in a similar structuring its meaning is concluded.
Interesting opportunities lie in the "expansion of functionality" for third-party sites. For example, in various scientific (and not only) online publications there are no discussions at all associated with published articles. In the object-linking system, an object of the “link” type will contain a link to such an article (and any other material) and it will be possible to discuss this object, build various links for it with other objects and relate it to different clusters as if we were dealing with a full intraservice object.
2) Usually, without thinking of their own projects, communities at times actually organize them around spontaneously arising interests, doing it in unsuitable formats, such as a forum. To organize a charity event, Internet support for any local event (for example, creating a HOA), a service (also geolocal) for joint purchases for any discounts, etc., etc. The proposed SocialList service allows you to arrange this kind of social activity, at the same time highlighting and stimulating activists and organizers. Note to the side: in general, there are many socially significant projects that are poorly monetized and to which the attention of neither large Internet businesses, nor “garage” start-ups, nor the state due to its traditional inertia, short-sightedness, fears, etc., is “turned around”.
3) In a more glamorous aspect, the masses always follow their idols. If the service uses a different kind of elite, the masses will catch up with it.
Ensuring the attention of the relevant audience.
Practically everything that stimulates participation results in the growth of the network, so it would be possible to enumerate further. However, the task of the “Social Elevator” is not limited to one ensuring growth and diversity, this condition is necessary and primarily important, but essentially indirect.
Creation of copyright projects within a common space implies the embodiment in some kind of ideas of encapsulation and data hiding, inherent in object-oriented programming, when the internal interacts with the external through some definite interface. Public access is potentially available to many, and subject to quality, is also needed by many, i.e. (potentially) the condition of social self-reliance is fulfilled. Potentially, because we need additional measures to get this product to those consumers who are interested in it. On the Internet (and not only) to get to consumers means to start getting into the field of their interested attention. This is a more immediate task "Lift". How is she solved? - 1) Due to the properties of the model objects-communication. Structuring means the concentration of resources around different attractors (network nodes), the principle of “all in one”. In particular, the concentration of relevant materials around a variety of topics (tags, taxa). Such a concentration actually represents a local thematic top, hit on which for relevant objects is almost guaranteed, simply on the basis of belonging to the topic. This in itself guarantees increased attention to the relevant audience. However, whether it will be maximum depends on the size of the stamp, its “degree of locality”. Too big top ceases to be top. What to do in this case? - Structuring implies including the division of thematically related objects into subgroups according to more and more specific features, i.e. the division of the big top into "podtopy" is smaller. In the proposed version of the object-relationship model, this means the production by users of new types of objects and the creation of new clusters.
2) But if the differences between the types become too small, and the number of objects of such types is still too large, additional measures are needed. Probably, the approach used in social media is suitable here - rating the authors, the objects they generate (and various activities in general). An open question regarding ratings - in what space do they operate? It used to be said that inside user projects. (An unauthorized, authoritarian sorting option is possible inside them). But themed tops are common space. About this I plan a separate note.
3) By creating types and clusters, you can position objects so that they will attract increased attention. For example, an object of the “argument” type, tied to a specific topic, may claim more attention than an object of the “opinion” type. Just because there are as many opinions as their speakers; they are listened to only if the carrier has authority. While there are few arguments on any topic and it is difficult to add something new to them. Similar can be said about the objects of the type (thematic) "summary". This is essentially the format of an encyclopedic article on a topic - you need to briefly summarize all the knowledge in this area. Collected in a common cluster, such objects would perform the function of articles on Wikipedia and, accordingly, were in demand, at the same time adding a rating to the author. (Ie, the author’s rating can be made dependent on the type of objects produced by him. If the community agrees that a new argument has indeed been added to the discussion, the rating increases significantly, but if the person under the guise of the argument gave only his opinion, his rating, on the contrary significantly reduced).
4) Contextual advertising is a traditional means to attract the attention of potential consumers. It could not be mentioned in connection with the Lift, if not the fact that it can be particularly effective in an environment with thematic tops, where increased attention is provided to all relevant objects, including advertising. Especially if it takes into account the direct (object molding) and indirect (with multi-parameter filtering / aggregation) indication by users of their interests. This is in line with the general statement that in a well-structured environment, the efficiency of all processes, including advertising, is increased.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/92207/
All Articles