Writing about social network fatigue around the world on O'Reilly Radar - http://radar.oreilly.com/archives/2007/12/decentralizing.html

At Six Apart, we'll be supporting the new OpenSocial initiative to make an open platform for social applications on the web. But for us, it's not about Google or Facebook. It's about the web itself. As you can guess from our announcement weeks ago that we're opening up the social graph, this is the sort of thing we believe in. Honestly, we don't care much about the political battles between big tech companies: We're doing this because this is what it takes for new features, applications, and experiences to happen in the right way for the vast range of communities that we serve. This gives regular people on the web more control over the social networks and applications they use.

http://www.sixapart.com/about/news/2007/11/opensocial_kill.html

In other news, I'm headed to London tonight for BarCamp Berlin, Web 2.0 Expo Berlin, and the Eduserv Foundation's OpenID event in London to talk about both OpenID and the social graph.

OpenSocial - http://blog.pmarca.com/2007/10/open-social-a-n.html

Keep your eye on Six Apart News as well the next few days.

Spoke with brad today at Web 2.0 Summit about Opening the Social Graph. Wrote about it more on O'Reilly Radar and slides are embedded below (or can be found on SlideShare) though are missing all of our awesome animations.

So it seems that Dave Winer thinks that my friend (though some may argue otherwise) brad and the rest of us shouldn't be using the term "social graph". "Social Graph" is a horrible term when dealing with non-geeks and even for geeks it elicits arguments about what type of graph it actually is.

So yes Dave, we are all talking about "social networks"! That said, I do think there is value in respecting Zuckerburg's prior uses of the phrase. So what about a compromise, "graph" for geeks and "network" for everyone else?