Chris Messina wrote an interesting post on his blog about his OpenID Shitlist, Hitlist and Wishlist for 2008. (I'm going to briefly try to remember if using the word "shit" is cause for alarm on Planet Debian, and then I'm going to ignore the problem and move on.)
I think it's a good post and it really identifies some of the key players that are helping and failing in the OpenID space. I got a shout-out for Wikitravel and for the MediaWiki OpenID extension, which yay for me.
I think Chris was probably a little unfair about Wikimedia's lack of support. The site is moving very slowly towards a unified login for all its wikis, which is a really difficult task to make happen. OpenID is slated for installation some time after that, so it's going to be a while. But I hope that it will be useful for Wikipedians.
My main impression from this blog post, however, is that OpenID's day in the sun might be over. That's not a bad thing -- usually the hard work gets done after the cameras are turned off. Zealots like myself tend to think that if only the world knew about our latest-greatest idea or technology, they'd fall right into line and adopt it immediately. But my experience has been that things work a lot slower than that, and I'd guess that OpenID is probably going to have a similar adoption curve.
In thinking about opening up the Social Web, it's probably good to compare the opening of the Web Web in the mid-1990s. At the time, most Americans who were "online" were subscribed to a proprietary network like AOL, Compuserve, Delphi or MSN. (I'm not sure how things were in the rest of the world... Similar? Worse?) Many of these services either walled their users from the Internet entirely, or made it a one-way interaction. AOLers could read stuff from the rest of the Web, for example, but others couldn't see what AOL folks were doing.
That system looked impenetrable; after all, AOL was paying millions of dollars to make great content and manage forums and the like, and why would they give that away to Internet leeches for free? But eventually it came apart because the Web became more interesting than the on-line services. (I personally think the watershed was the Ate my balls meme, but others might differ. I just kind of picture hundreds of thousands of AOLers calling up technical support asking to see the Mr. T pictures, and that's what finally broke things down.) Today, on-line service "walled gardens" are a negligible part of the on-line world -- those that still exist are more or less big ISPs.
I think that the parallel with the Social Web is probably pretty apt. Today, Google, Facebook and Digg are reluctant to open up their identity silos to a distributed social Web. Their main asset today is their collection of identities and the relationships between them -- why give away the crown jewels? My guess is that it's not going to be until a mature, standardized and distributed Social Web exists outside the walls of the big social-networking players that we'll see them really willing to sit down at the table and come to the party.
Of course, by that time, it'll be a moot point. But that just means there's a nice big fat market for somebody smart to take advantage of.
tags: socialweb openid walledgardens