Ryan MacMillan

The internet was founded by geeks who wanted to share ideas and data with each other. Though nobody foresaw the size of the internet’s success, the conception of what is now the largest resource in history was an act of social behaviour. The internet was never branded, there was no business plan, and I don’t believe that such a mighty phenomenon would have evolved from any less selfless behaviour than it did. However, we’re not all computer scientists and many of us would not have had access to the web without the creation of easy-to-use tools such as browsers and search engines.

While packaged, usable technologies can open the door for the masses to engage with the internet, it is easy become ignorant of the greater possibilities presented by more customisable, fuzzier systems like open source developer platforms. Last week, Oxford and Harvard professor, Jonathan Zittrain was quoted in the BBC warning us to avoid this ignorance and fight to maintain what he calls generative technologies. Just at look at what Lego did when their Mindstorms product was hacked by techies and redeveloped to perform new, unplanned functions: Lego didn’t sue the hackers, they employed them.

I see this dichotomy as existing within social media activities too. We are great advocates of openness here, in fact it’s the “O” in our KUDOS acronym. On the other hand, there’s a lot to be said for slick, accessible tools, if they provide the time- and expertise-poor masses with new services. It all depends on who your audiences are and whether they are likely to adapt and collaborate on your tools or just want a quick fix.