Difference between revisions of "Netness"

Revision as of 04:31, 26 January 2011

A net concept developed by Sheldon Renan

All things want to be connected — because the more things are connected the better they work.

Limit connectivity and you limit opportunity. Connect the unconnected and you hugely improve odds for success. Netness offers a powerful conceptual tool for guiding innovation and governance going forward."

Where do you see the "network of things" headed?

"I think we're at unique moment in human history", writes Amber Case, "many of us now have the ability to be omniscient and omnipresent at the touch of a button. The omnipresent information net can snap data to us from almost anywhere. However, not all objects have the capability to connect, and those that do often do not do so using the best paths. The so called 'network of things' will come from bringing more things online, connecting more systems, and reducing the friction of those systems".

"The best thing I've found to explain this is something that could be called "Renan's Law" or "Netness". It was developed by Sheldon Renan, an early observer and writer in the high tech industry".

"The more things you connect:, he says, "the better things work; the smarter they are; the safer they are; the more opportunity is created for sharing resources and collaborating.

"We are not just talking about connecting more things over networks", he adds, "and neither are simply just talking about connecting more networks. We are talking about connecting everything".

"If you limit connectivity, you decrease opportunity. You decrease safety".

One of my favorite examples of Netness deals with intelligent systems installed in everyday objects. If an elderly man slips in his bathtub, the bathtub should be able to check his pulse and other biomedical indicators. It should be able to call an ambulance if necessary, or the next of kin if nearby. The bathtub should also know which nurse or caretaker is closest and on shift, and how quickly one might be able to arrive.

Now the scale and intimacy of connectivity is increasing (accelerating) at a scary rate. We don't see it, but we do sense it. The term "netness" characterizes our new state-of-being as connectivity becomes increasingly ubiquitous, our lives increasingly "entangled."

Recognizing netness leads to recognizing this simple principle: connectivity is the most important enabler of creating of new value.

Forget Moore's Law. It is extending connectivity across and beyond networks that increases knowledge, safety, collaboration and (critical for eCommers) access to new models and markets.

Principles

• 1. Everything wants to be connected (or at least to be able to "converse" frictionlessly on an ad hoc basis)
• 2. The more things are connected (able to communicate) the better things work.
• 3. As connectivity becomes ubiquitous, systems (networks) become fields... connectivity fields...
• 4. A new class or state of connectivity is emerging which i've been calling "entangled" (many threaded, loosely but deeply connected) as in entangled conversations, lives, communities, networks...
• 5. As networks become fields, as lives and things become entangled, two worlds > the world of atoms and the world of bits < become one, greatly enhancing future opportunity and potential capability of all participants
• 6. The ability to connect, coordinate, collaborate and share easily everywhere on an ad hoc basis is now replacing Moore's Law as the most important source of opportunity."

Also see: http://www.socialtext.net/cookreport/index.cgi?netness [Netness on SocialText] and Netness on p2p foundation

"Connect the unconnected and you increase hugely opportunity, safety and success", says Renan, "this is why we can say everything wants to be connected". 

Opportunities are lateral. Connecting devices, people, systems and things across boundaries decrease the time and space it takes to get things done. Decreasing this time and space increases profits and makes society function smoothly. 

One benefit of connectivity and netness is the reduction of systemic friction. Almost all of the greatest and most profitable innovations that the past few decades have seen relate to this. Google reduces the time and space necessary to get to relevant information. Yelp is a vertical channel of specific information that one can access and filter according to whether a venue is open, nearby, or highly rated. These frictionless, or systems of low friction allow one to plan future events with higher degrees of accuracy. They allow one to predict outcomes in an increasingly precise way. 

This is a trend that will continue to affect everyday life. It will be no different from an analog reality in which a person connected to the best information profits first, but the connectivity to information and people will be mediated by a technosocial network of people and information. Bloggers like Marshall Kirkpatrick are early examples of journalists who use systems and network analysis to get to the best information first. His connectivity greatly adds to Read Write Web's ability to quickly report on the rapidly evolving world of tech.      The concept of connectivity is not new. Successful technology decreases the connections between nodes. Successful technology also disappears. Unsuccessful technology increases those connections and frustrates people. 

 A tree, for instance, must have access to sunlight, soil and water, or it will die. A human must have access to similar resources. The Internet has become a massive river of resources through which people are catching fish. Some have more innovative nets than others. And all of us can be caught. 

In his Phenomenon of Man, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin wrote that connectivity = life, and isolation = death. That is why all things absolutely want to be connected. 

Sociologist Emelie Durkheim did a study on populations – he found that those of Catholic faith were less likely to commit suicide than those of Protestant faith. Did it have something to do with religion? Further research suggested that those with Catholic faiths were more likely to have stronger family ties and be part of a community, whereas those with Protestant ties were less likely to be community oriented. He found that those who were isolated from others had fewer connections.  In Emelie Durkheim’s perspective, a malnourished public sphere deprived individuals of real social connections. In the face of this anomie, the cell phone allows an organic social network. Through the subject and the technology combined, the subject can become an Actor on the larger Actor Network. If the human spends time in a non-place, then the addition of a non-place accessed through the telephone tears through the solitary contractility characterized by the non-place. Both the place and the non-place can exist at once, because in the supermodern perspective all dichotomies blur into one another. Compare this to the former world of forward focused isolation --- TV, one way signals, into a world of interactivity. Before, the screen was far away. Now we live in that screen. The isolated human in the non-place seeks to reconnect with those in proximity, but cannot. The cell phone is used as a substitute for interaction, but the cellphone user really wishes for face-to-face interaction over virtual interaction, and thus manages face to feign importance. What has happened is that we've gone from a village society with relative social heirarchy to a non-place sovietym,w here one drives in a vehile or commutes rto suburbia or walks down the street in a city without knowing anyone. In this case, one uses a cell phone to reconnect. One uses an iPod to listen to music and get back a sense of belonging or familiarity. 

I would say that yes, mobile is essentially our individual connection to this network. The history of the phone and the personal computer saw communication across distances from static positions. Now we are mobile. Things change with mobility. We can carry our closest family members in our pocket. We never have to feel alone.