The walled gardens are closed, hierachical, centralized databases such as Google and Facebook which control over information flows and undesirable information (Mitew, 2014). However, the online networking can be centralized and decentralized. Speaking of social networking, web sites such as Myspace and Facebook are undeniably fancy and popular but they are all centralized. This makes users more likely to use a decentralized approach which allows users to have more control over their own private data in order to avoid dissemination of information (Yeung et. al, 2008).
A centralized network is defined as a third party between one and another. It is also known as a central node which acts like something that you will never meet but it is a must to meet at some ways to reach from one to another. There is no direct exchange from the PCs while all information that we send has to go through the server or the central node (Samarajiva,2014). In the opposite, decentralised networks have no third parties and no servers. People can exchange information directly and need not a third party such as Napster and SoulSeek (Samarjiva, 2014).
According to Fitzpatrick and Recordon 2007, people are getting irritated of registering and declaring their friends on every site(centralized networks). People believe that they are lack of control of their own privacy by using these social networking. And, they likely agreed that their information has been taken advantage of to use as advertising. For example, Beacon, a part of advertising system from Facebook disappoint many users that their information published on their friend’s news feed about their activities in other websites(Malik, 2007). In addition, there is an interview from InformationWeek and UBM Tech, Fritz Nelson and David Berlind (2012) talking about how the walled gardens want to have all control of our data.
Therefore, it is believed that decentralised networks allow people to have more control their ownership (Wilson, 2008). Decentralized network provides a better controlled-structure for socialization as users do not have to worry about privacy, ownership and dissemination such as FOAF (Friend-Of-A-Friend) (Brickley & Miller, 2007). A FOAF plays as a central role that provides a format for a specifying ‘friends’ relationship among people and it is also believed that its popularity is rising in the community (Golbeck and Rothstein, 2008).
This decentralized social networking can be used as an major point where your friends can access your status, photos or to write personal message on the board.On the other words, this is only restricted and allowed to the “friends” relationship – others than friends will not able to read and access to it- which gives users more control over the data.
All in all, the walled gardens might have to worry about their future while decentralised networks allow more of what users want and yet their data need not be taken advantage of as an advertising system.
Jennifer Golbeck, Matthew Rothstein. Linking Social Networks on the Web with FOAF: A Semantic Web Case Study. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Third Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI’08), Chicago, Illinois, July 13–17, 2008m, pp.1138-1143. 2008
Who’s going to rope you into their walled gardens 2012, Online Video, Ignite Technologies Inc, Santa Clara CA