IRC? The next big thing? Who would have thought :/

>> "Last time I checked, that's IRC."

The difference is, IRC can scale really well. IRC has worked out how to deal with spam, abuse, botnets, etc etc. You can have moderated, password protected channels, user levels, kicks, bans etc etc. It'd take the 'social stream' thingys a while to replicate that functionality, and the question would be 'why rebuild it?'.

FWIW, I really do believe we'll see a massive resurgence of real time chat this year and next.

It's amazing to look back at just now big it was. Even the BBC ran an IRC server and had regular chats about programs etc. Then they shut everything down and moved to moderated message boards - which suck in terms of user experience. Since then people have had to try and emulate the experience places like twitter. which results in, again, a bad user experience.

We'll be back to live chat on the web soon enough though.

"massive resurgence of real time chat this year" ... watch omegle. kind of ridiculous concept but usage is spreading virally.

And blogging is basically just a .plan file...

FWIW, the Amherst internal blogging/social-network site is called "planWorld", and it quite literally grew out of .plan files. Around 1999, someone decided it would be a good idea to have them be readable over the web, and so they hacked up a PHP app to expose people's .plans on a web interface. Eventually it grew the ability to post, to check who's been viewing your plan, to style things, to send private messages, and to have group conversations, but the terminology is still "finger" and "plan" and "whois".

Until recently, it was also possible to go the other way: you could finger [email protected] and it would show you what I'd most recently posted through the web interface. But planWorld recently moved to a newer server which isn't running fingerd, so that functionality has disappeared.

Come on Paul. IM is hardly ancient geek history.

My point is not that they are the same, but that details matter a lot, and that just because there are parallels between two things, it does not make them the same thing. My .plan example was not made up -- that was an actual criticism from the early days of blogging (according to Jason Shellen, who was part of Blogger).

(Just read Jason's piece the other day, actually. You can't leave comments on a .plan ...)

I agree that details matter a great deal. In any event, the comment specifically questioned the temporal aspects of the analogy. Wishing you success in your endeavors.

IM and IRC are fundamentally different from twitter and friendfeed, because twitter and friendfeed have home pages with content. Deciding what goes on the home page is key functionality that wasn't in IM or IRC.

Some IM protocols allowed one to set up some info which is public and supposed to act as a bio. This content could be some form of HTML, which is more than anything twitter supports (i.e, it let you do the styling, much to the detriment of others).

If you like IRC, you will like Chatterous.

It is like IRC where you can get msgs by SMS/IM/email/etc

> It is like IRC where you can get msgs by SMS/IM/email/etc

So in other words it's not like IRC at all.

No, IRC is fundamentally about the channel structure.

Additionally people have used an assortment of clients to receive messages including local apps, web based, etc.

It isn't about how you receive the message, its the structure of how people are organized to chat.

Have you used Friendfeed? It is what Twitter should be and it has the benefits of IRC with an order of magnitude more practicality.

Unfortunately I almost never use Friendfeed; all of my friends are on Facebook.