Preparing for Web 3.0

http://blog.openconceptual.com/2007/10/education-and-creation-for-web-30.html

by brianfrank • 19 years ago

2 12 19 years ago

blog.openconceptual.com

iamwil3• 19 years ago

It's an interesting comparison between the difference between 2.0/1.0 and 3.0/2.0, but the author gives no support as to why he thinks it's education/creation for 3.0 in the future.

Do you think he's spot on, and know any reasons for or against it?

brianfrank5• 19 years ago

Granted. My case isn't very concrete. I'm going by the very general principle that if something isn't growing -- making new connections, adapting, and creating -- then entropy starts to happen.

I don't think the web can grow much more complex without it outgrowing our ability (as both users and providers) to use it effectively -- at least not to its full potential. Therefore growth will probably have to be balanced by growth in our intuitive knowledge and competencies: education.

iamwil3• 19 years ago

Can you give some concrete examples please?

To me, it seems that the average user has to know less and less about the underlying web in order to use it to do things. Perhaps you're talking about people that build tools on the web?

keith_erskine• 19 years ago

Gee, my site is Web 2.4 rc1. Will I be ready?

jsmcgd2• 19 years ago

For me the following sentence says that there is no 'bubble 2.0': "The overvaluations this time are not being made by businesspeople and investors, but consumers and users." At worst you could argue that this is a fad but not a bubble. Users cannot create bubbles, only investors can.

jsmcgd2• 19 years ago

Also I really don't like the terms: 'Bubble 2.0' and 'Web 3.0'. Can we not wait for some industry consensus before brandishing these terms. (Thanks I had to get that off my chest).

brianfrank5• 19 years ago

I agree that the terms are silly and abused, but unfortunately we seem to be getting stuck with them. I'd love to have better ones (know any?), but for now, you have to admit that people at least know what they refer to: things that'd otherwise be too ambiguous. These over-simple terms aren't bypassing consensus, they are a means to consensus-building.

As to the earlier comment, the whole point of the essay is that we need to look at fads as if they are bubbles, users as if they're investors. See Davenport and Becks 'Attention Economy' as well as Mark Anielski's 'Economics of Happiness'. And to see the where I'm eventually trying to lead, see David Warsh's 'Knowledge and the Wealth of Nations' and the 2005 World Bank paper called "Where is the Wealth of Nations."

iamwil3• 19 years ago

Well, I suppose we can do what the batman movies, or Gundam series do. Batman, Batman Returns, Batman Forever, Batman Begins. Gundam Wing, Gundam Turn A, Gundam Seed.

Web. Web Social. Web Ubiqu. Web Singularity.

I guess most hackers don't like the term web/bubble 2.0/3.0 is because it's overloaded, and hence, imprecise. Thus, ripe for exploitation by marketers, which generally have a bad rep with hackers (sometimes with good reason).

I think the author just means "the next evolutionary step of the web" Just as when people are talking about 2.0, they just mean that the web now was far different than it was back in 1996.

ardit33• 19 years ago

nah, I am still working on my web 2.5.1 rev C application

Yet another article about web 3.0, blah.

Preparing for Web 3.0

Related Stories