

Preparing for Web 3.0 - brianfrank
http://blog.openconceptual.com/2007/10/education-and-creation-for-web-30.html

======
iamwil
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?

~~~
brianfrank
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.

~~~
iamwil
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?

~~~
brianfrank
Never mind my last comment.

I should've just said "Second Life." Those users -- at least the ones who
stick around -- invest _alot_ of capital (cultural, emotional, financial,
etc).

I don't know if Second Life will be the company that gets the next wave right,
but I think we should look at what they (and their users) are doing, to see
who'll be the big winners in 5 to 10 years.

Here's a fairly recent post on GigaOM about it:
[http://gigaom.com/2007/09/26/7-reasons-why-second-life-
shoul...](http://gigaom.com/2007/09/26/7-reasons-why-second-life-should-
matter-for-biz-executives/)

...and then there's the story posted by pg about declining use of
wikipedia:[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dragons_flight/Log_analysi...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dragons_flight/Log_analysis)
... and my comment on there: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=66946>

------
jsmcgd
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.

~~~
jsmcgd
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).

~~~
iamwil
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.

~~~
brianfrank
Nice. I like those suggestions... But wouldn't it be more fun just to steal
movie titles. How about The Web Identity > The Web Supremecy > The Web
Ultimatum... did I get the order right? Anyone remeber the 'Ernest' films?

------
ardit33
nah, I am still working on my web 2.5.1 rev C application

Yet another article about web 3.0, blah.

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

