I think what you have written is a very good piece, however, I would caution to call it web 3.0.
Everything that you are talking about is what was envisioned back in 2000. Back then, I did high end research work for American Express and it was avidly doing research into B2B and knowledge management portals.
Back then the focus was on the corporation, and now it is on the individual user, who, there is enough brought together, equal more weight than any corp can. The only thing that has slowed down the creation of what you are describing is the adoption of technology by the end user and the speed/availability of internet connections around the world.
This isn't 'new', it's just the progression that was originally expected close to ten years ago.
ICQ was the original MySpace, Facebook, whatever - it hasn't really changed that much.
danja
· 2 years ago
Very nice round-up, although most of the characteristics described seem to be in a fairly advance stage already, so to me what you describe seems more like Web 2.1, not really the "Next Wave".
Re. "If Web 3.0 is the Semantic Web, where computer agents read content like human beings do — then RSS will be its eyes (or at least its corrective lenses)."
While RSS (and Atom) do offer some useful capabilities through their delivery mechanisms (and in Atom's case through the Atom Publishing Protocol), they only really offer very limited metadata capabilities to human-readable content. It's the tip of the tip of the iceberg. The Semantic Web is about data in general (not just metadata), expressed on the Web through the Resource Description Framework. The extension of the current Web of Documents to a more general Web of Data will make a huge difference to the way everyone uses the Web.
I strongly recommend this short video from Tim Berners-Lee: The Semantic Web of Data, and there's a good selection of Semantic Web-related podcasts here. Work in progress regularly crops up on Planet RDF.
Dustin Brewer
· 2 years ago
Wow. I would like to congratulate you first of all for the longest blog post in the course of blog posting history. I had to take a break from reading it. Not that it is too long, it is very much all inclusive of everything that is evolving in the web. With sites like Pownce and Twitter being as popular as they are, granted Pownce is still in private beta. I think that social networking and all that "Web 2.0" brought us is a start and still happening towards sorting the massive amount of data and information that is available on the interwebs.
I can't wait to see what comes out of all this and I hope we can all keep up with how fast things are moving.
p.s. while you were hitting publish web 4.1 actually started, welcome to the psyche-network.
large mens clothing
· 1 year ago
It wasn't all that long! Haven't you ever read a book before ;)
Thank to the author for some really good info there
visarga
· 3 months ago
I selected the text and used the Alex Voice (TTS) on my mac. Zero eye strain and the intonation is excellent.
Wii Fit
· 2 years ago
With all the posts about "web2.0 and web3.0," aren't people just getting carried away with hearing their own voices?
People like simplicity... things get more simple... it will continue that way.
Steve
· 2 years ago
@Dustin, luckily this article was written over the course of several weeks. I warned you from the beginning that it would be a definitive guide. :)
@WiiFit Indeed, the web is going from what I consider a "hunter gatherer" mentality (Web 1.0) to a more community oriented mode (Web 3.0). The labels we use are less consequential than the concepts themselves.
Thanks for the comments!
Phillip Rhodes
· 2 years ago
This would be an interesting enough discussion of the "Future of the Web" without the "Web 3.0" jargon. And no matter what you (or anybody else) says, as a label "Web 3.0" is always going to be a vacuous, meaningless buzzwords, just like "Web 2.0" And the reason is simply because adding a number just... does... not... convey... any... extra... meaningful... information.
If people insist on treating the Web as something that can be versioned (which is a faulty assumption in the first place, IMO), then at least create labels that *mean* *something.* Even if the something is stupid, at least give us a label that describes something in a way that provides some sort of value.
"The Semantic Web" "The Community Web" "The Interactive Web" "The Grid" "The Collaborative Web" "The Elephantine Lipitrude Web" "The p0rn and pirated music Web"
or something...
Steve
· 2 years ago
I think that is the best reason I have ever heard for why "Web 2.0" / "Web 3.0" is meaningless. That being said, the fact of the matter is that the web probably can't be strictly versioned, but like the difference between Modernism and "Post-Modernism" there are certain places in the continuum that denote major changes in basic behavior. These places require some kind of label.
Since the "Internets" is run by a techie crowd, we prefer monikers like "Web 3.0" for better or for worse (probably for worse).
I think The Semantic Web would be the best of show as far as real labels for "the new web" are concerned. Though, "The p0rn and pirated music Web" comes in a close second.
Szavanna
· 2 years ago
Hi Steve - hm interesting - thanks for putting it all together - I will take my time and will look at the post in more detail - since I am a newbie especially when it comes to more technical aspects. I will also be following the comments - it's interesting to see the discussion as it develops.
Maz Hardey
· 2 years ago
Steve,
I am really impresed by the depth of information that you have gone into about WEb 3.0 platform (seems we are not far off are we!). I particularly like your ideas on the people searches and locating, rather than just networking. Seems Mcluhn was right when he observed that we are living in a 'global village' and at closer quarters than we have been ever before.
It will be more than interesting to see how this develops in the course of Web 2.0 (lets face it the rest of the world has only just caught up with this!)
look forward to reading more...
of course maybe we should be less concerned with trying to define such content and enjoy the webs synchronous, immersive, smooth flowing and addictive ways.
:P
xxdesmus
· 2 years ago
You missed the links on Twitter and Netvibes by the way.
Honestly, I think what you're describing is mostly Web 2.5 at best. We still haven't even seen the full ramifications of web 2.0 yet.
Oh, and I hate buzz words. We really don't need any more this "web [insert a number]" stuff.
xxdesmus
· 2 years ago
I forgot to mention this: You say RSS will be the eyes for computers to "read" the web. This is incorrect in my opinion. Microformats (and more broadly XML in general) will be the eye would be a much more applicable technology that will help computers build the semantic web that we all dream about. RSS does not provide context, it only provides content. Microformats allow for context in a number of ways (that I will not list here).
andrew
· 2 years ago
tl;dr -- jk
congrats on the front page digg, steve!
Aidan Henry
· 2 years ago
Wow Steve... I think you covered pretty much... EVERYTHING. Well done. Your post took me a long time to read. I can't imagine how long it took to write. Congrats.
@desmus I tend to agree that there are certain "unpredictable" elements involved, and there are probably things that I missed. This article is a speculative tour of Web 3.0 based exclusively on technologies that currently exist.
As for microformats, I think that is an article in and of itself. I will try to tackle that sometime in the future. I completely agree that they will play a pivotal role. Thanks for the comment!
@andrew Thanks mate :)
@Aidan I'm so glad that you liked it, I'll be sure to check out the article. It's really fun to speculate on this sort of thing, I hear Sci-Fri writers get paid quite a bit for similar efforts.
Anonymous
· 2 years ago
Wow, that must have taken you a long time...
Such a long time that I don't feel like reading it.
Bill Smith
· 2 years ago
Wow this is by far one of the best post I have read in a while. It is quite foward in thinking thank you so much.
Steve
· 2 years ago
@13 duly noted :)
Skizmo
· 2 years ago
Steve,
Do me a favor. Go find a real job instead of writing this kind of uber-nonsense.
Steve
· 2 years ago
Thanks for the opinion Skiz. I will consider cutting the "uber-nonsense" when next I post. ;)
Anonymous
· 2 years ago
hmm...maybe you should have called this article:
"How to draw attention to oneself; and possibly be considered a Web 3.0 pioneer before the ballgame even begins"
Nice article, but really, enough of this Web X.0 crap!
Steve
· 2 years ago
The parts I agree with: Web 3.0 is a buzz word.
What I would like to point out is that while Web 3.0 or whatever you call it is a buzz word it seems to have obfuscated the entire point of the article. The point, for those who have taken the time to read the entire article, was to show that web technologies that currently exist foreshadow the web as it will be.
I wanted to highlight these technologies, show how they can be extended and dump them into a cluster which I called -- for the sake of argument -- Web 3.0. For those who care, find and replace all instances of Web 3.0 with "The Semantic Web".
I want to thank everyone who has given constructive criticism and all those people who have praised the article. Great discussion and I hope it continues.
splat
· 2 years ago
But it all sounds boring -- just more ways to organize increasing amounts of data.
None of this speaks to more interesting ways to get the machines to be smarter, it just gives us more ways to organize what little they can actually do.
Machine intelligence is really pretty crude.
The real Web x.x+ involves the holodeck and the replicator -- those are the quantum leaps of the future.
Steve
· 2 years ago
@splat I'm pretty sure that's where speculation becomes science fiction, though I've heard that 3D imaging technology is progressing quite nicely (the good people at Carnegie Mellon are working on it).
You really did a good job putting this together, and making the front page of Digg....bravo. I'm sure you realize by now that that's a double edged sword from some of the *ahem* comments.
This is a fantastic piece, no matter which way you slice it. Using a common phrase like Web X.Y shouldn't detract from the fact that you did a darn good job of analyzing web technologies.
Great work Steve, keep it up!
Groovy
· 2 years ago
Good post, funny comments, you handled them well.
Dugg and Stumbled
adam
· 2 years ago
talkin about web 3.0 is sucking.. while 5% of sites admins just knew about web 2.0.. lol
Steve
· 2 years ago
@Darren / Groovy thanks a lot :)
@adam I'll take the parts of that I understood as a compliment :)
Thanks guys!
Gopinath M
· 2 years ago
Very very very very very very very very very lengthy post....Looks like you have provided lot of information. Good work!!
Jayanth
· 2 years ago
Didn't read the entire post...but, from what I have read, good job...and, as someone else said above, you have handled the comments well too..congrats!
John Romero IV
· 2 years ago
Agree with above poster. You can't accurately predict the next wave using terminology and concepts that are slowly beginning to take shape in the present; Web 2.1 is far more accurate. Web 3.0 probably won't occur in our lifetime, unless significant progress is made in bio and nanotechnology.
Luke Karisny
· 2 years ago
In all honesty folks we're in the early stages of the "Web 2.0" game. I think you would be very hard pressed to find many profitable companies in that sphere of the market. So far we've seen a couple of great platforms built and thanks to the maturity of web services and Google's stance on open API's we also have a little bit of interaction happening between a handful of sites.
If Web 2.0 is viewed simply as a set of features then the only thing novel about social networks is that they use those "new features" that we associate with them. When's the last time any of us called AJAX by what it really is? You know, the cross-platform and simply better alternative to the iframe element. I still think to this day it's hillarious that Microsoft came up with XmlHttpRequest.
Do we really want our users in charge of our product development? In charge of our content? It's not very helpful when they're as blinded by the hype as we are. The major social networks might be what everybody is focused on right now, but as over-glorified clubs / advertisement delivery vehicles they sure do a poor job of getting people to click on banner ads. It feels like we're all just spinning our wheels on this one and not really getting anywhere.h
Re: the never ending argument over terms. I liked it when we used to call it The Semantic Web. Today's bastardized slang doesn't carry the same simple and profound message of a better webernets. Today's term screams "Hey I've got a new website with lime green rounded buttons and large fonts that have this full background color highlight when you hover over there. Yeah we're kinda like another website called ... " you get the picture.
I know my post is a little OT ... just saying what comes to mind right now. Keep on dreaming, it's what drives us all further.
Sean
· 2 years ago
Web 2.0 was a name given to a set of changes in the web and how we use it. It wasn't a set of changes that happened because the name was made up.
Some interesting points are made here but the web isn't a car or a software application; a product put out by a company. Unlike a product, you can't version it with a set of new features. Things on the web evolve naturally and often unexpectedly. To say, "this is what it's likely going to be like" seems a futile exercise.
steve
· 2 years ago
youve neglected to tell us about web3 thats built to help others, find needers and havers,connect offers with needs free of charge...these are a few of my favorite things...can web3 make the world a better place ? or just make middle class wisconsin a better place/////what sayith youith? any tie ins to the 100dollar pc thing? hardware and net connection are as important as software........
Steve
· 2 years ago
Issue 1 - This is Web 2.1
This might be true, but as many commentators have pointed out the 3.0 moniker is sort of a "label". I agree that many of these technologies currently exist, in fact, I am sure all of them do -- that is why I choose them. However, I am of the opinion that Web 2.0 is crawling towards a natural conclusion even now. Technology follows an exponential scale, and even though Web 1.0 lasted for "quite some time" Web 2.0 might not require a decade to happen.
Though, it is entirely possible that this is Web 2.1. Only time will tell.
@steve Great name by the way :) The cultural implications of the new web is something I will try to explore soon.
@Luke I'll definitely get around to giving your question the thought it deserves. Not right this second though, thanks so much for commenting.
Thanks everyone, this has been a truly enlightening discussion so far.
Andri
· 2 years ago
Web 3.0??!?!?, why did you have to do that? *ohhh* Compared to the longish articel you wrote, which people seem to like (I didn't read it) you sure do suck at picking headlines :)
Steve
· 2 years ago
*chuckles* Headlines are hard Andri. Thanks for reading whichever part of the article that you did. :)
Clay Anderson
· 2 years ago
Goodness, a lot of people are stuck on the moniker. Talk about not seeing the forest for the...well, the *name* of the forest.
(People, if you're stuck on the name, copy-and-paste this article into Word, and replace "Web 3.0" with whatever term you would use to describe the "Next Stage of the Web." Then, print it out and read it.)
Steve, this is fascinating and insightful. You're not attempting to look 10 years down the road -- as some seem to expect -- but 2-5 years. You've looked back on the early days of the web to see how data and features have consolidated, integrated, and evolved, and then extrapolated these trends to speculate on what will come next. My sense is that you're probably 80-90% correct.
In any case, it's a great read. Appreciation for the work you've put in.
Steve
· 2 years ago
Clay I truly appreciate the kind words. This is exactly what I was trying to accomplish with this article. I didn't want to wildly speculate on where the web *could* head, I wanted to provide some insight into where it *was* heading based on technologies evolution.
Thank you so much for reading.
eve
· 2 years ago
Wow, what an article! I think you are right on target, I cant wait to see some of those actually happen!
kaleb
· 2 years ago
Personally, my hope is that with the advent of "web 3.0" we stop classifying the evolution of the web with numbering system and simply recognize it as an environment. It's the inevitable shift from viewing web as a thing, to the web as a place.
Ilyas
· 2 years ago
I'm suprised how many haters out there, ( me including) about web.x
Regardless, I'm with you “Jerry Maguireâ€, its good to take a look around the web landscape at some point or another in ones lifetime, and note the observation and reflect on the future and past.
If what we get from web 3 is as tedious and arbitrary as this blog then god help us
Steve
· 2 years ago
@John opinion duly noted. :)
Rich
· 2 years ago
Sorry, but however interesting the ideas I have to agree that the moniker Web 3.0 is unhelpful and simply used as a buzz word with no real value.
The world wide web, or what we could call in this line Web 1.0, is 18 years old. Web 2.0 is 4 years old and is still a mystery to at least 99% of the planet I would say. How on earth did we get to Web 3.0 so soon?
I think Web 2.0 did mark an important distinction, the critical aspect of which to me has always been the Read/Write Web. I see no such critical distinction in Web 3.0, just lots of ideas, the vast majority of which are part of Web 2.0 anyway - things like widgets and interoperability are an enormous part of what I do right now, and I'm not even sure they fall under the concept of Web 2.0 let alone Web 3.0.
Steve
· 2 years ago
The buzzword debate aside, here's my take.
I wasn't saying that Web 3.0 is here, or even close to here. What I was speculating on (and this is and was always meant to be speculation) was what Web 3.0 will look like whenever it does arrive. Unless I choose to draw ghosts from the air, the only way that I could do this is by using current technological offerings as a jump off point.
A few misconceptions that people seem to have is that I am saying *This is Web 3.0* and ignoring other obviously related technologies (like Microformats). I am not, they just did not make it into the article because there is a near infinite number of things that could be covered and despite the exhaustive nature of this post, there just wasn't enough space.
We aren't done with Web 2.0 quite yet, but it is interesting to speculate on where the web is heading. That was my primary goal, and at that I have been successful.
Thanks for taking the time to read and comment!
Petrus Pennanen
· 2 years ago
Your vision of web 3.0 sounds similar to Leiki's.
For an example of automatic personalisation of web 2.0 in action on a mobile, I'd suggest that you try the just published Leiki News Reader available for free from www.leiki.com -> Get Leiki Software -> Leiki News Reader
It has award-winning usability and advanced automatic personalisation which learns the user’s interests from clicks on articles and selects personally relevant news.
A single version of the app work on almost all Java-enabled phones. Currently the service has several hundred RSS feeds with more being added.
Steve
· 2 years ago
Is that so? ;)
Jesmi
· 2 years ago
Thanks for the information.
Lais Edward
· 2 years ago
it's all clear about this thing...But i have a crave for Fox prison Break..n i also want to suggest others to look out for this show!!!!
Jeffro2pt0
· 2 years ago
It's been a long time since I've been this excited while reading an article. I just wanted to let you know that I think this article is a good bit of inspiration. The funny thing is, a lot of what you describe as being Web 3.0 worthy is already starting to happen. I especially enjoyed your explanation of RSS and how much of a role it's going to be in the web 3.0 world.
Richard Leon
· 2 years ago
You might as well call this the 'School of Fish' web - users swimming around aimlessly in clumps, changing direction to follow every latest microfad and microcelebrity, occasionally eaten by predatory advertisers whose only interest is in harvesting them for sales and marketing opportunities.
There's something a little bleak and underwhelming about a social network predicated on the belief that the most that anyone can aspire to is becoming the hamster who can spin a wheel (i.e. lifestream) the fastest, consume and comment on the most media, and recontextualise themselves as a content-generating web meta-application.
My prediction is that the backlash will come from a new generation of users who realise that most of this is just shrill and irrelevant digital noise, and will decide gardening is more fulfilling.
Essential memes: compassion not competition; solar photons are always free and make you feel good too; you can't eat sizzle no matter how many mobile content delivery platforms link to it.
Steve Spalding
· 2 years ago
That last paragraph may be the best thing I've read all month, excellent analysis!
thomas
· 2 years ago
Have you read the definition by Sramana Mitra on Web 3.0?
Nate
· 2 years ago
I really like the ideas, very thorough, ecspecially the entertainment part, reminds me of online tv sites like http://www.tvforpc.com
Marc
· 2 years ago
Load of crap. Which is essentially the social web. Very very few sites provide value, and those will be the only ones to survive. Way too much emphasis on RSS, most have no clue what it is nor care. Everyone is shooting in the dark right now hoping someone will buy them up.
Java Games
· 2 years ago
Great analysis of the web's future. I kind of agree with philip about the web 2.0 - 3.0 jargon, but overall a great post.
Dan from imdb
· 2 years ago
great info, thanks a lot.
Pick my Click
· 1 year ago
Highly interesting thoughts !
Dwayne Charrington
· 1 year ago
in my opinion, what you described could also be defined as Web 2.1 moreso than 3.0. It took how long for Web 2.0 to be coined and put to use again?
See my point it took years and years to evolve to Web 2.0 status what makes people think that all of a sudden just because everyone starts adapting a trend that it can be coined as Web 3.0 already?
Web 2.0 has only just started basically, it hasn't been around that long at all, who are we to define the next evolutionary stage of the internet so soon?
I do commend you though for writing such an in-depth article and presenting it beautifully, it was an interesting read nonetheless. It was nothing new that other Web 3.0 articles haven't already said, but it was a fantastic write up still.
Hi i want to reccomend you very useful rapidshare search http://loadingvault.com. You can find there a lot of new movies, games and music. Enjoy it!
Get Entertained
· 1 year ago
Good Article (post). I like your point of view.
Reanimator
· 1 year ago
What is means under web 3.0 when we don't use all features of Web 2.0?Isn't it ridiculous?
seo firm
· 1 year ago
Great info! Time flies, doesn't it feel like Web 2.0 was just introduced? Thanks for your heads up. It's always good to keep learning about what the future of the web will become.
WWW.AUTANET.CZ
· 1 year ago
Spole?nost Honda oznámila p?edstavení zcela nového modelu Accord ur?eného pro evropský trh. Nový model Honda Accord v provedeních sedan a Tourer, který si klade za cíl konkurovat zavedeným prémiovým model?m v D-segmentu, nabízí sportovní vzhled, množství d?myslných ?ešení, unikátní soubor bezpe?nostních systém? a excelentní dynamiku. Ohleduplnost k životnímu prost?edí díky ?ad? motor? spl?ujících požadavky emisní normy Euro 5 dále potvrzuje o?ekávání, které zna?ka Honda s novým modelem Accord spojuje.
Birthday jokes
· 1 year ago
With all the posts about “web2.0 and web3.0,” aren’t people just getting carried away with hearing their own voices?
alex
· 1 year ago
great info
George Lindemann
· 1 year ago
I think Web 3.0: People build applications that other people can interact with, companies build platforms that let people publish services by leveraging the associations between people or special content (e.g. FaceBook, Google Maps, My Yahoo!)
sohbet
· 1 year ago
good job i like it.
Jaquone Jefferson
· 1 year ago
A Whole New Level of Web 2.0 To 3.0 Social Technologies!
Limited Time Founder Partner Stock Option Program!
FREE TO JOIN & BIG PAY PLAN!
FREE TokSee to TokSee Phone Calls World Wide! Get a Free VoIP USB Travel Phone!
* PRIVATE LABEL COMMUNITIES * EMAIL INVITE ENGINE * MASS RSS FEED SYNDICATION * SOCIAL BOOKMARK ENGINE * RECORD & UPLOAD VIDEO * MASS VIDEO BLAST ENGINE * 4 WAY VIDEO CONFERENCING * COLLABORATION TOOLS
LIMITED PRE LAUNCH PRE REGISTRATION Get Started Ahead of the Masses!
Image Host
· 1 year ago
Great article, can I post and reuse in my class....I will of course give full credit to you and your site!
Rapidshare
· 1 year ago
I completely agree with all that here is told
Jones
· 1 year ago
Very nice article.
Anirban
· 1 year ago
Took me some time to get to the bottom of the (big) article. I have read about Web 3.0 but this one really cleared my mind and kept me interested to read till the end. People still can't get enough of webworld.
leah
· 1 year ago
've been experimenting with various project management tools and have discovered an excellent site. It is a very user friendly, web-based application that is well worth taking the time to explore. Take a few minutes and look at Projjex.com. The tutorials are excellent & you don't need to be a Rocket Scientist to figure out how to use it. It even offers a free version so you can try it on for size.
Trends Depot
· 1 year ago
This is a well detailed article about web 3.0. What worries me about the personal search pages if developed, is privacy issues. I am against the idea of people writing about me with my knowledge
Trends Depot
· 1 year ago
This is a well detailed article about web 3.0. What worries me about the personal search pages, if developed, is privacy issues. I am against the idea of people writing about me with my knowledge
I wouldn't call it 3. Maybe something over 2 in best case. Anyway gonna take looong time.
remodeling
· 1 year ago
well... Great article, but runs ahead of time.
wilson
· 1 year ago
This is a very well written and informative web 3.0 article that I have ever read...
I personally loved the Natural Language Search feature, as I'm the person that more into the words thing...
maze
· 1 year ago
First, this article deserves respect for its length. You present a lot of interessting ideas.
Unfortunately that's all. I think you should have given us reasons for why you think the web will develop in this certain direction(s). At least it would have been usable to follow your train of thought. With this missing, there is not much left one can do with the article. I can say "yes" or "no" to each of your idea but I cannot discuss your arguments since you are not giving any. With the lack of arguments I'd rather say "no".
Streamer
· 1 year ago
Wau, this is longest article I ever read... Web 3.0 is the same internet with all features and effects on all mobiles, PDAs, PCs and internetTV
Web3.0 services will be only online and powerfull
incite
· 1 year ago
Hi The article about web 3.0 is awesome. Presented in such a nice manner. And also the article is too informative article. Thanks for the article.
Mr. Without Pay-Per-Click
· 1 year ago
This has gotta be the absolute longest blog posting that I have ever read in my life! It was interesting enough to keep my full attention, however. As disappointed as I was with "Web 2.0," I'm very exited to start seeing all these new developments for the next stages of evolution.
This has nothing to do with anything but I HATE TWITTER! (just wanted to put that out there lol)
Very interesting article, I believe the biggest change for Web 3.0 will be the way this information is accessed. Maybe through personalized search. This would record historic searches (something that is already done) and poresent results based on your previous choices...
science fiction seer
· 1 year ago
I see Web 3.0 as being a media portal, no longer will there be seperate devices for TV, Radio, Music, Internet and Mobiles. Web 3.0 devices will do everything...
Glitter Graphics
· 1 year ago
WEB 3.0, i am not sure what really that could be. It could be a web that do everything, it is even a search engine with numerous of information, could be Google plus Yahoo plus Msn plus Youtube plus Wikipedia and so on..
Frankly speaking, i am not sure whether such thing will actually exist.
Slot Machine Jackpots
· 1 year ago
Web 3.0 will be about INSTANT real-time communication via various protocols and media. Personlization is Web 2.5. Web 3.0 will will exploit the advances in computer and broadband technology.
Irish Gifts
· 1 year ago
Wow, that was some read... Really, really interesting tho so well worth it.
One point i'd like to make is about search engines collecting information about our preferences and then presenting info based on what we've done historically. When Amazon started doing this for me when I was first using them to buy books about film producing I thought it was great. Saved a lot of time searching because it usually ushered me to where I wanted to go in the first place. Then time went on, I became totally uninterested in film producing and the preferences thing became annoying.
I still get emails from Amazon telling me about some new book which I have no interest in, and I suspect that in the not too distant future I'll be getting emails about books about military history - which I'm looking for now.
Obviously it'd be great to just press delete and you could remove that bit of the softwares memory but I have a feeling we'd all be doing this rather a lot.
I wonder how this will be handled?
sbspalding
· 1 year ago
I think there will have to be a certain amount of information decay built in. A preference is only a "strong" preference within the context of time. If you bought a book back in 1999, that doesn't mean you are still interested in the subject in 2008.
There are questions as to how this would be handled practically, but I believe this is a direction we would have to head in.
Joey1058
· 8 months ago
What I find interesting is the Ads bit. I think advertising will be so focused on personalities that an individual blogger will either put out a request for being sponsored, or an agency will approach the blogger and offer sponsorship. At that point, the agency simply obtains permission to data-mine the bloggers purchases at a variety of companies. The next time the blogger posts online, the ads read something like " Hey, John Doe uses brand X laundry soap. You are low on brand Y laundry soap. Why not switch to Doe's brand?!" Because those same search agents will have access to your purchases at those companies if you allow them to. Everything is shared.
ecommerce developme
· 6 months ago
I think here is so many articles to define web 3.0. You read this book to define........ it's really interesting...
Thanks
ecommerce developme
· 6 months ago
Here is so many tips to define Web 3.0. I think that social networking and all that Web 3.0....Thanks
ecommerce developme
· 6 months ago
Here is so many interesting tips that u can define Web 3.0................It's really nice. Thanks
Mike @ Sell Your Mobile
· 2 months ago
Hello! Thank you so much for offering your personal insight into this. I have read as much as I can on the subject being averse in Web 2.0. Truly need to come back and digest this over time.
Projektowanie Stron
· 2 months ago
great info, thanks a lot.
Projektowanie Stron
· 2 months ago
Here is so many tips to define Web 3.0. I think that social networking and all that Web 3.0....Thanks
All Comments
Everything that you are talking about is what was envisioned back in 2000. Back then, I did high end research work for American Express and it was avidly doing research into B2B and knowledge management portals.
Back then the focus was on the corporation, and now it is on the individual user, who, there is enough brought together, equal more weight than any corp can. The only thing that has slowed down the creation of what you are describing is the adoption of technology by the end user and the speed/availability of internet connections around the world.
This isn't 'new', it's just the progression that was originally expected close to ten years ago.
ICQ was the original MySpace, Facebook, whatever - it hasn't really changed that much.
Re. "If Web 3.0 is the Semantic Web, where computer agents read content like human beings do — then RSS will be its eyes (or at least its corrective lenses)."
While RSS (and Atom) do offer some useful capabilities through their delivery mechanisms (and in Atom's case through the Atom Publishing Protocol), they only really offer very limited metadata capabilities to human-readable content. It's the tip of the tip of the iceberg. The Semantic Web is about data in general (not just metadata), expressed on the Web through the Resource Description Framework. The extension of the current Web of Documents to a more general Web of Data will make a huge difference to the way everyone uses the Web.
I strongly recommend this short video from Tim Berners-Lee: The Semantic Web of Data, and there's a good selection of Semantic Web-related podcasts here. Work in progress regularly crops up on Planet RDF.
I can't wait to see what comes out of all this and I hope we can all keep up with how fast things are moving.
p.s. while you were hitting publish web 4.1 actually started, welcome to the psyche-network.
Thank to the author for some really good info there
People like simplicity... things get more simple... it will continue that way.
@WiiFit Indeed, the web is going from what I consider a "hunter gatherer" mentality (Web 1.0) to a more community oriented mode (Web 3.0). The labels we use are less consequential than the concepts themselves.
Thanks for the comments!
If people insist on treating the Web as something that can be versioned (which is a faulty assumption in the first place, IMO), then at least create labels that *mean* *something.* Even if the something is stupid, at least give us a label that describes something in a way that provides some sort of value.
"The Semantic Web"
"The Community Web"
"The Interactive Web"
"The Grid"
"The Collaborative Web"
"The Elephantine Lipitrude Web"
"The p0rn and pirated music Web"
or something...
Since the "Internets" is run by a techie crowd, we prefer monikers like "Web 3.0" for better or for worse (probably for worse).
I think The Semantic Web would be the best of show as far as real labels for "the new web" are concerned. Though, "The p0rn and pirated music Web" comes in a close second.
I am really impresed by the depth of information that you have gone into about WEb 3.0 platform (seems we are not far off are we!). I particularly like your ideas on the people searches and locating, rather than just networking. Seems Mcluhn was right when he observed that we are living in a 'global village' and at closer quarters than we have been ever before.
It will be more than interesting to see how this develops in the course of Web 2.0 (lets face it the rest of the world has only just caught up with this!)
look forward to reading more...
of course maybe we should be less concerned with trying to define such content and enjoy the webs synchronous, immersive, smooth flowing and addictive ways.
:P
Honestly, I think what you're describing is mostly Web 2.5 at best. We still haven't even seen the full ramifications of web 2.0 yet.
Oh, and I hate buzz words. We really don't need any more this "web [insert a number]" stuff.
congrats on the front page digg, steve!
I posted my thoughts on what I *hope* web 3.0 looks like here:
http://www.mappingtheweb.com/2007/06/08/web-30-...
Let me know what you think.
Cheers,
Aidan
www.MappingTheWeb.com
www.ReadWriteWeb.com
As for microformats, I think that is an article in and of itself. I will try to tackle that sometime in the future. I completely agree that they will play a pivotal role. Thanks for the comment!
@andrew Thanks mate :)
@Aidan I'm so glad that you liked it, I'll be sure to check out the article. It's really fun to speculate on this sort of thing, I hear Sci-Fri writers get paid quite a bit for similar efforts.
Such a long time that I don't feel like reading it.
Do me a favor. Go find a real job instead of writing this kind of uber-nonsense.
"How to draw attention to oneself; and possibly be considered a Web 3.0 pioneer before the ballgame even begins"
Nice article, but really, enough of this Web X.0 crap!
What I would like to point out is that while Web 3.0 or whatever you call it is a buzz word it seems to have obfuscated the entire point of the article. The point, for those who have taken the time to read the entire article, was to show that web technologies that currently exist foreshadow the web as it will be.
I wanted to highlight these technologies, show how they can be extended and dump them into a cluster which I called -- for the sake of argument -- Web 3.0. For those who care, find and replace all instances of Web 3.0 with "The Semantic Web".
I want to thank everyone who has given constructive criticism and all those people who have praised the article. Great discussion and I hope it continues.
None of this speaks to more interesting ways to get the machines to be smarter, it just gives us more ways to organize what little they can actually do.
Machine intelligence is really pretty crude.
The real Web x.x+ involves the holodeck and the replicator -- those are the quantum leaps of the future.
As for a real replicator..well, take a look.
You really did a good job putting this together, and making the front page of Digg....bravo. I'm sure you realize by now that that's a double edged sword from some of the *ahem* comments.
This is a fantastic piece, no matter which way you slice it. Using a common phrase like Web X.Y shouldn't detract from the fact that you did a darn good job of analyzing web technologies.
Great work Steve, keep it up!
Dugg and Stumbled
@adam I'll take the parts of that I understood as a compliment :)
Thanks guys!
If Web 2.0 is viewed simply as a set of features then the only thing novel about social networks is that they use those "new features" that we associate with them. When's the last time any of us called AJAX by what it really is? You know, the cross-platform and simply better alternative to the iframe element. I still think to this day it's hillarious that Microsoft came up with XmlHttpRequest.
Do we really want our users in charge of our product development? In charge of our content? It's not very helpful when they're as blinded by the hype as we are. The major social networks might be what everybody is focused on right now, but as over-glorified clubs / advertisement delivery vehicles they sure do a poor job of getting people to click on banner ads. It feels like we're all just spinning our wheels on this one and not really getting anywhere.h
Re: the never ending argument over terms. I liked it when we used to call it The Semantic Web. Today's bastardized slang doesn't carry the same simple and profound message of a better webernets. Today's term screams "Hey I've got a new website with lime green rounded buttons and large fonts that have this full background color highlight when you hover over there. Yeah we're kinda like another website called ... " you get the picture.
I know my post is a little OT ... just saying what comes to mind right now. Keep on dreaming, it's what drives us all further.
Some interesting points are made here but the web isn't a car or a software application; a product put out by a company. Unlike a product, you can't version it with a set of new features. Things on the web evolve naturally and often unexpectedly. To say, "this is what it's likely going to be like" seems a futile exercise.
This might be true, but as many commentators have pointed out the 3.0 moniker is sort of a "label". I agree that many of these technologies currently exist, in fact, I am sure all of them do -- that is why I choose them. However, I am of the opinion that Web 2.0 is crawling towards a natural conclusion even now. Technology follows an exponential scale, and even though Web 1.0 lasted for "quite some time" Web 2.0 might not require a decade to happen.
Though, it is entirely possible that this is Web 2.1. Only time will tell.
@steve Great name by the way :) The cultural implications of the new web is something I will try to explore soon.
@Luke I'll definitely get around to giving your question the thought it deserves. Not right this second though, thanks so much for commenting.
Thanks everyone, this has been a truly enlightening discussion so far.
(People, if you're stuck on the name, copy-and-paste this article into Word, and replace "Web 3.0" with whatever term you would use to describe the "Next Stage of the Web." Then, print it out and read it.)
Steve, this is fascinating and insightful. You're not attempting to look 10 years down the road -- as some seem to expect -- but 2-5 years. You've looked back on the early days of the web to see how data and features have consolidated, integrated, and evolved, and then extrapolated these trends to speculate on what will come next. My sense is that you're probably 80-90% correct.
In any case, it's a great read. Appreciation for the work you've put in.
Thank you so much for reading.
Regardless, I'm with you “Jerry Maguireâ€, its good to take a look around the web landscape at some point or another in ones lifetime, and note the observation and reflect on the future and past.
as for me....Just make it easy, and make it work.
The world wide web, or what we could call in this line Web 1.0, is 18 years old. Web 2.0 is 4 years old and is still a mystery to at least 99% of the planet I would say. How on earth did we get to Web 3.0 so soon?
I think Web 2.0 did mark an important distinction, the critical aspect of which to me has always been the Read/Write Web. I see no such critical distinction in Web 3.0, just lots of ideas, the vast majority of which are part of Web 2.0 anyway - things like widgets and interoperability are an enormous part of what I do right now, and I'm not even sure they fall under the concept of Web 2.0 let alone Web 3.0.
I wasn't saying that Web 3.0 is here, or even close to here. What I was speculating on (and this is and was always meant to be speculation) was what Web 3.0 will look like whenever it does arrive. Unless I choose to draw ghosts from the air, the only way that I could do this is by using current technological offerings as a jump off point.
A few misconceptions that people seem to have is that I am saying *This is Web 3.0* and ignoring other obviously related technologies (like Microformats). I am not, they just did not make it into the article because there is a near infinite number of things that could be covered and despite the exhaustive nature of this post, there just wasn't enough space.
We aren't done with Web 2.0 quite yet, but it is interesting to speculate on where the web is heading. That was my primary goal, and at that I have been successful.
Thanks for taking the time to read and comment!
For an example of automatic personalisation of web 2.0 in action on a mobile, I'd suggest that you try the just published Leiki News Reader available for free from www.leiki.com -> Get Leiki Software -> Leiki News Reader
It has award-winning usability and advanced automatic personalisation which learns the user’s interests from clicks on articles and selects personally relevant news.
A single version of the app work on almost all Java-enabled phones. Currently the service has several hundred RSS feeds with more being added.
There's something a little bleak and underwhelming about a social network predicated on the belief that the most that anyone can aspire to is becoming the hamster who can spin a wheel (i.e. lifestream) the fastest, consume and comment on the most media, and recontextualise themselves as a content-generating web meta-application.
My prediction is that the backlash will come from a new generation of users who realise that most of this is just shrill and irrelevant digital noise, and will decide gardening is more fulfilling.
Essential memes: compassion not competition; solar photons are always free and make you feel good too; you can't eat sizzle no matter how many mobile content delivery platforms link to it.
See my point it took years and years to evolve to Web 2.0 status what makes people think that all of a sudden just because everyone starts adapting a trend that it can be coined as Web 3.0 already?
Web 2.0 has only just started basically, it hasn't been around that long at all, who are we to define the next evolutionary stage of the internet so soon?
I do commend you though for writing such an in-depth article and presenting it beautifully, it was an interesting read nonetheless. It was nothing new that other Web 3.0 articles haven't already said, but it was a fantastic write up still.
- Dwayne Charrington.
http://www.dwaynecharrington.com
Limited Time Founder Partner Stock Option Program!
FREE TO JOIN & BIG PAY PLAN!
FREE TokSee to TokSee
Phone Calls World Wide!
Get a Free VoIP
USB Travel Phone!
* PRIVATE LABEL COMMUNITIES
* EMAIL INVITE ENGINE
* MASS RSS FEED SYNDICATION
* SOCIAL BOOKMARK ENGINE
* RECORD & UPLOAD VIDEO
* MASS VIDEO BLAST ENGINE
* 4 WAY VIDEO CONFERENCING
* COLLABORATION TOOLS
LIMITED PRE LAUNCH PRE REGISTRATION
Get Started Ahead of the Masses!
Anyway gonna take looong time.
Great article, but runs ahead of time.
I personally loved the Natural Language Search feature, as I'm the person that more into the words thing...
Unfortunately that's all. I think you should have given us reasons for why you think the web will develop in this certain direction(s). At least it would have been usable to follow your train of thought. With this missing, there is not much left one can do with the article. I can say "yes" or "no" to each of your idea but I cannot discuss your arguments since you are not giving any. With the lack of arguments I'd rather say "no".
Web 3.0 is the same internet with all features and effects on all mobiles, PDAs, PCs and internetTV
Web3.0 services will be only online and powerfull
This has nothing to do with anything but I HATE TWITTER! (just wanted to put that out there lol)
DJ
Monetize Your Site Without Pay-Per-Click
Frankly speaking, i am not sure whether such thing will actually exist.
Personlization is Web 2.5.
Web 3.0 will will exploit the advances in computer and broadband technology.
One point i'd like to make is about search engines collecting information about our preferences and then presenting info based on what we've done historically. When Amazon started doing this for me when I was first using them to buy books about film producing I thought it was great. Saved a lot of time searching because it usually ushered me to where I wanted to go in the first place. Then time went on, I became totally uninterested in film producing and the preferences thing became annoying.
I still get emails from Amazon telling me about some new book which I have no interest in, and I suspect that in the not too distant future I'll be getting emails about books about military history - which I'm looking for now.
Obviously it'd be great to just press delete and you could remove that bit of the softwares memory but I have a feeling we'd all be doing this rather a lot.
I wonder how this will be handled?
There are questions as to how this would be handled practically, but I believe this is a direction we would have to head in.
Thanks