Slashdot Mirror
Can the Web Survive v3.0
robotsrule writes "The battle lines between skeptic and evangelist are already drawn. Either way, Web 3.0 will either be the new face of the Web that launched a thousand empty business plans, or the tipping point into a vastly more exciting phase of the Web. This Web 3.0 article asserts that the marraige of artificial intelligence to the infrastructure of Web 3.0 will dramatically accelerate our capacity for distributed problem solving. However, it also issues dire warnings on the potential hyper-euphoria that will accompany it."
Why do we need Web 3.0 now? We barely need Web 2.0!
Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
Well, Web 2.0 Journal is already reporting that it's been "a couple of crazy days in the Blogosphere," but clearly that will be just a ripple compared to the tsunami that this article is certain to unleash. In the month that the Web turned sweet sixteen it is almost obscene to think that anyone should be deluded into thinking that a phenomenon this young could possibly already be moving into its third era. From childhood to le troisième âge, with no adolescence or even middle age. Please, let's bury "Web 3.0...now!
Will the Web 3.0 be able to leverage Ajax technologies and XML, XSLT, and XAML, technologies to leverage a synergy between forward-thinking strategies and ISO-9000 quality?
---- "XML is like violence. If it doesn't fix the problem, you aren't using enough."
What is the release date of web 3.0?
Will it work with Vista?
Can it play Doom?
If we ever want a good web, the current mentality must be disposed of..
The web today is built on transferring documents and everything else is a hack on that...we need something more unified, easier to code...something that will put the client and server side together in an intuitive way, not the AJAX crap flying around ATM...
Infinite time means everything that can happen, will. You being you is absolutely incidental. You do not exist.
Someone wake me when the last person to use the phrase "Blogosphere" has been killed.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
We don't even have Web 1.0 (tm?) nailed yet, simple stuff like accessible XML styled with CSS. IMHO, that was where the development reached 1.0 and AFAIK MSIE still doesn't fully implement the 10 year old CSS level 1 spec. Web 3.0, WTF!?
I just dont get this ! its like someone built and people used web 2.0, and there is now talk of web 3.0
I dont see anyone around much web 2.0 ? i myself scarcely chance on sites that use this so-called web 2.0 stuff, let the clients who us ask for such 'web 2.0'ish developments are rapidly declining too.
what i am starting to think is these web 2.0, 3.0 shit are just buzzwords invented to sell more books, courses, certificates and such to the interested community.
Read radical news here
Web 3.0? Are these people crazy? I mean, Web 2.1 is still in beta testing, BLINK and MARQUEE were only just moved from the trunk to the branch, and these folks expect the Internet to release a 3.0 line already?
You've got to be kidding me...
I'm amazed how people make a living coming up with this nonsense.
How long exactly was the "Web 2.0" supposed to last?
As long as they keep selling it doesn't matter what they say.
Will welcome our new flying car driving WEB 3.0 overlords. ;)
Why is it that everytime somebody wants to "forecast" the future of a specific information-related idea just throws out how Artificial Intelligence will make [insert-magic-here] possible??
Who the fuck came up with Web 2.0? I've never heard any mention of it except for articles off Slashdot. I refuse to acknowledge Web 2.0, or versioning the World Wide Web in general. As far as I can say, Web 2.0 (and now 3.0) is a way for struggling tech writers to have something to write about. The web's not the sort of thing you can assign a version number to. It evolves, but not in such a precise fashion. Tech writers: find a new topic that is meaningful. Here's a free one, encryption. Go!
Mozilla will propose new standards for CSS4.0 which will be an XML Schema and will have sticky floating flash avertisements that intercept your right mouse button and Javascript 3.0 which will look like python.
Microsoft IE will silently implement the standard because they know that by doing that they achive adoption and besides IE, other browsers will be left behind. Thus, the only existing two browsers will have floating flash ads that intercept your right button and run binary blobs from youtube.
Few major sites with many visitors, likw msn.com and youtube, will start using these features right away. Thus users will be forced to keep a Firefox or IE handy.
Google will give $10M to buy a small company by two israeli students who are doing a word processor in AJAX3. Developers will start using AJAX3 in hope to be bought by google.
Adobe will be rich by selling botnet services by the flash plugins to investors. Mozilla will be rich because google will give it $700M for every accidential adclick by the right mouse button. Microsoft will be bought by adobe. Google will buy Apple. Gabmle and Proctor will buy Levono.
I do not know what web 3.0 will be built with, but I know that web 4.0 will be built with sticks and stones.
Yeah, as soon as nudity is acceptable corporate work attire.
Is everyone playing with their wii instaed of posting on slashdot?
Monstar L
"hyper-euphoria" == "investor ignorance"
... and were emptied.
Every time something big comes along a bunch of idiots with money say "I have a great idea! Let's give a bunch of buzzword-laden high-school dropouts billions of dollars of our hard-earned money in the faint hope they have the slightest idea what they're talking about!". This invariably attracts millions of additional idiots, who cry "Brilliant!" in unison, and proceed to hand over all of their disposable income. In rare cases that works, somewhat (see: Apple Computer) but in most it simply results in vast funds disappearing like smoke up a chimney.
Of course, the aforementioned idiots are the first to point fingers and start shouting "fraud" and saying things like "how could anyone have known?" when the whole scam comes tumbling down and they're in debt up to their iBalls. Or maybe it wasn't a scam, but just a really stupid idea that didn't have a snowball's chance in Hell of ever earning a profit. Yes, I know, sometimes stupid-sounding ideas do pan out (see: Fed Ex) but it's not common.
One may call this phenomenon a "tech bubble" if that eases the pain, but it's still another euphemism. Ultimately it is greed and stupidity at work, in roughly equal proportions, tempered by a complete lack of judgment. One aspect of the human mass-psyche that desperately needs work is this: just because a bunch of other people are doing something stupid is no reason to jump in yourself. It's still stupid.
I prefer to think of it as if millions of checking accounts suddenly cried out in pain
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
You suckers still use that old Web 3.0 stuff? Boy, I feel pity for you! We moved to Web 5.5 Enterprise edition yesterday and couldn't be happier! And when you manage to move to Web 5.5, guess what we are going to do? Move to Web 6.0 instantly. HA! Beat that!
From what I have been able to gather, Web 3.0 is some sort of additional layer on top of the web which utilizes artificial intelligence. According to the article, "Web 3.0 will be characterized and fueled by the successful marraige of artificial intelligence and the web....It will do so by shunting out the parts of the problem that require a human being to human beings with the help of the web"
:-) )
/.'s, what do we geeks think web 3.0 should be? Personally, I see it as the triumph of open source/free/libre software and operating systems over the corporate behemoths. A place where ordinary folks, like auto mechanics and grandmothers, can write or find their own custom software with no technical no-how or cost. This is my vision of web 3.0 .
I hope that Web 3.0 will have a built-in spell checking function before a post is made to a website. (Perhaps the writer could have used Firefox 2.0
The writer seems to be envisioning some sort of http://www.qunu.com/ system where users ask live humans for help over jabber chat? I am not so sure a system like this would work so well...I've found it to excel in some areas and lack in others...but it is hardly the stuff of Web 3.0.
So,
money investing in Web 2 yet! At least wait until my personal bankruptcy is finalized. Sheesh
"Web 2.0" == Bubble 2.0
It's a way for people to score some easy money off investors that have short memories when it comes to hype about the internet.
Web 3.0? That's a word that people started using because they wanted be the first using it, even though it means nothing. At least there is some description of "Web 2.0", albeit vague and rather silly. Web 3.0 can't even say that much.
This Web 3.0 article asserts that the marraige of artificial intelligence to the infrastructure of Web 3.0 will dramatically accelerate our capacity for distributed problem solving.
Plus it will allow Major Kusanagi to join with the Puppet Master and kick some terrorist ass!
This is left as an exercise for the reader.
This was called "the Semantic Web". Why must we invent a new buzzword when we have a perfectly good old one?
I wonder if they're still using OWL. A few hours of that is enough to turn an evangelist into a skeptic.
LETS connect AI to the internet! No harm can come of it! /sarcasm
While we're at it, lets build fully automated robot factories, and connect THEM to the internet too! With an unlimited and unstoppable power source! YES!
Internet DRM?
"Enjoy what you're doing! If it becomes drudgery, you're doing it wrong!" - Jim Butterfield
but nonetheless, a profitable failure. Buzz about things like this are much like the continual buzz leveraged by the political parties to generate donations. Nothing new there.
/. and beyond. They are seeing new and upcoming websites like YouTube and Digg. There's a lot going on right now. Some marketeers decided to memetize the process and deem it an idiotic "2.0"
The difference here is mainly in the public's perception about what the internet is and isn't, and what the web is and isn't. In a lot of ways this stems from something like a meme, but not exactly. I guess a close characterization is an "ambience meme." It is to say, the feel of a time and place. The sixties, the great depression, world war II: these times and places held a special energy in them for those who lived through them and still carry a particular flavor for those of us who hear and read about their history.
So right now the web has a certain shift in ambience that is partly driven by the change in the major players on the web, and also how they do business. It could be claimed that this started with Google's IPO, or earlier, or later. Users are seeing redesigns on everything from Yahoo! to
Really, though, there's not as much going on right now as there seems to be. In a lot of ways the state of things stems from the fact that for awhile there was kind of a sticking point. There wasn't all of this major, visible progress, and then suddenly there was. But that is not '2.0-worthy' in itself. The question is whether there will be a _continual_ surge of changing and newness now, or if it was just a periodic shift. The latter is more likely, but if the former were to be the case it would seem worthy of being called a second version.
Now, what could possibly set a web 3.0 apart? The end of the web. Just like there are major misconceptions due to the ambient meme that has been labeled "web 2.0" there is a very pesky problem with the internet of ours: the dominance of the web; the fact is, for most people the web is the internet. Why is that a problem? Mainly because it seems as though we have an infrastructure capable of more diverse interactions and we limit it to a large extent. And I think that's where web 3.0 will be. There will be the web, but there will be new entities and institutions that will be separate and still connected with the web.
Slowly e-mail has been joining the web (webmail), and so has usenet (google groups). Over time it's come to the point where you can access the majority of the non-web internet via the web. In the future it seems highly likely there will be other interfaces developed to allow you to access equal volumes in different contexts.
-HobophobE
Nothing laughs forever.
I went to a talk by the V.P. of Yahoo search R&D last Thursday, who had something to say about this. The current new thing in search is recognizing certain classes of common queries and understanding them at a deeper level than word matching. The main examples were performers, for which the search engine offers ways to view, listen, and buy their works, and cities, which brings up map and location related information. Sports related queries bring up current sports scores. There are a few tens of special cases like this in Yahoo now. That's about the level at which "semantics" are currently understood. Yahoo would like to make this more general.
There's much interest in "search personalization", but other than for ads, nobody really has a good idea on how to make that work without making it too annoying. There's search history use, where the recent history of your searches influences the results of your next search. But that has the downside that searches become nonrepeatable; the same search done twice can produce different results, depending on what happened in the interim.
Ever-smarter ad targeting, though, is coming. The user's history can be used profitably for selecting ads, and that's the most likely near-term application.
So that's the Yahoo perspective on "Web 3.0", and no, the Yahoo speaker didn't use the term.
It's one way to sell dumb fucks the same thing twice. Didn't you know that?
Look what you do is make trivial changes, break an existing API slightly, call the new version of whatever 2.0 and then sell it to the same muppets who bought 1.0. You double your revenue.
Deleted
obsolete, I expect Web 4.0 will be announced soon, or is it Web 2007 ?
Just starting to think that?
Shit. I first heard the term "Web 2.0" back in 1997. And it was used then as marketing hype. Of course then the terms being hyped were VRML, frames, Shockwave, and push.
Isn't computer science supposed to teach us to distill our thinking down to clear, unambiguous statements that can be executed by profoundly dumb computers?
anything dot-oh does not compute
take some technology that most people barely understand in the first place, and condense it down to Something x.0? Plus which, there isn't even consensus on what Something x.0 is.
Web 3.0 is maybe the semantic web. No, it's artificial intelligence. No, it's a web of human intelligence, performing mechanical turk tasks. No, it's (insert definition of choice here).
Language should make things CLEARER, not obscure things even more.
All of this point-oh stuff is Bullsh-t 1.0
I blogged about the New York Times' unfortunate contribution to this confusion: just say no to Web 3.0
I want ubiquitous wireless web wired to my brain, so that I can upload my consciousness and be WAN with the universe.
Web 2.0 barely exists. It's a nebulous term given to some vague graphic stylings and a more social/interactive nature.
Why are we assigning version numbers to things that don't even have a strict definition?
'web 1.0 - the basic 'web. You click on a link and you read the page.
/.)
... ? What's next? Almost everyone is online socially and professionally. They can do just about everything online that they do in real life. Aside from the direct neural interfaces and "consensual reality", what is left? And who is left off-line who would need to get online to do it?
'web 1.5 - the basic 'web + databases. You can post your comments to someone else's web site. (yay
'web 2.0 - online sales. Amazon.com, eBay.com, PayPal.com, etc. The drive was to get out of the "brick and mortar" business model and get online.
'web 2.5 - because personal selling such as eBay could be considered a step above corporate selling such as Amazon.
'web 3.0 - LiveJournal, MySpace, etc. The drive to get your diary online. Pages for everyone, without the need to maintain your own website. The 'web is opened up to the angst-ridden ravings of hundreds of thousands of teenagers (and people who are still, emotionally, teenagers).
'web 4.0 -
I don't think the applications the author is talking about are really valid. They're much more easily addressed by simply chatting with the people you'd already talk to, and you're probably already chatting with them online anyway.
The dot com bubble was fulled by an influx of investment money that was generated by the Trillion dollar bet first half payoff.k market.html
see http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/transcripts/2704stoc
It was a case of easy and fact come, easy and fast go.
Losers of that gamble also made the news. Worldcom, Enron and the likes.
Such an influx of finances into empty product/service ideas will NOT happen again.
Artificial Intelligence at best is what each word is defined in the dictionary, then put together. Simply put, NOT REAL, an imitation!
And that is exactly what artificial Intelligence is, an imitation we create, a part here, a part there. And of course it can be said that its an image of ourselves as we are the programmers, and the machine is in essence made out of what is in essence stone material of various types (not biological material.)
The deception is in the hiding of the fact that its such an imitation of ourselves, artificial. The deception that its something more then we are. And it is this where the danger comes in. But it is like the building of the tower of babel, it won't work, it will fall.
The reason is simple, we have yet to recognize correctly and apply such recognition on a wide scale what this tool we call a computer really is.
It is an abstraction machine upon which we apply abstraction physics.
With the correct understanding we don't face such danger of misunderstanding or deceptions that the machine is more then we are. As such there won't be any hype or unjustified claims.
http://threeseas.net/abstraction_physics.html
Artificial intelligence is the by product of automating enought that the sum generated the appearance of human character in the reflection of its program processing.
We are really much simpler than what most people want to believe. Kinda like the Human genome being found to not be any where near what level of complexity we thought or wanted to think we were.
That is an obnoxious popup. Had to turn off blocking to see it in action, but that is not nice
So, can we mod Taco -1 Troll?
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
Seeing how the development (and especially deployment) of Web 2.0 is getting along, it can probably play not only Doom, but Duke Nukem Forever.
we barely knew thee....
The best feature I'd seen like that was about 6 months ago when next to each result in a Google search there was an "exclude results from this site" link. It was great for blocking out for-pay sites like Experts Exchange. Unfortunately, it went away and I have no idea how to make it show up again.
Slashdot needs a "-1, Wrong" moderation option.
The Urban Hippie
Nooo ... it's when the law is finally passed forcing us to monitor ourselves to see if we're terrorists.
No sig today...
Web 2.0 is considered to have begun with the introduction of XMLHttpRequest and Dynamic HTML. Their introduction in IE 5 was a discrete event.
...makes me want to puke-point-oh
A wise man once said nothing and simply listened.
The marriage of artificial intelligence to the infrastructure of Web 3.0 will become self aware at 2:14 a.m. August 29th, 2007.
stop the keyword hype!
won't someone think of the children?!
They will never stop until somebody makes the
Regardless of what form the Web takes in its 2.0, 3.0, or 4.0 variations, if the U.S. doesn't get off its ass and stop coddling the telecos and cable companies, we won't be seeing any of it. Our series of connected pipes are *slow*. The U.S. is ranked 20th in the world in broadband penetration, and the FCC definition of broadband is 200kbps or better. So when we talk about a thriving, competitive market for broadband, we're talking about an average download speed of 1-1.5 Mb. In Europe and Asia, broadband means an average download speed of 3 Mbps at the very least. Sweden has 8-9 Mbps down, and South Korea and Japan have easily available, cheap 20 Mbps down.
We've become far too smug about Internet leadership, so we shouldn't be surprised when it is South Korean and Japanese companies that push the next round of Internet applications. Google, Yahoo!, Apple, and Microsoft should be really worried about this, because the telecommunications companies in the U.S. have far too much power, and if the Net Neutrality debates are any proof, they'd love to get more. "Innovating" and giving American customers the infrastructure for the 21st Century sounds good in their PR campaigns, but judging by their performance over the last ten years, the American public is getting screwed by the incumbent telecoms and the cable companies. Look at the profits the rapidly-merging American telecoms have seen over the last ten years, then look at the growth of broadband in the U.S. relative to other countries over the same period of time.
The New Digital Divide is coming fast. Maybe I can become a millionaire by organizing Geek Trips to South Korea, Japan, and Sweden: "Experience crazy new applications that provide full-motion, hiqh quality video! Work faster! See immersive 3d game environments that make your puny American games look like antiques! Download files in a flash!"
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
Europe doesn't have Wii. North America has roughly one million Wiis for 300 million people. So this leaves a lot of people who still have time to post on Slashdot.
in every serve!
It always happens! I *just* installed 2.8 last night! @#$!^#^!#$
At last, the secret to wealth without work has been found.
Yes, Virginia, there IS such a thing as a free lunch.
True, the Web was a bubble, but that was then, this is now. This is totally different. You see, there's been a paradigm shift. The old fogeys who just don't "get it" are going to be left in the dust, but you, you can be in on the ground floor. This bubble is going to expand forever.
Benjamin... pssst... just two words: "Web 3.0."
(And if that doesn't work, I have an incredible deal involving arbitraging international postal reply coupons).
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
What disappoints me here is that there's no "+5 Fucking Duh" mod for this post, but yeah I'm thinking exactly what you're thinking. And 90% of the geeks that hate marketing orgasms are thinking.
One day at the time Is all we do
ffs - has the use of buzzwords become so anemic that it's simply a matter figuring out which major revision is next?
I hereby proclaim that Buzzword 2.0 will rule Hype 3.0 of Blogosphere 4.0 of Web 5.0.
naah sig schmig
how cool will that be? Hunh? I dare you to come up with something even more techno-hip than that, because both you and I know it's impossible.
Will code a sig generator for food
Finally, someone thought up a way to make people stop using that stupid "Web 2.0" term.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
70545
<Clipsy> There's a review on slashdot of a book called "Creating Web Pages with Ajax," and I was thinking
<Clipsy> I'd like to make a book called "Creating Web2.0 Content for Dummies"
<Clipsy> and then when someone opens the book
<Clipsy> a boxing glove on a spring comes out and punches them in the face
.
Or as some prefer to call it... SKYNET!1!!
Web 3 is when the rants like this will only be read by machines and posted on slashdot by machines so that enough other machines will access it and bring the blog down. In other words: Web 3 is an indication that the singularity is near. And you can bet that that the singularity itself will be announced as Web 4 in the blogosphere!
Im still stuck with web 1.0
...can executive management at all the IT companys officially begin to use "Web 3.0" in every "pep talk" they give us now? Or do they have to wait until they are taught to use the phrase properly at the next Management training seminar? I just gots to know!
..please include this tag: http://snipurl.com/12lvp
... for Web95.
http://outcampaign.org/
Web 2.0 is a buzzword largely perpetrated by people who don't understand the technology involved. Arguing over a definition is fairly pointless.
I agree, XMLHttpRequest started the revolution. It allowed your javascript to get new information from a server without reloading the page, all other magic fell into place from there.
I would also lay some of the blame with Gmail and Paul Buchheit showing a lot of people what was possible.
you can always do a "-site:experts-exchange.com" in the search bar...
it's not as convenient... but it's still there
I will not give in to the terrorists. I will not become fearful.
Oh we have web 3 vision here in Nigeria. I can connect anyone who would like a preview of it if they can just help me re-adjust some of my brother's investment in the technology. All you have to do is send me your bank details and I will post a large sum of money for web 3 investment by you (as a slashdot user you are clearly a savvy individual who knows how to best invest this sort of funds). The only slight difficulty is getting the money out of our country. Please send me $1000 to help organise the bank transfers.
In hope of retiring early
I R using weboooon2 11.19.06, a dev build nitely. It iz the bestus! 3.0 is 4 luzerz
It's just a nice name to some features added in "regular" web.
Wikipedia is in web2.0 instead of what? Britanica ? WOW! that's a big change, a web which allows user to write in it (don't take me wrong, it's a big change, but not one that makes the web other version [2.0]).
also
Personal websites are now Blogs..... WOW!!! AmAZIng! certainly other version of the web.
DoubleClick had lost to Google Adsense ! I'm amazed, it's an other version for sure!.
And now, to summary it all up, nothing has changed dramatically that we need to call it web 2.0.
We'll need to call it WEB2.0 when the website read our minds or something,
We'll call it WEB3.0 when it will send us food when we think of it [it's a feature of WEB2.0 but it will be called 3.0].
Cause you know those advertisers, they will call their mom grandpa if it will sound right enough, just like they called some features in web (1.0) web 2.0
Wheres Web 2.1?
All i see is web 3 will incorprate artifical intellegence, so basically they will click the ads for you!
whoa, could life get any easier!
No shit sherlock!
Congratulations Slashdot... yet another low, this would have to be one the worst articles I've read off here. Is this a piss take or did you seriously think this crap warranted any attention what so ever?
Or maybe you just didn't even bother reading the article before posting it...
imagine a game where players compete to clothe a runway model that will be judged in a contest by other players. This game could very well be a job requisition submitted by a major fashion company that wants to get advanced market research on what clothes buyers will prefer
!!!! Just imagine.... I'm imagining how much of an idiot you would have to be to write this stuff, then going to an extra level to imagine how much of an idiot you would have to be to post it on a site like slashdot, and then going to the next level to be a slashdot reader.
You guys smoking crack or what?
That's hilarious. I need to know is that a "sanman2" original, or are you quoting someone else?
Ben Hocking
Need a professional organizer?
Reading the blurb, I just wondered: with techies being so convinced that Web 2.0 is just a load of empty buzzwords, and the general public being mostly ignorant of what goes on in the tech world, ... who's actually spreading the Web 2.0 buzz?
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
Any technology that uses in its description BOTH Artificial Intelligence AND a buzzword like Web 3.0 is suspect from the get go. I just remember taking AI classes in college and things like genetic algorithms, neural networks, and optimal brain damage. Those name sound so exotic and some of them actually do some cool things, but the names seemed mostly so exotic in order to secure funding. Maybe that was my warped perception, but if I were giving out grants, I would likely go for cooler sounding things like advances in genetic algorithms than to something like "a new way to use statistical regression in computers."
Ah well, fight on AI agents. There's nothing cooler than advances in AI, even if they don't make much of a difference ultimately.
So people, buzz all you want with web v3+, it's interesting to watch, to read, and to react to. Still, I have to tell you, I don't really care about web3, what I'm waiting for is well, in the context of web version hyping let's call it web10. The network infrastructure and service world where browser features will be a thing of the past to battle over, where easy interactivity will be a long accustomed to property not a buzzword feature, where data searching and handling will be totally transparent not dependent on competing search engines or appliances, where reliable (from every point of view) remote centers will host my data on a virtual machine with the desktop and applications of my choice capable of _every_ and _each_ task I now do on grounded workstations including watching and recording drm-less tv feeds, running distributed applications by giving them a some extra money/each extra virtual cpu/usage assigned to my remote desktop, automatic monthly data backup mailed to me monthly. Where the web and the network would be something you'd never need to care about (i.e. availability, speed). Yes, you understood that correctly, I don't want no browser and ajax based clunky web-application, those are the toys of this buzzed web2, things needed to be done but just tools for paving the way for real networked applications.
I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
Or should I wait for the next version?
"If your parents never had children, chances are you wonât either." -Dick Cavett
Wow,
how many tubes do you need for that?