Thoughts on Web 3.0 by Kenneth Udut
There's too much focus on the technology of "personal service" in the Web 3.0 models. It should be about connecting people and ideas, seamlessly.
Web 3.0 mistakes: Kenneth Udut May 11 2008.
The people working on Web 3.0 in all of its various forms are missing the point.
Current models of Web 3.0 involve lots of markup language to describe every little thing in every which way (bulking up the size of things quite a bit), sort of a "meta-meta keyword" situation. [describe the description for me, would you?]
Or a 3-D world on the computer. Okay, virtual reality. Been there, done that. Cool parlor trick, and great in movies.
Or the web will be this massively hypertexted situation where phrases are linked together and you can trace every quote back to its source. [point of origin and freely mixing up the works of others becomes key].
Or Web 3.0 will be a mashup of existing technologies, but only on a massive scale, involving databases of databases.
This is what I know so far.
But they've got it wrong.
It's about people.
Connecting people together along with the ideas of people (living (chat rooms, forums, myspace) or dead (wikipedia, half the websites out there).
That's what's missing from the web. Proper connections between people and ideas that don't know each other exist.
Mapping related ideas with related ideas is SUCH a massive thesaurus-style effort that it is akin to mapping every human brain and all of its synaptic connections that ever lived. i.e. - finding the KEY behind brain grammer - or how ideas are put together not just in verbally or writtenly or physically or musically --- but within the BRAIN ITSELF.
That is a worthy effort, but MASSIVE, and will take the specific specialized knowledge of thousands upon thousands of people contributing to it.
But beyond that, the whole POINT of the ideas is hooking up the CONVEYOR of the information with the CONVEYEE.
Now the conveyor of information may not be present at that moment. The conveyor may have setup a webpage and not interacting with those of similar minds. Or the conveyor is a historical person who has since died or whose ideas are being conveyed by other people (historians, news reporters, gossip and hearsay). This is CURRENT PEOPLE passing on ideas that came from OTHER PEOPLE.
Or perhaps the conveyor of ideas is ALIVE AND present AND LISTENING. Then you need methods to connect THOSE people up so that they can INTERACT.
The trouble with todays efforts in doing so are various social networking services of various kinds, or forums or chat rooms is that they are AWKWARD and require you to REGISTER, as if the OWNER of that website is saying, "WHO ARE YOU?" before you even get a chance to knock on the door. It is a SECURITY SYSTEM which puts a major impedance upon people with their ideas interacting with other people and their ideas.
The official designers of new protocols, the new ways of the projected Web 3.0 MISS THE POINT. They worry about how computers will interact with computers, or having computers anticipate that you need your toast burnt then scraped off, then buttered and eaten at a certain tempature. (ala Rosie the Robot). While some efforts are nice, like FOAF (Friend of a Friend), that is STILL yet more data collection, like an ongoing family tree that is done when all people on Earth are linked up with one another in a 6 degrees of separation kind of way. While that is cool, it STILL DOESN'T necessarily HELP PEOPLE INTERACT WITH THEIR IDEAS WITH OTHER PEOPLE AND THEIR IDEAS.
This is the missing component. IT's not about computers storing documents with 3D manipulation of parallel document processing and full attributions to every source you use. That's what you do when you write a term paper in school. It's not about tagging every single thing that every way and ever will be and is with more adjectives than a poorly written Detective Novel. That's whta you do if you want a computer to come to self-actualization ala Terminator 2 or AI.
Web 3.0 will be about PEOPLE WITH THEIR IDEAS connecting (either real time (well, slightly delayed time, like within a few days or hours or so), or dead time, like documentation, historical knowledge, news knowledge, pictures, videos)) with OTHER PEOPLE AND THEIR IDEAS.
There are no monkeys on the web as far as I know. Higher beings are not on the web. Just human beings.
Connect, globally.
Kenneth Udut on May 11, 2008 in Naples, FL USA on a laptop on the back porch in the middle of the woods just at the edge of the Everglades.
Discuss this, if you like. I'll be around.
The people working on Web 3.0 in all of its various forms are missing the point.
Current models of Web 3.0 involve lots of markup language to describe every little thing in every which way (bulking up the size of things quite a bit), sort of a "meta-meta keyword" situation. [describe the description for me, would you?]
Or a 3-D world on the computer. Okay, virtual reality. Been there, done that. Cool parlor trick, and great in movies.
Or the web will be this massively hypertexted situation where phrases are linked together and you can trace every quote back to its source. [point of origin and freely mixing up the works of others becomes key].
Or Web 3.0 will be a mashup of existing technologies, but only on a massive scale, involving databases of databases.
This is what I know so far.
But they've got it wrong.
It's about people.
Connecting people together along with the ideas of people (living (chat rooms, forums, myspace) or dead (wikipedia, half the websites out there).
That's what's missing from the web. Proper connections between people and ideas that don't know each other exist.
Mapping related ideas with related ideas is SUCH a massive thesaurus-style effort that it is akin to mapping every human brain and all of its synaptic connections that ever lived. i.e. - finding the KEY behind brain grammer - or how ideas are put together not just in verbally or writtenly or physically or musically --- but within the BRAIN ITSELF.
That is a worthy effort, but MASSIVE, and will take the specific specialized knowledge of thousands upon thousands of people contributing to it.
But beyond that, the whole POINT of the ideas is hooking up the CONVEYOR of the information with the CONVEYEE.
Now the conveyor of information may not be present at that moment. The conveyor may have setup a webpage and not interacting with those of similar minds. Or the conveyor is a historical person who has since died or whose ideas are being conveyed by other people (historians, news reporters, gossip and hearsay). This is CURRENT PEOPLE passing on ideas that came from OTHER PEOPLE.
Or perhaps the conveyor of ideas is ALIVE AND present AND LISTENING. Then you need methods to connect THOSE people up so that they can INTERACT.
The trouble with todays efforts in doing so are various social networking services of various kinds, or forums or chat rooms is that they are AWKWARD and require you to REGISTER, as if the OWNER of that website is saying, "WHO ARE YOU?" before you even get a chance to knock on the door. It is a SECURITY SYSTEM which puts a major impedance upon people with their ideas interacting with other people and their ideas.
The official designers of new protocols, the new ways of the projected Web 3.0 MISS THE POINT. They worry about how computers will interact with computers, or having computers anticipate that you need your toast burnt then scraped off, then buttered and eaten at a certain tempature. (ala Rosie the Robot). While some efforts are nice, like FOAF (Friend of a Friend), that is STILL yet more data collection, like an ongoing family tree that is done when all people on Earth are linked up with one another in a 6 degrees of separation kind of way. While that is cool, it STILL DOESN'T necessarily HELP PEOPLE INTERACT WITH THEIR IDEAS WITH OTHER PEOPLE AND THEIR IDEAS.
This is the missing component. IT's not about computers storing documents with 3D manipulation of parallel document processing and full attributions to every source you use. That's what you do when you write a term paper in school. It's not about tagging every single thing that every way and ever will be and is with more adjectives than a poorly written Detective Novel. That's whta you do if you want a computer to come to self-actualization ala Terminator 2 or AI.
Web 3.0 will be about PEOPLE WITH THEIR IDEAS connecting (either real time (well, slightly delayed time, like within a few days or hours or so), or dead time, like documentation, historical knowledge, news knowledge, pictures, videos)) with OTHER PEOPLE AND THEIR IDEAS.
There are no monkeys on the web as far as I know. Higher beings are not on the web. Just human beings.
Connect, globally.
Kenneth Udut on May 11, 2008 in Naples, FL USA on a laptop on the back porch in the middle of the woods just at the edge of the Everglades.
Discuss this, if you like. I'll be around.
Files
 | Kenneth Udut Foaf updated Oct 24 09 1.08 Mbytes, 4,163 downloads edited by Udut, Kenneth on Oct. 25 2009 · Zoom Updated FOAF meshup for Kenneth Udut (not 100% up to date, but it's better, and it validates rdf) |
1 rate Comments
Simplify3 on May 11 2008 edit · delete I sound like a crazy person. The ideas were developing in my brain AS I WAS WRITING. What I wanted to express would have taken up a 500 page book. Hopefully one of you out there will make sense of what I've say there and rewrites them in a friendly, easier to digest manner [whether you think I'm right or wrong]. The main people is that you have people. People have ideas. People with similar ideas like to congregate and generate even more ideas. [or products or whatever it is that people produce - but even a product starts off as an idea]. If read a book from an author long since passed, nevertheless, I AM STILL CONNECTING with that AUTHOR AND HIS/HER IDEAS and comparing that with MYSELF AND MY IDEAS, even though the author is no longer present or easily available.
Final thought for the moment that I heard somewhere: Every writer is a time traveler.
What does this means? This means that words convey ideas that COME ALIVE and truly are SPOKEN, BROUGHT INTO THE PRESENT MOMENT by the communication between the author from his/her book, and the PRESENT PERSON. Example: If I read a novel written by Mark Twain, I am connecting with Mark Twain. I'm being told a story that came out of his brain. He has traveled FORWARDS IN TIME to have a conversation with me or to tell me a story that came out of his head.
Thoughts?
1 comment · 
Add a review
Links
- Twine is close to the Web 3.0 I am thinking of - (6 clicks) I hope http://twine.com works out well. It's closer(although not "it") to what I am thinking of for Web 3.0.
Edited by Simplify3 on May 11 2008 - Thoughts on Web 3.0 by Kenneth Udut - There’s too much focus on the technology of “personal service” in the Web 3.0 models. (Web 3.0)
Edited by Simplify3 on May 11 2008
