3 ms·

Interview About Web 2.0

22 points by babul 18y ago

brandonkm 18y ago
Very insightful interview, Paul Graham has really thought out what went wrong during the last bubble and has drawn some good lessons from that period. I agree 100% with the "web 3.0" part, classifying the movement of the web as a version number is really playing down the advancements of the current web environment. Then again, as the web matures people get excited about the new offerings and subsequently buzzwords follow. Its good to see people that see past the hype and are making viable things that people actually want.
jfornear 18y ago
I also agree that "web 3.0" has already lost it's credibility and is reserved for random bloggers' stupid predictions about the future of the web.
- cawel 18y ago
  Nova Spivack is a serious counter-example to your claim: http://novaspivack.typepad.com/nova_spivacks_weblog/web_30/index.html http://novaspivack.typepad.com/nova_spivacks_weblog/web_30/i... Themes like 'semantic web' or 'recommendation engines' are still very pertinent.
  - jfornear 18y ago
    This is a pretty pointless debate, but Nova's blog actually supports PG's outlook that the web is gradually evolving. Nova acknowledges that Google and Powerset are pretty semantic already. Recommendation 'engines' have also been evolving slowly for a long time. Although Nova might indeed have interesting things to say about the future of the web, I was addressing the majority of bloggers, who merely label things they don't understand as 'web 3.0', in my original comment. Google results for 'PhotoSynth web 3.0': "Providing a glimpse of what we might expect to see from Web 3.0" "I am sure that after the launch of Photosynth, we will have a new web all the way and may be we'll call it Web 3.0." "Web 3.0 Explainded" "Related Tags: facebook web digg social networks web 3.0 technology" "This is incredible. Amazing. The conglomeration of social ... This is web 3.0, the semantic web in the making."

3 ms·

Interview About Web 2.0

22 points by babul 18y ago

brandonkm 18y ago
Very insightful interview, Paul Graham has really thought out what went wrong during the last bubble and has drawn some good lessons from that period. I agree 100% with the "web 3.0" part, classifying the movement of the web as a version number is really playing down the advancements of the current web environment. Then again, as the web matures people get excited about the new offerings and subsequently buzzwords follow. Its good to see people that see past the hype and are making viable things that people actually want.
jfornear 18y ago
I also agree that "web 3.0" has already lost it's credibility and is reserved for random bloggers' stupid predictions about the future of the web.
- cawel 18y ago
  Nova Spivack is a serious counter-example to your claim: http://novaspivack.typepad.com/nova_spivacks_weblog/web_30/index.html http://novaspivack.typepad.com/nova_spivacks_weblog/web_30/i... Themes like 'semantic web' or 'recommendation engines' are still very pertinent.
  - jfornear 18y ago
    This is a pretty pointless debate, but Nova's blog actually supports PG's outlook that the web is gradually evolving. Nova acknowledges that Google and Powerset are pretty semantic already. Recommendation 'engines' have also been evolving slowly for a long time. Although Nova might indeed have interesting things to say about the future of the web, I was addressing the majority of bloggers, who merely label things they don't understand as 'web 3.0', in my original comment. Google results for 'PhotoSynth web 3.0': "Providing a glimpse of what we might expect to see from Web 3.0" "I am sure that after the launch of Photosynth, we will have a new web all the way and may be we'll call it Web 3.0." "Web 3.0 Explainded" "Related Tags: facebook web digg social networks web 3.0 technology" "This is incredible. Amazing. The conglomeration of social ... This is web 3.0, the semantic web in the making."