[Air-l] how to pin down web 2.0

Kurt Luther luther at cc.gatech.edu
Sat Apr 21 16:37:11 PDT 2007 

The forerunners of Web 2.0 may have had no commercial goals beyond 
building community, but newer startups have gone beyond that. They seek 
to build a community and, crucially, to then get bought out by Google or 
Yahoo! and make some quick cash. It's very short-term and very explicit. 
I see a lot of backlash against this business model from people like 
Mark Zuckerberg who, at least on the surface, appear to honestly value 
some of the eye-misting principles Alexis enumerated below.

Kurt

-- 
Kurt Luther
Ph.D. Student, College of Computing
Georgia Institute of Technology
Atlanta, Georgia, USA


Alexis Turner wrote:
> I posed it in my last message (in its brevity), as a simple summation of 
> Lane's 7 points - half of which were very, very specifically business 
> oriented.  I don't think the tenor of the post matched especially well with 
> the chosen definitions and I was calling her (him?) on it.
>
> The fact is, though, it's a bit of a a chicken & egg problem, isn't it?
> Is Web 2.0 built by business, or co-opted by business?  Personally, I think the 
> latter, which hasn't been mentioned much on the list but which finds a nice 
> balance between the two sides (which I see as the Romantic Rollers vs. the Jaded 
> Spades).
>
>  Even I, on occasion, can get misty eyed and hopeful and agree with your claim 
> that things started out in basements by people with all the best intentions.  
> We're going to share!  It's social!  Power to the (many) people!  And, yes, I 
> would also agree that this is not necessarily a bad thing.  But let's be real 
> about the difference between what we want at the beginning of the day and what 
> we get at the end of it.  it's usually not everything we dreamed of, even if we 
> get part way there.
>
> So, yeah, maybe things started out that way, but by its very nature, doesn't Web 
> 2.0 just scream to corporations to look 
> at it - after all, what more could an investor want than to know, up front, that 
> millions of customers are clamoring for a product?  By its very collaborative 
> nature, any remotely succesful Web 2.0 "product," "service," or "platform" is 
> going to ask to become corporatized, because it already has a devoted 
> community.  Or customer base, if your eye is bent to looking at it in those 
> terms. Corporations take what's good about 2.0 and twist it to their own ends.  
> At the end of the day, then, you may be part of a community and enjoy all the 
> perks therein, but the food's provided by McDonald's.
> -Alexis
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, 21 Apr 2007, danah boyd wrote:
>
> ::Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2007 05:59:53 -0700
> ::From: danah boyd <aoir.z3z at danah.org>
> ::To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org, subbies at redheadedstepchild.org
> ::Subject: Re: [Air-l] how to pin down web 2.0
> ::
> ::I would violently disagree with this categorization.  Web1.0 was the boom
> ::where companies sold fiction to venture capitalists and walked out like
> ::bandits.  The vast majority of what is categorized as Web2.0 was built in the
> ::rubble of the crash.  There is no doubt that the last year has involved
> ::numerous buyouts by large corporations but the vast majority of Web2.0 apps
> ::were built in total startup mode without an eye for business, with a focus on
> ::people like the creators, and with zero market research.  Blogger, LJ,
> ::Friendster, MySpace, Facebook, LinkedIn, YouTube, Wikipedia, Flickr,
> ::Socialtext, Upcoming, ...  these are not big corporate projects, even if
> ::they've been bought or expanded beyond their britches.  With big megacorps
> ::embracing Web2.0, funny things are happening, but that's not the crux of what
> ::this term is signaling.
> ::
> ::
> ::On Apr 20, 2007, at 3:56 PM, Alexis Turner wrote:
> ::
> ::> In other words, Web 1.0 was something created by individuals, and Web 2.0 is
> ::> the
> ::> Web through the lens of business, user-leveraged experience, and market
> ::> drive
> ::> research.
> ::> -Alexis
> ::> 
> ::> 
> ::> On Fri, 20 Apr 2007, Lane DeNicola wrote:
> ::> 
> ::> ::Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2007 18:11:50 -0400
> ::> ::From: Lane DeNicola <denicola at alum.rpi.edu>
> ::> ::Reply-To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org
> ::> ::To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org
> ::> ::Subject: Re: [Air-l] how to pin down web 2.0
> ::> ::
> ::> ::Mark Warschaur mentioned O'Reilly Media as the cited progenitor of the
> ::> ::term Web 2.0, and I'd argue Tim O'Reilly's (rather lengthy) 2005
> ::> ::article--appropriately titled "What is Web 2.0?"--is probably still
> ::> ::the best general source on the concept:
> ::> ::
> ::> ::http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-
> ::> is-web-20.html
> ::> ::
> ::> ::According to the concept as built there, Alex Halavais is effectively
> ::> ::right, that the term denotes "companies that have attracted funding or
> ::> ::make money on the web over the last few years," but also that "it
> ::> ::suggests some kind of breaking point with earlier approaches to
> ::> ::design," to wit:
> ::> ::
> ::> ::"In exploring the seven principles above, we've highlighted some of
> ::> ::the principal features of Web 2.0. Each of the examples we've explored
> ::> ::demonstrates one or more of those key principles, but may miss others.
> ::> ::Let's close, therefore, by summarizing what we believe to be the core
> ::> ::competencies of Web 2.0 companies:
> ::> ::
> ::> ::    * Services, not packaged software, with cost-effective scalability
> ::> ::    * Control over unique, hard-to-recreate data sources that get
> ::> ::richer as more people use them
> ::> ::    * Trusting users as co-developers
> ::> ::    * Harnessing collective intelligence
> ::> ::    * Leveraging the long tail through customer self-service
> ::> ::    * Software above the level of a single device
> ::> ::    * Lightweight user interfaces, development models, AND business models
> ::> ::
> ::> ::The next time a company claims that it's "Web 2.0," test their
> ::> ::features against the list above. The more points they score, the more
> ::> ::they are worthy of the name. Remember, though, that excellence in one
> ::> ::area may be more telling than some small steps in all seven."
> ::> ::
> ::> ::I'd advocate the use of the term, if only because of its circulation
> ::> ::as industry vernacular, but its use should be well-qualified.  As a
> ::> ::fluid construct (one used here to designate "companies with certain
> ::> ::competencies," rather than, say, qualities of specific technologies)
> ::> ::perhaps the best course would be to qualify it as "O'Reilly's (or
> ::> ::whomever's) conceptualization of Web 2.0."
> ::> ::
> ::> ::--
> ::> ::Lane DeNicola
> ::> ::Doctoral Candidate | Dept. of Science & Technology Studies
> ::> ::Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
> ::> ::http://www.nacresky.com/lad
> ::> ::Tried the Science Studies Search Engine? <http://www.nacresky.com/ssse>
> ::> ::_______________________________________________
> ::> ::The air-l at listserv.aoir.org mailing list
> ::> ::is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org
> ::> ::Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://
> ::> listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
> ::> ::
> ::> ::Join the Association of Internet Researchers:
> ::> ::http://www.aoir.org/
> ::> ::
> ::> _______________________________________________
> ::> The air-l at listserv.aoir.org mailing list
> ::> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org
> ::> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://
> ::> listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
> ::> 
> ::> Join the Association of Internet Researchers:
> ::> http://www.aoir.org/
> ::
> ::- - - - - - - - - - d a n a h ( d o t ) o r g - - - - - - - - - -
> ::"taken out of context i must seem so strange"
> ::
> ::musings :: http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts
> ::
> ::
> ::
> ::
> ::
> _______________________________________________
> The air-l at listserv.aoir.org mailing list
> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org
> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
>
> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: 
> http://www.aoir.org/
>

More information about the Air-L mailing list