Dinosaur Web 2.0 in the New Year
Forgive my arrogance, I will express my personal vision of the Web and make my prediction.
Who does not like "multibukkoff", refrain from reading.
Let the opponents of evolution splash saliva, but this theory helps in studying the world. In the Internet world, too, there is evolution, driven by the creativity of developers and user skills. Luck is to give something new to the user, and he did not run away from boredom or discomfort before.
There is little innovation in Web 2.0, since the main changes have occurred in the ideology. Information poured into the Internet on the Internet, and the only thing that users could master to master it was tags and votes. Evolution responded to new conditions, but led to the control of mass interest over the individual. Here it is, the Web 2.0 dinosaur, in all its glory: huge, strong, carnivorous and stupid.
The urgent problem of new projects was the classification of users, here the rating (karma) system works poorly. The problem is that it is impossible to evaluate a person only by “plus or minus”, as it is impossible to give the tags the meaning of the topic. A more advanced classification system is being worked on within the Semantic Web, Web 3.0, which is logical, but it’s just a bug fix.
')
The most flexible moderation system turned out to be franding, that is, high-quality selection of information for yourself, manual selection of news feeds. But the main drawback of individual moderation is poor scalability, because as soon as a stream appears stronger, one person fails.
In general, the Web 2.0 dinosaur eats everything, but poorly digests and poorly creates content. Many small themed dinosaurs generate great content, but are very limited in size. However, creating thematic resources is more profitable, they are guaranteed to take their place.
The main problem of Web 2.0 is a rigid social framework for creativity. The author must act "according to the rules", otherwise a large audience will not accept it. And the driving force in any community is an active minority, the leaders, after which the majority creeps. Therefore, to replace the cold-blooded web-quantile reptiles should come online communities in which the passive mass and the active minority help each other, and not vice versa.
I’m sure that 2008 will give a lot of such projects, and perhaps due to the development of the idea of ​​franding. We are developing a “warm-blooded” service (pluz.ru) on a completely new concept of content classification and generation. Major innovations should occur in social networks.
In the development of social networks and communication services in general, there are a number of features:
- it is more convenient to communicate in text mode than by phone (or webcam)
- mail, messengers and comments began to converge on the format (gmail groups letters, embeds chat, and messengers are used as mail)
- in actively emerging freelance exchanges, a new team-based communication format is required, based on the relationship “customer” - “performer”
These features allow you to make a forecast about the emergence of two new formats of communication in the network:
1. Universal language format that combines writing articles, comments, instant messenger, mail, etc.
2. Business management format combining ratings, prescriptions, payments, etc.
Let me make another prediction.
Slow development of user skills will lead to the emergence of different "individuals" of web resources. One “face” is for those who are in the subject, for geeks, and another is “face”, with limited functionality, for beginners. Already, many things in the interfaces are not obvious-understandable, and their specifics will be enhanced. So why not reach an unprepared audience by creating a separate version of the site?
Who does not like "multibukkoff", refrain from reading.
Let the opponents of evolution splash saliva, but this theory helps in studying the world. In the Internet world, too, there is evolution, driven by the creativity of developers and user skills. Luck is to give something new to the user, and he did not run away from boredom or discomfort before.
There is little innovation in Web 2.0, since the main changes have occurred in the ideology. Information poured into the Internet on the Internet, and the only thing that users could master to master it was tags and votes. Evolution responded to new conditions, but led to the control of mass interest over the individual. Here it is, the Web 2.0 dinosaur, in all its glory: huge, strong, carnivorous and stupid.
The urgent problem of new projects was the classification of users, here the rating (karma) system works poorly. The problem is that it is impossible to evaluate a person only by “plus or minus”, as it is impossible to give the tags the meaning of the topic. A more advanced classification system is being worked on within the Semantic Web, Web 3.0, which is logical, but it’s just a bug fix.
')
The most flexible moderation system turned out to be franding, that is, high-quality selection of information for yourself, manual selection of news feeds. But the main drawback of individual moderation is poor scalability, because as soon as a stream appears stronger, one person fails.
In general, the Web 2.0 dinosaur eats everything, but poorly digests and poorly creates content. Many small themed dinosaurs generate great content, but are very limited in size. However, creating thematic resources is more profitable, they are guaranteed to take their place.
The main problem of Web 2.0 is a rigid social framework for creativity. The author must act "according to the rules", otherwise a large audience will not accept it. And the driving force in any community is an active minority, the leaders, after which the majority creeps. Therefore, to replace the cold-blooded web-quantile reptiles should come online communities in which the passive mass and the active minority help each other, and not vice versa.
I’m sure that 2008 will give a lot of such projects, and perhaps due to the development of the idea of ​​franding. We are developing a “warm-blooded” service (pluz.ru) on a completely new concept of content classification and generation. Major innovations should occur in social networks.
In the development of social networks and communication services in general, there are a number of features:
- it is more convenient to communicate in text mode than by phone (or webcam)
- mail, messengers and comments began to converge on the format (gmail groups letters, embeds chat, and messengers are used as mail)
- in actively emerging freelance exchanges, a new team-based communication format is required, based on the relationship “customer” - “performer”
These features allow you to make a forecast about the emergence of two new formats of communication in the network:
1. Universal language format that combines writing articles, comments, instant messenger, mail, etc.
2. Business management format combining ratings, prescriptions, payments, etc.
Let me make another prediction.
Slow development of user skills will lead to the emergence of different "individuals" of web resources. One “face” is for those who are in the subject, for geeks, and another is “face”, with limited functionality, for beginners. Already, many things in the interfaces are not obvious-understandable, and their specifics will be enhanced. So why not reach an unprepared audience by creating a separate version of the site?
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/18237/
All Articles