Netizen

Tuesday, February 17, 2009

TCC: Twitter Community College

(This used to be a Google blog. Now it seems to have become a Twitter blog. It looks like it: Twitter Tips: It's A Bird, It's A Bird.)

In my last post I said I wanted to follow around 100 people, and now I find myself following 237, and I am not complaining.

This article jolted my apple cart: Twitter Professors: 18 People to Follow for a Real Time Education. I immediately proceeded to follow all 18. Then I realized this list had a media bias, as in this was like the Media Department at the TCC, for the most part. So I googled up the "top techies to follow on Twitter" and came up with a wonderful list: The 10 best techies worth following on Twitter | Between the Lines....

After all that school work, it was time for a coffee break, so I went ahead to this list: New York Top 1,000 Tweets. I decided to follow many of the attractive women on the list. Women are more likely to respond back on Twitter than on Facebook or Plenty Of Fish, I think. On Facebook, it is like, oh no, I don't even know this guy. On Plenty Of Fish, it is like, do I want to spend the rest of my life with this guy? I don't think so. On Twitter there is none of that pressure. And so people talk. Women talk. Not all of them. But a few.

If you can find great people to follow, Twitter becomes a whole different experience.

Let me go ahead and list the people from the first two lists.

Twitter Professors: 18 People to Follow for a Real Time Education

The 10 best techies worth following on Twitter

Harry McCracken (Editor of Technologizer)
Padmasree Warrior (CTO at Cisco Systems)
Dave Zatz (Digital lifestyle writer)
Rafe Needleman (Editor of Webware)
Jason Snell (Editorial Director of Macworld)
Charlene Li (Author and thought leader)
Lance Ulanoff (Editor in Chief of PCMag)
Jeremiah Owyang (Analyst, Forrester Research)
Paul Thurrott (Founder, Windows Supersite)
Rob Enderle (Analyst, Enderle Group)

And then there is a B list.

Ina Fried - News.com reporter
Abbie Lundberg - Former editor of CIO magazine
Matt Cutts - Google engineer
Danah Boyd - Academic/researcher in new media
Ryan Block - Former editor of Engadget
John C Dvorak - Legendary tech pundit
Tom Merritt - Host of Buzz Out Loud
Guy Kawasaki - Venture Capitalist
Sarah Lacy - Silicon Valley writer/reporter
Michael Arrington - TechCrunch founder/blogger
Sascha Segan - Mobile writer for PCMag
Veronica Belmont - Revision 3 host
Leo Laporte - Host of This Week in Tech
Molly Wood - CNET TV host
Om Malik - Founder of GigaOm
Natali Del Conte - CNET TV host
Jason Calacanis - Founder of Mahalo
Robert Scoble - Fast Company blogger
Kevin Rose - Founder of Digg

Shift Happens

View more presentations from Jeff Brenman. (tags: sociology future)

The Future of Firefox and JavaScript

View more presentations from jeresig. (tags: web programming)

Introducing Web 2.0 concepts

View more presentations from John Lewis. (tags: john intergen)

Mechanical Miracles of the 21st Century

View more presentations from jokechannel. (tags: arctic road)

21st Century Love Revolution

View more presentations from crossthebreeze. (tags: research digital)

Thursday, February 12, 2009

Twitter Tips: It's A Bird, It's A Bird

"What am I doing? I am talking to an empty telephone, because there was a dead man at the end of this fucking line!"

- Robert De Niro in Heat.

thinking about connections
120 is the New 140: How to Build Relationships on Twitter
Looking for Mr. Goodtweet: How to Pick Up Followers on Twitter
My First 7 Days on Twitter
Facebook, Twitter, and Blogs - the big three Right now, Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube are where it's at. Add a blog to the equation and you have the complete solution for communication with the maximum number of people.

I have been on Twitter only a few weeks (I Get Twitter), so I don't claim to be an authority, but my hunch is that Twitter is all things to all people. It is what you make it. But I think it is obvious Twitter is a fundamental internet application. Google became a verb because search is the ultimate fundamental internet application. Email is a fundamental internet application. News is basic. Facebook is a fundamental internet application. Twitter is the new kid on the block. It is basic, it is fundamental. It will catch on. It will stick around.

There can't be tips. There are no tips for search. There are no tips for how to use your Facebook account. I think the same is true for Twitter. There are no tips, really. But I wish to share a few that work for me, and I suspect might work for a few others like me. But I make no claim to universal appeal. There is no such thing. On Twitter you create the ultimate niche.

But as to tips, these work for me.

(1) Become A User, Not An Addict, But Do Become A User

I can see how easy it is to get carried away. You get a few hundred followers, or even a hundred, and you can fall in the trap of thinking you are finally the celebrity you always deserved to be, but until now it had been the world's loss to not have discovered you. Use Twitter in moderation. This is like having an email account. You are not on email all day.

But knowledge workers are on email all day. And many people have successfully integrated Twitter into what they do. Twitter is how they broadcast themselves to the world. And many of them have followers in the tens of thousands. They are not addicts, they are avid users.

(2) Be Yourself

Guy Kawasaki is the number one name on Twitter but I am suspicious of his number one advice, which is, follow everyone who follows you. Then, what's the point? I don't think he follows 50,000 people. But he follows 50,000 people in hopes 50,000 people will follow him. And many do, and all the glory to them, and I am one. He usually posts links to news items that often look interesting, and sometimes I click through. But Kawasaki has a website to promote and he has a brand name to establish: his name. And so follow as many people as you can if you share his goals. Why not? But if your Twitter account is like your email account to you, then don't.

(3) Take It Easy

Only follow people you intend to follow, people you know, people who are famous. Unfollow people you no longer wish to follow. And don't worry about how many people follow you. If they want to, they will. Glory is not in the numbers. Few is not bad. Many is not necessarily good. There are zombie followers who add you in hopes you will add them and it will look like they have a lot of followers, but who don't really "follow" you. They don't read a word of what you have to say.

(4) Respect Your Followers

Imagine your followers as people genuinely interested in what you are doing, what you might be reading. Let your personality shine through your Twitter posts. If you link to a lot of news on Africa, I am going to think you are really into Africa. And if you really are, that helps me get to know you better, if I am someone interested in getting to know you better.

(5) Don't Feel Obliged

It is okay to not tweet every day, it is okay to not tweet every hour. Pace yourself. And it is okay to put out 30 tweets in an hour. Too. You decide. Don't feel obliged.

(6) Celebrity Tweets

I like the Kevin Rose model. He founded Digg. That makes him a celebrity. He has over 100,000 followers, but he follows only about 100, and he posts sparingly. On the other hand you have the CEO of Mashable, he posts several per hour, all day. But then it is because he mostly posts links to his own website. And that is good too. That does not make him a fake.

I also want to end up with 100,000 followers, but I want that to happen because my tech startup became a grand success. And I want to post more often than Kevin Rose, and less often than Mashable. And I only wish to follow people I really wish to follow, and so I wish to keep that number as close to 100 as possible. I have no desire to "follow" 50,000 people. I don't think that is humanly possible.

How not to scare away a celebrity? Mitch Kapor started following me within days of my showing up at the site and he only follows a few hundred, so I knew it was genuine, but I celebrated the event in a grand way, and then he was no longer following me: Mitch Kapor Now Following Me On Twitter.

http://twitter.com/paramendra/statuses/1204544455

Twitter Enterprise

A business model for Twitter: Pay up | Outside the Lines - CNET News
The three business models that make Twitter a billion-dollar...
11 Business Plans For Twitter

I think Twitter is going to make a ton of money. There are people who have ridiculed it as a site that is hot, but guess what, it is not making any money. Google did not make any money for years and years, but anyone who used Google in the early years, or most people, they could tell it was a great application.

The way for Twitter to make big bucks is by having a Twitter, and another Twitter Enterprise that big brand names pay for, that has a greater number of functionalities.

Tuesday, February 10, 2009

NY Tech MeetUp Mailing List Web 5.0 Controversy

OMGICU

I have been active with this mailing list only since the last MeetUp (NY Tech MeetUp: 02/03/09), been barely a week, and so far I have not got into the thick of it much, but right now I logged in to look at today's daily digest, and boom, there it was splattered all over the place. Before proceeding to read all the emails, I took this screen shot. Seven of the 20 emails are about my Web 5.0 post.

I am going to read all the emails, and I am going to respond. But before that I wish to respond to an email from Michael Mellinger. (Conceptually Diligent: Web 5.0 Is Repackaging Hello)

In his last email Mike wondered if there will be a Web 6.0, and a Web 7.0.

Web 5.0 And The Speed Of Light

In physics it is said nothing in the universe moves faster than the speed of light. In my classification, Web 5.0 is the same way. There is no Web 5.1, there is no Web 6.0, there is no Web 7.0. Web 5.0 is the ultimate.

Web 5.0 Is Da Bomb
Competing For the Web 3.0 Definition
Conceptually Diligent: Web 5.0 Is Repackaging Hello
Defining Web 4.0
Web 5.0: Face Time
A Web 3.0 Manifesto

Clarifications

I think earlier classification systems have made the fundamental error of thinking of the web only as the software behind the websites. In my classification system the web is the software, the hardware, the connectivity, and, most important, the people, the netizens. How can you miss the people after Web 2.0?

Read

Now let me go read and answer other queries and curiosities.

Nicolas VDB: Stay tuned, web 36.0 coming soon on Paramendra's blog

Tim Mattison: The whole original post feels almost computer generated. I'm so confused. http://pdos.csail.mit.edu/scigen/

James Gillmore: I think the message to be taken away from Paramendra's posts should be a recognition of the enthusiasm, passion and idealism for a subject matter we obviously all love or we wouldn't be here. It doesn't need to illicit jaded "web 2.+ is so cliche" responses. However, Paramendra, I think what you're saying is far from reality and how things will actually pan out--and it's a little to poetic for a lot of us. It's also not very specific. I'd love to see a post from you about simply what technical advancements on and offline you forecast in 2009 and 2010, regardless of what point oh they fall into. What are your predictions for the next 2 years?

Andrew: wahahahaha *snort* *sniffle* ...... ahhhh PB, thanks for the Monday chuckles, Chuckles.

Matthew Zito: Glad we cleared that up. Unfortunately for you, I've already invented the New Web 1.0, which will supplant all versions of Web x.x

Andrew to Matthew Zito: Sorry, but we only recognize Web 1.0 as defined in ISO/IEC 3282-1:1993.

My Reaction

I guess it has not been the controversy I first thought it might be. There is irrational, illogical derision and dismissal. There is mild amusement, but no real technical critique. I should learn to ignore most of the fluff. Perhaps this is not the right venue to be expecting a discussion.

Creating Ground

There are people who don't buy into the Web 2.0 term itself. At one point Google CEO Eric Schmidt was one of them. He dismissed Web 2.0 as a marketing term. I would have to fundamentally disagree. Web 2.0 is very real to me. Web 2.0 was when the web got populated, it became alive, it became dynamic.

And then there are those who think of Web 1.0 as read, Web 2.0 as read-write, and Web 3.0 as read-write-execute. That is a fairly elegant classification. It is not right or wrong, I feel it is misguided. It only makes sense if you think of the web only as the software that powers websites, which I don't.

I look at the software, the hardware, the connectivity, and the netizens, like I said above. There are four components. What others might propose to be Web 3.0, I have proposed to be Web 2.1.

You could disagree with my basic premise and argue but the web is only about software. Or you could take my holistic approach and come up with a different classification system. But I have not seen any so far, and this mailing list perhaps is not the place to look.

Sunday, February 08, 2009

Web 5.0 Is Da Bomb

Web 3.0 - Wikipedia technical and social possibilities identified in this latter term are yet to be fully realized the nature of defining Web 3.0 is highly speculative. In general it refers to aspects of the Internet which, though potentially possible, are not technically or practically feasible at this time.

Competing For the Web 3.0 Definition
Conceptually Diligent: Web 5.0 Is Repackaging Hello
Web 5.0: Face Time
A Web 3.0 Manifesto
Defining Web 4.0

When I tried to explain to a friend the Web 5.0 concept he said, but that is like repackaging hello.

I said, but Starbucks has been repackaging coffee. But Web 5.0 is more than saying let's get offline, let's get off the phone, let's meet in person, face to face. Web 5.0 is the stuff of revolutions. Web 5.0 is about face time, but it is also about mass group dynamics, it is about tens of millions engaging in concerted street action to pull down dictatorships. It is about grassroots organizing in an established democracy to take over the highest office in the land.

Web 2.0, Web 3.0 and Web 5.0 together could turn China into a federal, multi-party democracy. Web 2.0, Web 3.0 and Web 5.0 will bring forth a total spread of democracy in the Arab world, the only thing that will. Missile strikes will not. You are looking at a scenario where the tech industry will compete with the military-industrial complex. There is a grassroots way, there is a war of communications technology way to spread democracy.

(from some of my previous writings -- since I have made some tall claims)

* In 1999 I was one of the founding members of a dot com company that went on to raise $25 million during its second round before it went down during what in the industry is known as the nuclear winter. I was also team member number two of another dot com that sought to challenge then industry leader AllAdvantage that paid people for watching ads while surfing the web. That company also closed shop once the nuclear winter set in and there was a massive dot com meltdown. The founder Paul went on to Duke.

* The king of my country pulled a coup in February 2005 and took over. The country already had gone through a decade long civil war led by the Maoists in which 13,000 people died in active combat, twice that many committed suicide. The Maoists of Nepal had proven themselves to be the largest, deadliest ultra left group this planet saw since the end of the Cold War. At their peak they had 80% of the country.

In February 2005, three forces in Nepal were at loggerheads: the monarchists, the Maoists, and the democrats. Since February 2005 no Nepali outside of Nepal has put as much time into the democracy movement of Nepal as I have. I was so busy thinking about the 27 million people in Nepal - days, nights, weekends, it was a zombie existence - I literally was not thinking about myself. There would be piles of unopened mail on my floor. The work I have put into Nepal's democracy and social justice movements is going to win me the Nobel Peace Prize. It could happen in 2008, 2009 or 2010 by the latest. If it happens in 2008 or 2009, I will have broken MLK's record.

What happened in Nepal in April 2006, January-February 2007, and February 2008 was magic. If Nepal can become a multi-party democracy of state funded parties and one where at least one third of the legislature is female by law, what happened in Nepal during those three mass movements will have been the French Revolution for this 21st century.

* I am a Madhesi in Nepal. In Rwanda they got Hutu and Tutsi. In Nepal they got Pahadi and Madhesi. Jesus was a Jew. There are 13 million Jewish people on the planet. Buddha was a Madhesi. There are about 13 million Madhesis on the planet. That is how many black folks MLK had when he was doing what he was doing.

More than 40% of the people in Nepal are Madhesi. Of the 30,000 Nepalis in NYC, maybe 30 are Madhesi. That should tell you of the filters in Nepal that work against the Madhesis.

I am half Nepali, half Indian by birth. More than 99% of the Nepalis in America are not my ethnicity. More than 99% of the Indians in America are not my ethnicity. I need to point out the ethnic politics in countries like Nepal and India are way more complicated than the racial politics in countries like America. Barack did not have it tougher growing up.

* Barack knows me, as does Howard Dean. Terry McAuliffe knows me. I have a feeling the Clintons might be aware of my presence. All the top politicians in Nepal know me or of me.

* There is a concrete mathematical theory called the butterfly effect. A butterfly flapping its wings in the Amazon forest could be the reason a cyclone hit Bangladesh. What happened in Nepal in April 2006, January-February 2007, and February 2008 were political cyclones. I was the butterfly flapping my wings in New York City.

* In April 2006, over a period of 19 days, about eight million people out of the country's 27 million came out into the streets to shut the country down completely to force a dictator out. The Maoists wanted to take credit but they had been pushing for an armed uprising all along. The seven democratic parties kept pushing for a mass meeting here, a mass meeting there, a daylong shutdown here, and a daylong shutdown there. I am the father of the concept of continuous movement in the Nepalese context. I pushed the concept from the very beginning. If there is a tortoise sitting on the fence, chances are it did not randomly get there.

All the political actors and parties that took credit for April 2006 were fundamentally opposed to the Madhesi movement of January-February 2007 that was a more intense movement than April 2006. February 2008 was the second chapter of the Madhesi movement and the third chapter to the April 2006 revolution itself. I was the one constant to all three.

* When Upendra Yadav, now leader of the largest Madhesi party and fourth largest party overall after the April 10, 2008 elections to the constituent assembly in Nepal, landed in Los Angeles in July 2007 for the annual conference of Nepalis in America, his first words were "Where is Paramendra Bhagat?" They took him to the hotel. He again asked, "Where is Paramendra Bhagat?" They had to fly him over to NYC to meet me.

I was at a Nepali event in Jackson Heights in Queens. Some MPs from Nepal were on stage. I was sitting in the front row. Hundreds were in attendance. In the middle of the program one MP got off stage to come sit one seat from me to get his picture taken with me. Then he got embarrassed and said he was trying to get the crowd into the background of the picture.

In February 2006 Madhav Nepal, then leader of the largest political party in the country, was put under house arrest by the royal regime. A month later he managed to come online wireless. His brother lived in the house next to his. The first person he contacted was me. We chatted on Google Talk. Madhav Nepal is a Pahadi.

* Nobody in the Nepali diaspora put as much time, effort and talent into the democracy movement in Nepal as I did.

* I am the un-Bin Laden. I mean no disrespect to Christianity and Christ and if I use this metaphor it is because it is such a vivid one. Bin Laden is the anti-Christ, I am Christ. If 9/11 has been the modern day Pearl Harbor, the first major revolution of the 21st century happened in Nepal. Between eight years of a Barack-Hillary presidency, a possible Mayor of NYC who will get behind my idea of a new definition for voting rights in this city to engulf everyone who lives inside the city boundaries, and my tech company that will work to get hundreds of millions of new people online, I think you are looking at a total spread of democracy by 2020. The day all Arab countries have been turned into democracies is the day the War On Terror ends. There are two aspects to that war. There is the part about killing mosquitoes. The US military, law enforcement and intelligence agencies working with their counterparts in other countries get to kill mosquitoes: that is not my area of expertise. Someone like me helps drain the swamp. Everybody you need to spread democracy everywhere on earth lives right here in New York City. America needs me, and America needs me to be in New York City.

China is also going to be a multi-party democracy. But likely it will become a multi-party democracy of state funded parties, and the Chinese Communist Party will continue in power for a few more decades. Taiwan and Tibet will be states in a federal China.

My company is the best thing I could do for my country and countries like mine. Not everyone has to come to America like I did. The Internet is what will bridge the gap between the First World and the Third World, between the west and the rest. I could not work on my company in Nepal. I have to be in New York City to grow my company. I am going to list my company on NASDAQ. I am going to turn this into a Silicon City. I am going to be the reason the center of gravity of the tech industry shifts from California to New York.

* Warren Buffett once said he could not be CEO of General Electric. My management and leadership style by now places a heavy emphasis on Web 2.0 and a heavy consumption and production of mind food. The worlds of academia, media, politics and business are seamless. I might have more in common with a theoretical physicist than your stereotypical MBA.

* America is a concept, America is an idea, that concept, that idea is democracy, it is the market mechanism. When was the last time an immigrant into America played a larger role for democracy and social justice in his country of origin and intends to play a similar role for all countries that are not yet democracies? The medium is not the message, but my role would not have been possible before the advent of the Internet. I am a new breed revolutionary intending to wage wars with communications technology. I am a digital democrat. I am the un-Bin Laden. Neither of us seem to need states or standing armies. He is for violence. I am for nonviolent militancy, the kind where you shut a country down completely for three weeks to bring a dictator to his knees.

* Burma did not have a Paramendra Bhagat or Burma too would have succeeded. Tibet did not have a Paramendra Bhagat or Tibet too would have succeeded.

* Revolutionaries like MLK, Barack and me
We create new space
People like Rangel fill up that space
Over decades

I did for Nepal, a country of 27 million
For no money
What Bush has not been able to do for Iraq
A country of 27 million
For a trillion dollars

Nobel Peace Prize 2008: Making A Case For Nepal (2)
Nobel Peace Prize 2008: Making A Case For Nepal
The First Major Revolution Of The 21st Century Happened In Nepal

I moved to NYC in the summer of 2005. I poured a few years into Nepal's democracy and social justice movements. Then I was one of the earliest Obama volunteers in all of NYC: Barackface. From doing those two things to now having become a full time tech entrepreneur is not a career switch. There is a very concrete mathematical theory called the butterfly effect. My application of it has been cutting edge.

Spread Democracy
Revolution

I am going to compare that Web 5.0 achievement to the search algorithms of the two Google founders.

There are three buckets of paint, the three primary colors.

Vision.
Group dynamics.
Engineering.

The first two are my strengths, engineers you hire.

Mine is a Web 3.0 company. (IC) It has not been a career switch. It has been a slightly different application of the Web 2.0, Web 3.0, Web 5.0 interplay and dynamic.

The Nobel Peace Prize 2010 has to go to Nepal. It perhaps will be shared. The three mass movements will see their climax in the new constitution by the summer of 2010. Then the time will be ripe. I intend to lobby hard.

The talk of the center of gravity in the tech industry shifting from California to New York is less about how wonderful I think I am as a person, and more about the Web 2.0, Web 3.0, Web 5.0 classification. As the web matures to the higher planes, NYC stands to cash its advantage. People from every little town on earth live here. This city is the Amazon forest of humanity. And that is why it is going to be key to Web 3.0 and Web 5.0. It is about the city, not me. It is just that I want my company to play a role.

My Third World People Don't Get To Vote In This City

Wednesday, February 04, 2009

Competing For the Web 3.0 Definition

There are those who say the semantic web is the Web 3.0. I intend to argue that semantic web just adds to the dynamism of Web 2.0, and so that semantic web is Web 2.1, not Web 3.0.

Conceptually Diligent: Web 5.0 Is Repackaging Hello

There was Windows 95, and Windows 98, and Windows 2000, Windows X, Windows Vista, now they are talking up Windows 7. Those who are pushing the semantic web as the Web 3.0 are Windows slaves who don't seem to realize that Windows was about computing processes, but the Web is about people.

The central premise of my classification system is that the web is about people. Hence the top ranking goes to face time.

Web 5.0: Face Time

The web is not just about the software powering the websites. The web is also the hardware, the web is also, I dare say primarily about connectivity. AOL was an early stage Web 3.0 comany. Cisco has been a 3.0 company. Clearwire is a bold 3.0 company. AOL also was a Web 2.0 company. It popularized email and instant messaging in the US during the early years. It is very possible for one company to inhabit a few different spaces, clearly. Where would you put Intel? Where would you put the sizzling mobile space?

A Web 3.0 Manifesto

I give you that the alternate definition of Web 3.0 seems to be the more mainstream one, but I intend to compete. Those people are making the mistake of thinking the web is only about technology, worse, only about the software behind the websites.

Every additional computer that connects to the internet changes the internet itself. That is even more true about people. Every additional human being that comes online changes the internet itself.

There is no agreement on the definition of Web 3.0 like there is on Web 2.0, and so I intend to compete. There is general, tentative agreement that Web 3.0 is the next thing, beyond that there is no agreement. This is a fluid situation, and I intend to shape it.

Defining Web 4.0

My classification with its five broad elements is comprehensive, but it is early stage. It is earth, fire, water, air, spirit, it is not exactly the Periodic Chart Of Elements yet. But when you talk of the semantic web as Web 2.1, that is the first step towards a Periodic Chart Of Elements. So the semantic web has its place, I am not discounting it. I just intend to show it its proper place in the scheme of things.

On The Web

Web 3.0 - Wikipedia technical and social possibilities identified in this latter term are yet to be fully realized the nature of defining Web 3.0 is highly speculative. In general it refers to aspects of the Internet which, though potentially possible, are not technically or practically feasible at this time.

A List Apart: Articles: Web 3.0
HowStuffWorks "How Web 3.0 Will Work"
Welcome to Web 3.0: Now Your Other Computer is a Data Center a third wave—one that we are calling Web 3.0—and it may prove to be the most significant and disruptive yet to the traditional software industry. ........ not defined by distinct periods of time, but are best seen as overlapping waves of adoption. ....... Web 2.0 is about the next generation of applications on the Internet, featuring user-generated content, collaboration, and community. ...... Participation changes our idea of content itself: content isn’t fixed at the point of publication—it comes alive. Google’s AdSense became an instant business model in particular for bloggers, and video-sharing sites have rewritten the rules of popular culture and viral content. ........ For companies entering the emerging software as a service industry, the massive time and capital requirements remain a substantial barrier to entry. ........ The new rallying cry of Web 3.0 is that anyone can innovate, anywhere. Code is written, collaborated on, debugged, tested, deployed, and run in the cloud. When innovation is untethered from the time and capital constraints of infrastructure, it can truly flourish. ......... For developers, Web 3.0 means that all they need to create their dream app is an idea, a browser, some Red Bull, and a few Hot Pockets. Because every developer around the world can access the same powerful cloud infrastructures, Web 3.0 is a force for global economic empowerment. ....... the move from mainframes to client server was painful for IBM and DEC and created massive wealth for a broad generation of new companies like Microsoft, Oracle, PeopleSoft, and SAP. Web 3.0 threatens Microsoft’s .net, BEA, and WebSphere. And while I expect companies such as Amazon.com, Facebook, Google, and salesforce.com to do well, I think that even more wealth and further innovation will be created by a new, more broadly distributed class of companies and entrepreneurs that leverage the power of Web 3.0. ...... the stuff of revolution.
Web 2.0 is so over. Welcome to Web 3.0 - Jan. 8, 2009 Twitter has no business model. .... Almost no new game-changing companies have emerged since Twitter burst on the scene in 2007 ....... Yahoo's news site, for example, can charge more than 30 times as much as Facebook for a banner ad. ....... Accel just announced two new funds, totaling a billion dollars, dedicated to investing in early-stage social-media companies. ..... New companies are cropping up to expand the utility of the web, creating location-based services and financial payment systems that can be bolted onto existing sites. Often bootstrapped, they are frequently profitable and may get acquired quickly. Even in today's tough environment, these upstarts are the ones raising money and trying to score a life- or business-altering hit. Welcome to Web 3.0.
Web 3.0 - Features by PC Magazine
Web 3.0, the “official” definition. « The Jason Calacanis Weblog Web 2.0 services like digg and YouTube evolve into Web 3.0 services with an additional layer of individual excellence and focus. ...... Wikipedia, considered a Web 1.5 service, is experiencing the start of the Web 3.0 movement by locking pages down as they reach completion, and (at least in their German version) requiring edits to flow through trusted experts.
Web 3.0 | Facebook
» What to expect from Web 3.0 | Software as Services | ZDNet.com version 2.0 of any product tends to be a shortlived staging post on the way to 3.0, which is where it finally hits the mark. Windows was a classic example. 1.0 was so buggy it was hardly worth using. 2.0 fixed some serious problems but still had a lot of shortcomings. 3.0, launched in May 1990, was an instant success ...... After all, everyone will want to know what role Microsoft might play in Web 3.0.

Pages