Comments on: Threepointouch http://twopointouch.com/2006/web-2-0/threepointouch/ web 2.0, blogs and social media Mon, 30 May 2011 20:58:01 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3 By: Ian Delaneyhttp://twopointouch.com/2006/web-2-0/threepointouch/#comment-2332 Ian Delaney Wed, 15 Nov 2006 09:08:34 +0000 http://twopointouch.com/2006/11/13/threepointouch/#comment-2332 Yes, I've been hearing about intelligent agents searching the web for me since I was in short trousers. I recall Copernic, at least, for about 8 years that was supposed to do this. (I've just looked and they're still around - www.copernic.com). When I've spoken to people about semantic technologies there have been two camps - one lot seems to be into microformats, intelligent agents and semantic markup; the other lot are talking about enterprise mash-ups and developing ontologies to understand pre-existing data stores. There are already some 'semantic' applications - I've mentioned before that the National Health Service has one, for example, but they're mainly being developed for internal use by larger enterprises. This is both easier - since the types of data are already in a set format and cover a set field - and provides profits for the developers pretty quickly, unlike a public project for the WWW. And to sort of answer Simon, the ontologies that drive these intelligent agents need to be developed by people. Perhaps the del.icio.us database and similar could prove a great store of understanding how people categorise information that goes way beyond synonyms. It would make a lot of sense of the Yahoo acquisition if the search bods there were already working on this. Yes, I’ve been hearing about intelligent agents searching the web for me since I was in short trousers. I recall Copernic, at least, for about 8 years that was supposed to do this. (I’ve just looked and they’re still around — http://www.copernic.com).
When I’ve spoken to people about semantic technologies there have been two camps — one lot seems to be into microformats, intelligent agents and semantic markup; the other lot are talking about enterprise mash-ups and developing ontologies to understand pre-existing data stores.
There are already some ‘semantic’ applications — I’ve mentioned before that the National Health Service has one, for example, but they’re mainly being developed for internal use by larger enterprises. This is both easier — since the types of data are already in a set format and cover a set field — and provides profits for the developers pretty quickly, unlike a public project for the WWW.
And to sort of answer Simon, the ontologies that drive these intelligent agents need to be developed by people. Perhaps the del.icio.us database and similar could prove a great store of understanding how people categorise information that goes way beyond synonyms. It would make a lot of sense of the Yahoo acquisition if the search bods there were already working on this.

]]> By: Ian Greenhttp://twopointouch.com/2006/web-2-0/threepointouch/#comment-2300 Ian Green Wed, 15 Nov 2006 00:35:37 +0000 http://twopointouch.com/2006/11/13/threepointouch/#comment-2300 Semantic? I always thought that was a rather pejorative term. My problem is I still have not worked out what Web 2.0 is never mind Web 3.0. I would rather we all concentrated on bringing Web 2.0 into the real world like we have with www.whisky.co.uk (Whisky 2.0) before we go down some dark tunnel called Web 3.0. Question: How long will the technology/software of Web 3.0 take to address the issues we need to answer today. Back in 1999 we all thought the internet was the answer and we could all make a quick buck. Believe me I was there and it was painful (remember when people used to talk about "burn rate"?) Let's get right what we've got now before anything else - the technology can always catch up. By the way - a great conversation. Semantic? I always thought that was a rather pejorative term.
My problem is I still have not worked out what Web 2.0 is never mind Web 3.0.
I would rather we all concentrated on bringing Web 2.0 into the real world like we have with http://www.whisky.co.uk (Whisky 2.0) before we go down some dark tunnel called Web 3.0.
Question: How long will the technology/software of Web 3.0 take to address the issues we need to answer today. Back in 1999 we all thought the internet was the answer and we could all make a quick buck. Believe me I was there and it was painful (remember when people used to talk about “burn rate”?)
Let’s get right what we’ve got now before anything else — the technology can always catch up.
By the way — a great conversation.

]]> By: Marc - Stuck @ the Marriotthttp://twopointouch.com/2006/web-2-0/threepointouch/#comment-2242 Marc - Stuck @ the Marriott Tue, 14 Nov 2006 00:47:01 +0000 http://twopointouch.com/2006/11/13/threepointouch/#comment-2242 Hey does the NYT article on "Web 3.0" count as plagiarism? Web 3.0 as a term was not known on a mass scale to be related to the Semantic Web until that introductory article I wrote. In fact, I doubt if it was every related to the Semantic Web in any serious way before. The article I wrote (or the set of articles) where the first to make that relation and give an explicit and detailed definition. NYT editors have been known to plagiarize... but in this instance I guess it's more paraphrasing (or using as reference without giving credit) than direct plagiarizing. heh ') Marc Hey does the NYT article on “Web 3.0″ count as plagiarism?

Web 3.0 as a term was not known on a mass scale to be related to the Semantic Web until that introductory article I wrote. In fact, I doubt if it was every related to the Semantic Web in any serious way before. The article I wrote (or the set of articles) where the first to make that relation and give an explicit and detailed definition.

NYT editors have been known to plagiarize… but in this instance I guess it’s more paraphrasing (or using as reference without giving credit) than direct plagiarizing.

heh

’)

Marc

]]> By: Simonsayshttp://twopointouch.com/2006/web-2-0/threepointouch/#comment-2239 Simonsays Mon, 13 Nov 2006 22:12:35 +0000 http://twopointouch.com/2006/11/13/threepointouch/#comment-2239 <strong>Whatever 3.0...</strong> Both my boss Ian Green and Ian Delaney highlighted a recent article from the New York Times about the emergence of what is being termed web 3.0 which on the fact of it seems to be a reference to the... Whatever 3.0…

Both my boss Ian Green and Ian Delaney highlighted a recent article from the New York Times about the emergence of what is being termed web 3.0 which on the fact of it seems to be a reference to the…

]]> By: Bob Boydstonhttp://twopointouch.com/2006/web-2-0/threepointouch/#comment-2237 Bob Boydston Mon, 13 Nov 2006 21:46:41 +0000 http://twopointouch.com/2006/11/13/threepointouch/#comment-2237 Let me get this straight, so ALL new apps in the new Web 3.0 world will become semantic? Or will be it be a number of Web 3.0 agents going through the same old Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 pages you and I go through but just doing it faster? Something is missing here. Ian, like you said, this is the same old stuff we've had for many years. Back in college I got into artificial intelligence, i.e., Lisp, Prolog (remember Philip Khan?); so I am acquainted with the underlying logics here. What is REALLY means for an "agent" to "understand" is to create non-linear databases or knowledgebases. That's a lot of work and until someone can come up with a better way to collect data and knowledge I don't think the average entrepreneur will have much ability to participate. So the prerequisites are: 1. Better semantic language -- other than Lisp and Prolog types of languages 2. Better ability to assemble, collect massage data and knowledge 3. Faster computers and netware to CRUD data and knowledge It looks like the dream is shortsighted because it leaving out all the visual and audio capabilities. What about 3-D and holographic imaging? What about Stereo imaging? What about incredible sound affects? We've all dreamed of such a world! I've always wondered what would happen should two agents come into contact with each other. :) Let me get this straight, so ALL new apps in the new Web 3.0 world will become semantic? Or will be it be a number of Web 3.0 agents going through the same old Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 pages you and I go through but just doing it faster?

Something is missing here. Ian, like you said, this is the same old stuff we’ve had for many years. Back in college I got into artificial intelligence, i.e., Lisp, Prolog (remember Philip Khan?); so I am acquainted with the underlying logics here. What is REALLY means for an “agent” to “understand” is to create non-linear databases or knowledgebases. That’s a lot of work and until someone can come up with a better way to collect data and knowledge I don’t think the average entrepreneur will have much ability to participate. So the prerequisites are:

1. Better semantic language — other than Lisp and Prolog types of languages
2. Better ability to assemble, collect massage data and knowledge
3. Faster computers and netware to CRUD data and knowledge

It looks like the dream is shortsighted because it leaving out all the visual and audio capabilities. What about 3-D and holographic imaging? What about Stereo imaging? What about incredible sound affects?

We’ve all dreamed of such a world!

I’ve always wondered what would happen should two agents come into contact with each other. :)

]]> By: Simon Collisterhttp://twopointouch.com/2006/web-2-0/threepointouch/#comment-2235 Simon Collister Mon, 13 Nov 2006 19:24:14 +0000 http://twopointouch.com/2006/11/13/threepointouch/#comment-2235 I got a real buzz when I/we/you sorted out non-linear search... and now we're talking about giving it all back to the machines! Tut. I got a real buzz when I/we/you sorted out non-linear search… and now we’re talking about giving it all back to the machines! Tut.

]]> By: Ian Delaneyhttp://twopointouch.com/2006/web-2-0/threepointouch/#comment-2233 Ian Delaney Mon, 13 Nov 2006 16:52:07 +0000 http://twopointouch.com/2006/11/13/threepointouch/#comment-2233 I certainly like the picture a lot. (bookmarked for nicking later!) I certainly like the picture a lot. (bookmarked for nicking later!)

]]> By: Mike Butcherhttp://twopointouch.com/2006/web-2-0/threepointouch/#comment-2229 Mike Butcher Mon, 13 Nov 2006 13:46:45 +0000 http://twopointouch.com/2006/11/13/threepointouch/#comment-2229 I prefer this version: http://mbites.com/web_3 I prefer this version: http://mbites.com/web_3

]]> By: Antony Mayfieldhttp://twopointouch.com/2006/web-2-0/threepointouch/#comment-2226 Antony Mayfield Mon, 13 Nov 2006 10:45:45 +0000 http://twopointouch.com/2006/11/13/threepointouch/#comment-2226 Of all the fascinating / terrifying / amazing things happening with web communication and media and this is the topic of the day for the 'meme massive? Yawn... Of all the fascinating / terrifying / amazing things happening with web communication and media and this is the topic of the day for the ‘meme massive? Yawn…

]]>