One brute force approach which wouldn't take long is to a successive Google search on "1990" and "web 2.0"; "1991" and "web 2.0" etc. You'll get some noise and some nuggests, I reckon. Barry Wellman _____________________________________________________________________ Barry Wellman S.D. Clark Professor of Sociology NetLab Director Centre for Urban & Community Studies University of Toronto 455 Spadina Avenue Toronto Canada M5S 2G8 fax:+1-416-978-7162 wellman at chass.utoronto.ca http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman for fun: http://chass.utoronto.ca/oldnew/cybertimes.php _____________________________________________________________________
A search on Lexis might be more valuable in terms of legal scholarship. When judges start saying web 2.0 you know something is happening. I can't access Lexis at the moment but I used to enjoy free access as a student. I am very sceptical about this term right now as the comp sci conference press does not impress on the use of this term. Internet evangelists use the term like a family member who does this work in the corporate world. But I will search that press now as Mr Wellman suggests and see what I can find to back myself up. Peter Timusk, B.Math statistics (2002), B.A. legal studies (2006) Carleton University Systems Science Graduate student, University of Ottawa (2006-2007). just trying to stay linear. Read by hundreds of lurkers every week. On 19-Apr-07, at 5:40 PM, Barry Wellman wrote:
One brute force approach which wouldn't take long is to a successive Google search on "1990" and "web 2.0"; "1991" and "web 2.0" etc.
You'll get some noise and some nuggests, I reckon. Barry Wellman _____________________________________________________________________
Barry Wellman S.D. Clark Professor of Sociology NetLab Director Centre for Urban & Community Studies University of Toronto 455 Spadina Avenue Toronto Canada M5S 2G8 fax:+1-416-978-7162 wellman at chass.utoronto.ca http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman for fun: http://chass.utoronto.ca/oldnew/cybertimes.php _____________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________ The air-l@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/
Peter, I agree - having been involved for many years in software development project management, from a software technology point of view very little has changed, so if you said to a developer "we are going to utilise web 2.0frameworks in our next project" s/he would look at you as if you were some sort of nutter. Developers have a unique way of totally dismissing anyone they regard as being not part of the tribe. Get the product and marketing people in the room though and you would find a completely different view point, obviously everything NOW has to be web 2.0. I'm formulating ideas around access; cheap powerful computers / fast, multi access internet connections, domestication of the PC, particularly in the private space / bedroom culture of young people which encourages the use of communities of interest sites. What do you think a young persons myspace page would look like if a parent was looking over his / her shoulder (regulation) when they were crafting their home page? Martin. On 4/20/07, Peter Timusk <ptimusk@sympatico.ca> wrote:
A search on Lexis might be more valuable in terms of legal scholarship.
When judges start saying web 2.0 you know something is happening.
I can't access Lexis at the moment but I used to enjoy free access as a student.
I am very sceptical about this term right now as the comp sci conference press does not impress on the use of this term.
Internet evangelists use the term like a family member who does this work in the corporate world.
But I will search that press now as Mr Wellman suggests and see what I can find to back myself up.
Peter Timusk, B.Math statistics (2002), B.A. legal studies (2006) Carleton University Systems Science Graduate student, University of Ottawa (2006-2007). just trying to stay linear. Read by hundreds of lurkers every week.
On 19-Apr-07, at 5:40 PM, Barry Wellman wrote:
One brute force approach which wouldn't take long is to a successive Google search on "1990" and "web 2.0"; "1991" and "web 2.0" etc.
You'll get some noise and some nuggests, I reckon. Barry Wellman _____________________________________________________________________
Barry Wellman S.D. Clark Professor of Sociology NetLab Director Centre for Urban & Community Studies University of Toronto 455 Spadina Avenue Toronto Canada M5S 2G8 fax:+1-416-978-7162 wellman at chass.utoronto.ca http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman for fun: http://chass.utoronto.ca/oldnew/cybertimes.php _____________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________ The air-l@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@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/
-- Martin Garthwaite PhD candidate, London Knowledge Lab www.lkl.ac.uk +447957 764819 Skype id mgarthwaite1330 MS IM marting@gmail.com
A lexis-nexis search of major newspapers indicates that the term started appearing regularly in 2004 around the time of a Web 2.0 conference in San Francisco in October. The wikipedia article on Web 2.0 credits O'Reilly Media with coining the term in 2004. Mark At 10:03 PM -0400 4/19/07, Peter Timusk wrote:
A search on Lexis might be more valuable in terms of legal scholarship.
In 19-Apr-07, at 5:40 PM, Barry Wellman wrote:
One brute force approach which wouldn't take long is to a successive Google search on "1990" and "web 2.0"; "1991" and "web 2.0" etc.
-- Mark Warschauer Associate Professor of Education and Informatics University of California, Irvine 2001 Berkeley Place Irvine, CA 92697-5500 tel: (949) 824-2526, fax: (949) 824-2965 markw@uci.edu; http://www.gse.uci.edu/faculty/markw
To pop up a level a bit in the conversation.... Do folks here actually use the term? Should we all use it or not? The Wikipedia definition says Web 2.0 sites are ones that "that facilitate collaboration and sharing between users." My reaction to that is: um, what did you think the web was doing before? =:-) YMMV, Amy Amy Bruckman Associate Professor College of Computing Georgia Institute of Technology Atlanta, GA 30332-0760 Tel: 404-894-9222 Fax: 404-894-3146 Email: asb@cc.gatech.edu Web: http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~asb/
I generally agree that this is a term without much useful meaning. If you ask people what Web 2.0 is, they will start rattling off a bunch of techniques and uses that generally add up to something like these maps: http://ru3.com/luc/uploaded_images/web2-big-745097.jpg http://stephenslighthouse.sirsi.com/archives/web20.jpg http://hinchcliffe.org/img/web2architecture.jpg http://hello.eboy.com/eboy/wp-content/uploads/2006/04/FTN_CommunicationCity_... As Richard Feynman said, you can know the names of every bird in the world without knowing a bit about birds. If I were to characterize what these Web 2.0 examples hold in common, it is that they are all companies that have attracted funding or make money on the web over the last few years. I guess in some sense, that's what the 2.0 means, although it suggests some kind of breaking point with earlier approaches to design. (Does that mean that Amazon and eBay were 2.0 before their time?) So, I think it is largely a short way to say "a business model and design approach consistent with what is popular at the moment on the web." I think "social software" and "social media" fall into a similar trap: show me software that isn't social! "Sociable media" does suggest something different, as does the increasingly frequently heard "user-created media." These are still very broad terms, but they shift the focus to what people are doing when they interact with various sites and technologies, rather than (e.g.) how the website loads current data into view (AJAX, CSS, curvy bits, OpenID, etc.). - Alex On 4/20/07, Amy S. Bruckman <asb@cc.gatech.edu> wrote:
To pop up a level a bit in the conversation.... Do folks here actually use the term? Should we all use it or not?
The Wikipedia definition says Web 2.0 sites are ones that "that facilitate collaboration and sharing between users." My reaction to that is: um, what did you think the web was doing before? =:-)
YMMV,
Amy
Amy Bruckman Associate Professor College of Computing Georgia Institute of Technology Atlanta, GA 30332-0760
Tel: 404-894-9222 Fax: 404-894-3146 Email: asb@cc.gatech.edu Web: http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~asb/
_______________________________________________ The air-l@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/
-- -- // // This email is // [X] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. // [ ] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. // // Alexander C. Halavais // Social Architect // http://alex.halavais.net //
I have to agree with Alex's tongue-in-cheek definition. I have worked in interactive agencies and we would roll our eyes when the client would ask for something "Web 2.0." It came to be a bit of shorthand for "something cool like Flickr/Google Maps/Facebook." We eventually just learned it to mean "ajax." I did see a presentation recently by Jakob Nielsen at the IA summit in Vegas last month. He argues that Web 2.0 is characterized by social interaction but also through open APIs. He gave us the example of Twitter Vision, which is a mashup of google maps and twitter. Check it out if you have a voyeuristic streak and time to kill. Those in the industry these days are thinking Web 2.0 is already dead. They're thinking Web 3.0 is being built -- and I have to agree -- using things like open APIs in the mobile channel.
participants (7)
-
Alex Halavais -
Amy S. Bruckman -
Barry Wellman -
Mark Warschauer -
Martin Garthwaite -
Peter Timusk -
Sam Ladner