Wired, just posted a story about how Google, yes mighty Google has not been able to monetize the social networking sphere. From the article there are two glimmers of hope that suggest that there may be hope that us sharecroppers are not slaving away to provide content for others to get rich from – at least directly through contextual ads beside our own content. The first:
“You can’t put up contextual ads against user-generated content,” [Andy] Monfried says. “It’s irrelevant, and advertisers don’t want to risk their brands on user-generated content.
and the second:
“Google does a great job of monetizing intent,” says Ray Valdes, an analyst at Gartner Research. “It knows what I’m searching for and it can show me relevant ads. But social networks are not about intent.”
The article does suggest that Monfried and his company Lotame as well as Google are getting closer to being able to use the data that they do collect to target ads through “influencers”, but that the kinks are still being worked out of those systems and they are not in “prime time”.
So If it looks like we are not giving away our information for free for others to make money off of now, it seems that the time that will happen will approach. But in the mean time, maybe it is wise to think about how we can move data from one social network tool to another.
Maybe Web3.0 will actually take some small monetary investment on the part of the participants as they might be able to make use of a killer app that can in some manner federate all their Web2.0 content under their own control and still make it available in same manner that it was before. This way, those who don’t want to pay can stay on 2.0 and experience Web2.5 (a mix of hosted and independent content) as those with the desire to become more independent gain this ability. Web2.0 may already have parts of this idea as blogs all come together, independent of location via RSS, but multimedia is slightly more difficult.
Like many other shifts in history/science/technology/thought/paradigm… we won’t really notice the arrival of Web3.0, we’ll only really know it after it’s been here for a while and we look back.
After reading this from D’Arcy, I spotted this via Techmeme. It seems that this certainly a concern that is being shared by quite a few. More on this later.
Via OLDaily, I found this post about how one can get into Web2.0 in terms of the classroom. Though I don’t have time to get into it, I don’t think Web2.0 as we see it now is going to be the “future” as much anymore, rather Web2.0 is seeding what will cause change around education in such a manner that teaching as an institution will have to change. Hopefully I get time to fill this idea out.
If you are one of those people who has the time or inclination to get into the development/production and is curious about AJAX, check out Aptana Studio. It has built in support for Google Gears and Adobe Air,which should get it to hit some of the buzz words in web development right now.
One of the things that web2.0 has left us with is more places to dump everything that we make or find. There are a number of services that have started up to help mitigate this. Social Networking sites seem to be the high flyers here, but what about the great host of other aggregators out there? To the list below, we add Second Brain. It offers to suck your content from a number of locations, but only from the hosted versions (so it won’t suck in this blog, even though there is a WordPress connection. But it works with things like Delicious and Flickr quite well.
So if you are looking at Web2.0 as an alternative to the CMS that your institution provides, these sites might be your solution. Allowing you to host content in an open manner, but not running into the stigma that surrounds social networking.
I found a related post via OLDaily on this topic yesterday as well.
I came across “Big Think” as a YouTube like resource recently and watching this video, right around 1:00 to 1:42, Steve Pinker mentions one of the best ways to write about science, and indeed, perhaps how to teach it as well. Essentially, treat your audience as a colleague who is just as smart as you and whom you respect, but does something totally different and just needs to be brought up to speed.
Now in terms of writing, I totally agree with that. It’s a way to ensure you don’t talk down, but for teaching, I think it might… well… There are two thoughts there, the first is that you can really easily go over student heads if you treat your students like your college roomies, regardless of the age of your students, especially if they are significantly younger. Indeed, this downshift is often the most difficult thing to learn about teaching, but if you think about what Pinker said in another way, he’s hit the nail pretty close (in my mind) – talk to your audience as your college roomies. The difference? If you talk to the people you went through school with, there is a chance that they are all at your level now, but, if you talk to the level of your college that would have been your peers then, that is the sweet spot. By bringing this level up to speed, you have to be sure to include ideas that they can built on to be able to join the conversation, and in the end, so much of teaching is just about that, bringing people into the conversation.
Well, perhaps shut up – or so it would seem when it comes to managing the way that people communicate and choose to communicate or maintain their personal and professional networks – according to Mat Asay:
the point is that enterprise applications need to interweave with how people actually communicate: email, IM, phone (VoIP), and…Facebook.
This is exactly the reason why I’ve added the Facebook app to my BB – just incase someone prefers to use that, I should not hold my nose so high as to ignore them because “that’s not the way that I roll”. My personal style of rolling may not prefer FB – I like email, but I’m essentially a old timer in Internet years, but I certainly can’t ignore it.
I’ve been thinking to get people who use Facebook together on campus to see what they are doing and establish some manner of best practice around it so that it doesn’t get turned off for some reason or another – something that is not likely to happen, but I can see it being used poorly by someone and then biting them in the butt pdq as well.
What I really like about it is that it keeps passive lines of communication open and allows people to “catch up” quickly. Providing a great tool for teams that work apart, as is blogging or twittering, but blogging tends to feel long for many and twitter a bit barren.
Tim Bray pulled what I would think is a typical university lecture today. One half of the presentation that was advertised as:
“Whether or not you have any use for the term ‘Web2.0,’ it is undeniable that recent years have seen an explosion of creativity on the Internet… we should think together what kind of future Net we want, and what tools we need to get there.”
It raised some interesting ideas about how Web2.0 – commenting how the “continuous partial attention” or “ambient intimacy” is really changing the way that we have communicated – from the scope of audience to the ephemerality of the message to the latency between sender and receiver – from the basic face to face and print to “print plus (my term)” and “f2f plus” again with technology helping to shape the various elements of how the message exists.
Tim then left us hanging with an invite to all the Humanities people out there to explore this amazing opportunity.
The next part of the talk (he warned us about the split nature of the talk) was about Wide Finder and getting programs to run well on wide machines rather than tall ones (Moore’s law on its side) and how the use of functional languages like erlang might well be the answer to this other great problem for the (computing) Sciences.
So what part of this was B&S? well, both and neither. He was talking to an Arts and Science audience, he presented great problems for both sides to walk away and ponder on – and did it with style mind you – but in the end, both were kinda hollow…
So, sitting somewhere between Arts and Science… what am I thinking? If you put the two of these problems together, you might be able to develop something that really understands natural language and brings some manner of next generation web (not Web3 per se – which Tim is a critic of and offers a reward if someone comes up with a way to do it… I think… ).
This video certainly presents an interesting thought – what is even more interesting are the comments. People thinking that the students are whining, that the profs are too lazy and that nothing works or will ever change.
I think the place that we have to make the change is to allow students to have fewer external responsibilities when they come to
study – in the 1840s when the black board was the great invention, the demands on a university student were likely focused on class, not life as they are now. This is something that we all try to use technology to mitigate, but in the end, the majority of students likely don’t put the same priority on class that they do (because of needs) as there is on other parts of life.
It would be interesting to see what this idea of changing the class is like in countries that fund post secondary education.
Check out their blog to see the continuing conversation.
If you check out your options in GD – you’ll find presentation are available with an interface that looks very much like Power Point. The big bonus is that you can collaborate with others in creating – and I would think – presenting slides.