Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

The Problem With Web2.0


Published on

A rumination on the problem with web2.0 today (information overload), some solutions, and speculation about where we go from here

Published in: Technology, News & Politics

The Problem With Web2.0

  1. The problem with Web2.0 Aziz H. Poonawalla
  2. How do we use the web? <ul><li>We consume content </li></ul><ul><li>We generate content </li></ul><ul><li>We engage in conversations </li></ul><ul><li>Prior to web2.0, all centralized via The Blog </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Reading </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Blogging </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Commenting </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Now, these functions are specialized and decentralized </li></ul>
  3. Generating/Consuming Content <ul><li>Posts </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Blog </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Web forums </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Tumblog </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Tweets </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Photos and Video </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Flickr </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Picasa Web </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>YouTube </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Audio </li></ul><ul><ul><li> </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Podcasts </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Email </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Direct </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Lists </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Links </li></ul><ul><ul><li> </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Google reader Shared Items </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Facebook Shared Items </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Twitter </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Status </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Twitter </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Facebook </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Gtalk </li></ul></ul>
  4. Conversations <ul><li>Friends (1-1) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Twitter </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Facebook </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Friendfeed </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Email </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Groups (1-many) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Facebook (rooms) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Friendfeed </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Blog comments </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Web forums </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Private email lists </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Public (many-many) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Blog comments </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Friendfeed </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Web forums </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Public email lists </li></ul></ul>
  5. Signal to Noise Ratio (SNR) <ul><li>Signal: stuff you want </li></ul><ul><li>Noise: stuff you don’t </li></ul><ul><li>SNR scales inversely with: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Number of content sources </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Number of friends (social web) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Number of contacts (email) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>To improve SNR, need to increase signal and/or decrease noise </li></ul><ul><li>Problem : noise scales with signal! </li></ul>
  6. Social Noise <ul><li>Conversations blur the line between creating and consuming content </li></ul><ul><li>Multiple channels result in redundant content </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Same blog post by a given author might reach you via twitter, delicious, FF, etc. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Same status updates appear on twitter,, plurk, facebook </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Fragmented conversations across blog comments, FF </li></ul>
  7. Filtering sucks <ul><li>Many services claim to reduce noise, but are actually reducing signal </li></ul><ul><ul><li>AideRSS PostRank (algorithmic) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Digg (communal) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Techmeme (algorithmic) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Echo chamber effects </li></ul><ul><li>Filters invariably make assumptions about what you consider signal </li></ul><ul><ul><li>By relationships </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>By concensus </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>By popularity </li></ul></ul>
  8. Solution 1: Segregate services <ul><li>Define specific roles for each social service </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Inputs: mediums where you exclusively create content </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Outputs: mediums where you exclusively promote content </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Venues: mediums where you exclusively discuss content </li></ul></ul><ul><li>“ Simplify, Simplify” – Henry David Thoreau </li></ul>
  9. Solution 2: reduce signal <ul><li>Seems counterintuitive at first </li></ul><ul><li>Avoid the A-listers, just pick one or two (Scoble, Winer, etc) </li></ul><ul><li>Declare email independence [1] </li></ul><ul><li>Resist temptation </li></ul><ul><ul><li>New web services appear weekly </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Easy to get spread too thin </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Most are novel, few are useful </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Avoid redundancy </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Cull the herd </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Use your Google Reader statistics to see which feeds you barely read </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Avoid reading primary sources (ie BBC), rely on linkers instead (i.e. NewsJunk) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>[1] </li></ul>
  10. Solution 3: be elitist <ul><li>Following/friending too many people on Twitter, Facebook etc results in a firehose of updates </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Impossible to see everything </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Most people follow many but interact with few </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Some improvement is possible </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Twitter needs a “mark user as read” [1] </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Facebook needs more fine-grained control over your news feed filtering </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Fundamental limit to number of human interactions: Dunbar’s Number [2] </li></ul><ul><li>[1] </li></ul><ul><ul><li>[2] </li></ul></ul>
  11. Solution 4: metadata <ul><li>Semantic Web </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Advantages: structured data </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Disadvantages: data must be structured (by something or someone) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Folksonomy </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Folksonomy is not Taxonomy! [1] </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Scalable, distributed, organic </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Genuine wisdom of crowds (diversity) rather than groupthink [2] </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Represents actual human query terms </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Even the disadvantage (meta-noise [3]) is really an advantage </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Overtagging creates multiple entry points </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Actually increases likelihood a user will find the content </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>[1] </li></ul><ul><li>[2] </li></ul><ul><li>[3] </li></ul>
  12. Inflection point <ul><li>Web 2.0 represents an evolutionary decision point </li></ul><ul><ul><li>How do we handle super-connectivity? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>How do we handle information overload? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Present growth in social services is unsustainable </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Human attention is a finite resource </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Risk fragmenting into online silos </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Algorithms cannot save us </li></ul>
  13. Folksonomy is the Future <ul><li>WP-Folksonomy plugin </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Allows readers to tag posts </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Access level controlled by site admin </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Demos: , </li></ul></ul><ul><li>WP-Tagdex </li></ul><ul><ul><li>(does not exist… yet [1]) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Represent tags as an index rather than a cloud </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Literally, human-powered index of the entire web </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Combination could render algorithmic search obsolete! </li></ul><ul><li>[1] </li></ul>
  14. Web 3.0? <ul><li>OpenFriend API: allow friend/follower relationships to exist independently </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Social media sites would reference the API to “import” your existing friend relationships </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Distributed, open architecture akin to OpenID (anyone can run an OpenFriend server) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Blur the line between social media and MMORPGs </li></ul><ul><ul><li>3D environment is just a GUI for a giant social network </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Social networks are already “second life”, with business and pleasure transactions </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Search engines supplanted by RSS streams created in real-time from tag queries </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Live, media-rich data </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Relevance of results to search intent is inherently superior </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Return of the “phone book” model of information retrieval </li></ul></ul>
  15. Web 4.0? <ul><li>Ubiquitous connectivity </li></ul><ul><ul><li>WiMax, 4G devices </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Device convergence: GPS/cell/PDA/ </li></ul></ul><ul><li>All online activity geotagged by default </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Location information becomes as important as URL </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>“ Local” connections will dominate our attention </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Online and offline distinction becomes less meaningful </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Online “layer” over reality? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Fictional inspiration: Serial Experiments Lain, Dennou Coil </li></ul></ul>
  16. Future <ul><li>What web? </li></ul><ul><li>(I am a singularity skeptic [1]) </li></ul><ul><li>5 billion people worldwide still have no web access </li></ul><ul><li>broadband in the US lags far behind Asia (here: 5 MBps, there: 100 Mbps) </li></ul><ul><li>Conclusion: no matter how the web evolves, impact still limited to tiny fraction of humankind </li></ul><ul><li>[1] </li></ul>