‘The Crowd’ instead of ‘The Cloud’

by Caezar M
Disclaimer: this article described the evolution of Web 3.0 and in my opinion was a rather confusing read, i will best attempt to summarize what it was about.

Summary:

the author talks about the next step of the internet, Web 3.0. This is the point where we really get the best rich web experience (machine provided) coupled with semantically rich human provided services. Now it is well known that there is no real clear cut definition of Web 3.0 and if anything the best way to describe it is “I’ll know it when i see it” because we really do not know what to expect to come in the near future when we talk about the web. The web as it is (Web 2.0) is the “semantic web.” it allows users to read/write/participate if they so choose and it is predicted that the expansion to the internet that will come in the form of Web 3.0 will be to Read/Write/Execute. in other, more confusing words Web 3.0 will allow user(s) to offer their contributions to problems that are too complex for machine based computing. the author believes that this advance will lead to more self employed people who offer their services to the internet who have a diverse set of skills that you simply cannot teach to a machine. so the author offers an example if you get a machine to translate from one language to another and you want to get another analysis done as to the accuracy of the translation this would offer many challenges to a machine but if you were however to give this same task “the crowd” this would be a more viable option. so the ability to act on problems in the real world is the realization of this author for Web 3.0 while we can currently do some of these things, such as computational search engines that can disambiguate real language into something useable we currently do not have the semantic ability to give meaning to everything on the internet and that is the humans role in the next version of Web, or at least according to this author.

Response:

i liked this article because it offered one perspective into web 3.0. to this point i had only heard vague ideas of what web 3.0 might be and this article is certainly not going to address everything that is to come but it does seem to offer an idea of the direction that we are heading into. it does seem appropriate to think that the next stage of the internet is one that we are more intellectually involved in. we currently spend all our time spitting information at the “wall” and we have found ways to make it forceably stick but information with no meaning is not really information at all. from what i can derive from this article, the next version will allow us to spill not only information into the web but also understanding and reasoning that can actually be used to solve problems and not just create them. so human integration, Sounds like TRON…..hmmm. the internet does stand to gain something by adding the human element into the equation but the question for now is what and how. i lookd forward to the future and to the future of the web as a diseminating tool for the masses and hopefully instead of draining our brains of useful meaning we can use it to give something back to us.

 

Davis J.G., (2011). From Croudsourcing to Croudservicing, Web Intelligence, Internet Computing, 15(3), 409-412, retrieved from http://0-ieeexplore.ieee.org.opac.library.csupomona.edu/search/srchabstract.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5755607&openedRefinements%3D*%26sortType%3Ddesc_Publication+Year%26filter%3DAND%28NOT%284283010803%29%29%26searchField%3DSearch+All%26queryText%3Dweb+3.0

3 thoughts on “‘The Crowd’ instead of ‘The Cloud’”

  1. I must admit that I have not taken the time to keep up with the Web 3.0, and what we might expect, but I am not sure all of it will be good. Your article and response are very intriguing, but I think that we have issues in the future as more and more people will interact on the Internet alone. I think basic human interaction skills (in person) will continue to suffer, and I know the grammar of the next generation is really going to suffer.

  2. To make a small point, programming a language into a computer is not that hard if you use the proper programming language. Using prolog as an example, you can give it (the program) a set of rules that we can call the grammar and then feed it a sentence and the program can then deduce whether or not that specific sentence is part of the language. This simply means it (the sentence) follows the rules of the given grammar. And agreeing with Cary, if we continue to rely on computers too much our basic interaction skills WILL suffer. You have no idea how many time's I've cringed out in public when hearing the youth of today speak…

Comments are closed.