A quick point to define some ideas looking at Web 2.0 and the possibility that somebody could win an election based on a complete Web 2.0 effort. Hat tip to HOTS for bringing up the topic. My opinion is that the answer is no. 
Basically the population make up of America with the baby-boomer generation results in a large amount of the voting public unable, unwilling to use technology as a method for determining a viable candidate. Also, the best bang for the buck for candidates is shaking somebody’s hand.
Web 1.0 is the venerable internet of a displayed web page. Amazon is a web 1.0 company and added comment systems and a recommendation engine to bring themselves into a Web 2.0 structure. Twitter is a Web 2.0 utility. A blog without comments is a Web 1.0 tool. Web 1.0 was a person yelling into the wilderness with no expectation of a response and no technology or tools to accomplish that. The break though between Web 1.0 and 2.0 was fairly ambiguous.
Web 2.0 is interactive (asynchronous) communities that communicate. Whether we are talking about Facebook or MySpace Web 2.0 is about communication and community membership. That community can be loose or strictly coupled. The differentiator between Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 is the interactivity and community. The commentators have all tried to make the change a technology issue and yet it is truly a communication model change. The communication model is pretty much asynchronous. Technology facilitates communication changes but does not create that change. That implicit change is part of the adoption cycle.
Web 3.0 is interactive (synchronous) communities that collaborate in real time. Markhoff stated that it would be a semantical construct but much like the communications model of online communities and tagging Web 3.0 must reach a social space and go beyond simple ubiquity. I suggest that further expression of Web 3.0 will be truly interactive collaboration as if you were holding a meeting and sitting across from each other. One element missing from Web 2.0 is the associated communications feedback loop (often replaced with emoticons). Where Web 2.0 can be interactive and even synchronous the translations between cognition, communication, reception, through the textual display engines of Web 2.0 creates barriers. Web 3.0 will provide through some method the missing feedback mechanisms.
Web 4.0 will be driven by technology and more importantly I suggest it will be hyper media. The analogous tool to twitter at that time will be available as a service that moves between media and access points much like a computer or cell phone moves between access and usability points. Applications and utilities will not be tied to platforms and communities will be driven by content and interest. If you watch the new hit television show you will be able to comment and drive the story line along with others in your community. Driving your car people you know will help direct your GPS. Geo location and context aware applications will expand media awareness.
I base the Web 4.0 ideas on the weight of my belt. At one point not long ago I carried on my substantial waist a cell phone (sometimes 2), a SkyTel pager, a Palm PDA, an MP3 player, an HF pager, and my pants kept falling down. I now carry an iPhone. Smart phones and ultra portable computers result in convergence. Convergence of technology has little impact usually, but in these cases Web 2.0 and Web 3.0 are brought to ubiquitous devices with ultra portability. Utility of the applications grows. When my television can be watched on my computer, my computer watched on my television, my phone answered through my computer, and my email on my phone the “cloud” managing the data and the devices simply being display devices. Web 4.0 will have arrived.
I know some will disagree but heck that is the fun of the Internet. There is some good stuff on the Internet, but much like generational warfare and the discussion of it the Internet defies in many ways describing history while it is still happening. Time will tell, comments welcome.
1 thought on “Web 1.0 through 4.0 or community to society”
Comments are closed.