@prefix rdf: . @prefix ns1: . @prefix foaf: . ns1:this rdf:type foaf:Person . @prefix sioct: . rdf:type sioct:Weblog . @prefix atom: . rdf:type atom:Feed . @prefix rdfs: . rdfs:label "kidehen@openlinksw.com's BLOG [127] description" . rdf:type sioct:BlogPost , atom:Entry . @prefix dc: . dc:title "World Wide Web of Junk" ; foaf:maker ns1:this ; rdfs:label "World Wide Web of Junk" . @prefix dt: . @prefix dcterms: . dcterms:created "2005-05-20T23:07:38Z"^^dt:dateTime ; dcterms:modified "2006-06-22T08:56:58-04:00"^^dt:dateTime . @prefix sioc: . sioc:id "73132451390c0f2eb1f0fcd5373e8dd2" ; sioc:link ; sioc:content "\nAfter digesting Oblique Angle's post titled: World Wide Web of Junk,\nit was nice to be reassured that I am not part of a shrinking minority\nof increasingly peturbed Web users. The post excerpt\u00A0below is what\ncompelled me to contribute\u00A0some of my thoughts about the current\nstate of the Web and a future "Semantic Web". The value of the Internet as a repository of useful information is very low. Carl Shapiro in \u201CInformation Rules\u201D\nsuggests that the amount of actually useful information on the Internet\nwould fit within roughly 15,000 books, which is about half the size of\nan average mall bookstore. To put this in perspective: there are over 5\nbillion unique, static & publicly accessible web pages on the www.\nApparently Only 6% of web sites have educational content (Maureen\nHenninger, \u201CDon\u2019t just surf the net: Effective research strategies\u201D. UNSW Press). Even of the educational content only a fraction is of significant informational value. Noise is taking over the Web at an alarming rate (to be expected in a sense ), and even though Tim Berners-Lee\n(TBL) had the foresight to create the Web,\u00A0many see nothing\nbut\u00A0futility\u00A0in his\u00A0vision for a "Semantic Web" (I\ndon't!).\u00A0 A recent example\u00A0of such commentary comes from Eric\nNee's CIO article, titled:\u00A0 Web Future is Not Semantic, Or Overly Orderly. I take issue with this article because, like most (who have been bitten at least once),\u00A0 I don't like mono culture.\u00A0 This\narticle inadvertently promotes "Google Mono Culture".\u00A0 I\nhave\u00A0excerpted the more frustrating parts of this article below: ..As\nStanford students, Larry Page and Sergey Brin looked at the same\nproblem\u2014how to impart meaning to all the content on the Web\u2014and decided\nto take a different approach. The two developed sophisticated software\nthat relied on other clues to discover the meaning of content, such as\nwhich Web sites the information was linked to. And in 1998 they\nlaunched Google.. You mean\nnoise ranking. Now, I don't think Larry and Sergey set out to do this,\nbut Google page ranks are ultimately based on the concept of "Google\nJuice" (aka links). The value quotient of this algorithm is\naccelerating at internet speed (ironically, but naturally). Human\nbeings are smarter than computers, we just process\u00A0data (not\ninformation!)\u00A0much slower that's all. Thus, we can conjure up\nnumerous ways to bubble up the google link ranking algorithms in no\ntime (as is the case today). ..What\nmost differentiates Google's approach from Berners-Lee's is that Google\ndoesn't require people to change the way they post content.. The\nSemantic Web doesn't require anyone to change how they post content\neither! It just provides a roadmap for intelligent content managment\nand consumption through innovative products. ..As\nSergey Brin told Infoworld's 2002 CTO Forum, "I'd rather make progress\nby having computers under-stand what humans write, than by forcing\n-humans to write in ways that computers can understand." In fact,\nGoogle has not participated at all in the W3C's formulation of Semantic\nWeb standards, says Eric Miller.. Semantic\nContent generated by next generation content managers will make more\nprogress, and they certainly won't require humans to write any\ndifferently. If anything, humans will find the process quite refreshing\nas and when participation is required e.g. clicking\u00A0bookmarklets\nassociated with tagging services such as\u00A0'del.icio.us', 'de.lirio.us', or Unalog\nand others. But this is only the beginning, if I can click on a\nbookmarklet to post this blog post to a tagging service, then why\nwouldn't I be able to incorporate the "tag service post" into the same\nprocess that saves my blog post (the post is content that ends up in a content management system aka blog server)? Yet\nGoogle's impact on the Web is so dramatic that it probably makes more\nsense to call the next generation of the Web the "Google Web" rather\nthan the "Semantic Web." Ah!\nso you think we\u00A0really want the noisy "Google Web" as opposed to a\nfederation of distributed Information- and Knowledgbases ala the\n"Semantic Web"? I don't think so somehow! Today\nwe are generally excited about "tagging" but fail to see its\ncorrelation with the "Semantic Web", somehow? I have said this before,\nand I will say it again, the "Semantic Web" is going to be\nself-annotated by humans\u00A0with the\u00A0aid of\u00A0intelligent and\nunobtrusive annotation technology solutions. These solutions\nwill\u00A0provide context and purpose\u00A0by using our\u00A0our social\nessence as currency. The annotation\u00A0effort will be subliminal,\nthere\u00A0won't be a "Semantic Web Day" parade or anything of the\nlike.\u00A0It will appear before us all, in all its glory, without any\nfanfare.\u00A0Funnily enough, we\u00A0might not even call it "The\nSemantic Web", who cares? But it will have the distinct attributes of\nbeing very "Quiet" and highly "Valuable"; with\u00A0no burden\non\u00A0"how we\u00A0write", but constructive\u00A0burden on "why\nwe\u00A0write" as part of the content contribution\u00A0process (less\nGoogle/Yahoo/etc juice\u00A0chasing\u00A0for more\nknowledge\u00A0assembly and exchange). We\nare social creatures at our core. The Internet and Web have\ncollectively reduced the connectivity hurdles that\u00A0once made\nsocial network oriented solutions implausible. The eradication\nof\u00A0these hurdles ultimately feeds the very impulses that trigger\nthe critical self-annotation that is the basis of my fundamental belief\nin the realization of TBL's Semantic Web vision. \u00A0\n" ; atom:title "World Wide Web of Junk" . @prefix ns10: . sioc:has_creator ns10:this ; sioc:has_container ; sioc:links_to , , , , , , , , , , ; atom:source ; atom:author ns1:this ; atom:published "2005-05-20T23:07:38Z" ; atom:updated "2006-06-22T12:56:58Z" ; sioc:has_reply , . @prefix opl: . opl:isDescribedUsing . ns10:this rdf:type sioc:User . rdf:type atom:Entry , sioct:Comment . rdf:type atom:Entry , sioct:Comment . @prefix rdf: . @prefix ns1: . @prefix foaf: . ns1:this rdf:type foaf:Person ; foaf:made . @prefix atom: . rdf:type atom:Feed . @prefix sioct: . rdf:type sioct:Weblog . @prefix rdfs: . rdfs:label "kidehen@openlinksw.com's BLOG [127] description" . @prefix sioc: . sioc:container_of ; atom:entry ; atom:contains . @prefix ns7: . ns7:this rdf:type sioc:User ; sioc:creator_of . rdf:type sioct:Comment , atom:Entry ; sioc:reply_of . rdf:type atom:Entry , sioct:Comment ; sioc:reply_of .