|
» Strona g-ówna : Web2
Informacji szukaj w: google yahoo msn
Tue, 01 May 2007 20:30:04
An estimated 40 million Americans consume porn online. The Internet makes it simple, private " and addictive. Daniel Sieberg reports on the obsession and a new chance at a cure.
Tue, 01 May 2007 23:30:11
"Cheese" " crushed nighttime pain reliever laced with heroin " has become the drug of choice among an increasing number of teens in Texas middle and high schools. Kelly Cobiella reports on this increasingly deadly trend.
Wed, 11 Apr 2007 15:21:58
SECRECY NEWS Secrecy News Blog: http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/ Support Secrecy News
VISUAL AIRCRAFT RECOGNITION (FOUO) More than 160 U.S. and foreign military aircraft are catalogued in a U.S. Army manual which describes their distinctive physical characteristics in order to permit visual identification of the aircraft in flight. The manual is nominally a restricted document, marked "for official use only," and it has not been approved for public release. But a copy was obtained by Secrecy News. Proper identification of aircraft is obviously a matter of military significance. Incorrectly identifying a friendly aircraft (such as an F-15 Eagle) as an enemy aircraft (such as a MiG-29 Fulcrum) in wartime "could cause fratricide," meaning the destruction of friendly aircraft, the manual states. Conversely, incorrectly identifying an enemy aircraft (a Su-24 Fencer) as a friendly one (such as a Tornado) "might allow a hostile aircraft entry into, or safe passage through, the defended area." On the other hand, mistaking one type of hostile aircraft (a Su-17 Fitter) for another type of hostile aircraft (a MiG-21 Fishbed) would generally have "no impact" -- except "if friendly countries were flying some aircraft types that are normally considered hostile." Likewise, mistaking one type of friendly aircraft (an F-4 Phantom) for another (an A-4 Skyhawk) would normally not be a great problem unless "a hostile country was using an aircraft type that is normally considered friendly." The manual covers both well-known and relatively obscure systems, but does not include classified aircraft. Although an earlier edition of the manual was published without access restrictions, the current edition (2006) was not approved for public release. But as the government imposes publication restrictions on an ever larger set of records, the control system seems to be breaking down at the margins, permitting unauthorized access with increasing frequency. In this case, contrary to the restriction notice on the title page, the document does not reveal sensitive "technical or operational information." See "Visual Aircraft Recognition," U.S. Army Field Manual FM 3-01.80, January 2006 (413 pages in a very large 28 MB PDF file):
CIA PERSONNEL REGULATIONS DISCLOSED The Central Intelligence Agency has released three of its internal personnel regulations in redacted form as part of a defense against charges that it improperly dismissed a former undercover contract employee. A 2002 regulation signed by then-DCI George Tenet established the CIA Personnel Evaluation Board, which is "the primary mechanism for reviewing employee suitability and security cases that may result in the imposition of serious discipline, termination of employment, or revocation of security clearances."The "circumstances under which Agency employment may be terminated" are described in another 2002 regulation. The role of "contract employees" -- which are not the same as "contractors" -- is described in a third redacted CIA regulation. The regulations were disclosed by CIA in response to a lawsuit filed by "Peter B.," a covert contract employee who alleged that he was wrongly terminated and was subjected to unlawful retaliation by the CIA. The CIA replied that the CIA Director "has discretion to terminate a person employed by the CIA for any reason and the decision is not subject to review." The newly disclosed CIA personnel regulations were characterized in a declaration by CIA information review officer Linda Dove.
IN MEMORIAM: PAUL LEVENTHAL, JOHN W. LEONARD Almost every day brings forceful reminders of the transience of all human endeavors, challenging us to consider our own mortality and to act with compassion, if we can. Paul Leventhal, a tireless advocate for the cause of nuclear non-proliferation, died this week of cancer. As president of the public interest Nuclear Control Institute, he was a relentless critic of nuclear policy, a font of new ideas, and a mentor to a generation of younger activists. He is remembered here:John William Leonard, who also died this week at age 30, was the son of Bill Leonard, the respected director of the Information Security Oversight Office. "He was more than a good son, he was a good man," said an obituary notice in the Washington Post today (4/11/07, page B8). The notice stated that charitable contributions may be made to the John William Leonard Memorial Fund, c/o Bank of America, 28250 Three Notch Road, Mechanicsville, MD 20659. ******************************Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the Federation of American Scientists. The Secrecy News blog is at: To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, send an email message to secrecy_news-request@lists.fas.org with "subscribe" (without quotes) in the body of the message. To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a blank email message to secrecy_news-remove@lists.fas.org. OR email your request to saftergood@fas.org Secrecy News is archived at: SUPPORT Secrecy News with a donation here: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 21:06:00
By Web 2.0 Blog Contributing Editor Mark Scrimshire It increasingly obvious that the traditional publish and consumption model has outlived its usefulness and applicability. That model has big media businesses generating content and we, the consumer, passively consuming it. Up to now our only control has been the channel flipper or the power button. What is clear is that the power of community, should not be underestimated in the battle to define the future of the emerging online video industry. The leaders in these two markets are YouTube in the streaming field and the iTunes Music Store in the download field. One marked difference between the two is the size of video material being handled. We are poised to see dramatic growth in media download size with Apple's much covered entry today to the market for movie downloading through iTunes and competitors such as MovieLink making a big splash. I have contrasted the streaming and download segments in the visual below. The digitization of video coupled with the growth in broadband Internet access has dramatically boosted interest in video content. Another way to look at the on-line video industry is to look at what we, as consumers and creators, do with video content. There is more to Video than simply viewing content. We create, edit, view, find, review and share content. Rich Internet Applications, an integral part of Web 2.0, are emerging that address these different activities. The video star below illustrates the different activities we engage in with video an identifies some of the emerging players in each area.
![]()
Web 2.0 Players in the Video Market Let's review some of the Web 2.0 players in the online video market. In this review we will look at applications that are Internet-based. Some of the new entrants in the video editing arena provide downloadable tools. We are not looking at those tools in this review.![]() Strength: Online Editing. Eyespot is a very interesting Web 2.0 solution. This Rich Internet Application enables you to upload and edit your videos. Most other sites expect you to perform the editing on your PC, Apple Mac or Linux machine and then upload the result. EyeSpot provides online tools to mix video and music to create a finished video. EyeSpot allows you to upload and mix video, music and photos. Here is a quick video of images I uploaded, compiled and mixed in a few minutes. EyeSpot has a lot of potential since their online tools can be integrated as a front-end to a number of other services such as blip.tv and veoh. Indeed, you can setup publishing to blogger, LiveJournal, veoh and Blip.tv in your EyeSpot profile. ![]() Strength: Sharing
Blip.tv is a video sharing site. has already made headlines by winning a deal to provide video services to support media companies including CNN. As Marshall Kirkpatrick pointed out in TechCrunch's August 15th Blog EyeSpot has partnered with Blip.tv. The two startups offer services that are highly complimentary.
Strength: Sharing Veoh is a video sharing site. While it is possible to view video online the real power of Veoh comes from the downloaded client for PCs and Macs. The client creates a peer-to-peer network for sharing video and allows subscribers to view high quality, full screen video. The benefit of this approach is the distribution of video becomes highly scalable. Veoh is definitely attracting interest and investment. They recently raised $12.5 million in a B venture round from investors including former Disney CEO Michael Eisner and Time Warner. Strength: Sharing VideoJug appears to be a video sharing site with a mission. To explain life on film. VideoJug is seeding their site with educational videos but is encouraging the Internet community to contribute instructional video. It will be interesting to see if they can differentiate themselves from the likes of YouTube and build up a critical mass of educational content. Strength: Sharing
Flurl is a video sharing and search site. It allows media to be uploaded anonymously in a variety of formats. There is a 20MB cap on uploads that limits the size of video content. The service is advertising supported. The terms of service prevent linking to media files directly. Links are made to links that serve the content. This enables Flurl to serve advertising to viewers. Strength: Sharing
YouTube is now one of the top ten destination sites on the Internet serving over 100 million videos each day. It has achieved this position by making it exceedingly easy to upload and share video. YouTube hosts videos converting them from multiple sources to flash movies. Video is limited to 10 minutes in length or 100MB in size. Strength: Search Yahoo Video is evolving as a competitor to YouTube. Yahoo members are able to upload video to Yahoo Video. Yahoo provides video search to find video content on the Internet. Video uploads are limited to 100MB and multiple formats are supported. Yahoo supports tagging, rating and sharing of videos. ![]() Strength: Search Google has a video search site. Google recently added the ability to upload and share video on their beta site. Uploads are limited to 100MB and the popular video file formats are supported. Google provides a desktop uploader for Windows, Mac and Linux platforms that allows files larger than 100Mb to be uploaded. During the beta phase Google offered the option to charge for video downloading. This feature is currently suspended but expect it to return. It will be another example of Google leveraging it's core capabilities and extending in to new areas. In this instance use your Google Account to manage upload of videos. Use Google analytics to check on the popularity of your video and charge for premium content using Google Checkout.
![]() Stength: Review MovieTally is somewhat of an anomaly but is worth mentioning as a new site in very early beta. MovieTally does not host video, nor does it search the Internet for content. MovieTally is a community-based movie collection. It uses tagging and wiki type concepts to compile movie information. I believe the site could benefit from leveraging Amazon, for example finding movies from their database if the information does not exist in MovieTally. I can see real e-commerce potential with link ups with services such as Fandango, to purchase Movie tickets, and Amazon, to buy movies. The site is worth a visit. Register (its a quick process) and enter a couple of your favorite movies. MovieTally demonstrates many of the traits of a Web 2.0 application where network effects make the site more valuable as more people use it. I have reservations that people will really take the time to enter in Movie information, such as actor, director and plot summaries when Amazon is just a click away - but at the outset very few people expected Wikipedia to grow in to the extensive resource that it has become. I think this issue can be addressed by pulling information from Amazon using their web services toolkit. The developer, Hayden Metsky, has certainly paid attention to building a participative architecture with cross linkages embedded throughout the site. I intend to keep an eye on the evolution of this site in the coming months. There is an opportunity for MovieTally because people are looking for a movie recommendations and ratings site that they can trust - one that reflects their perspectives and those of their friends. What are your favorite online video resources on the Web? Let us know and join the conversation by leaving your comments below.
Mon, 25 Sep 2006 03:54:00
It's worth giving a run-down of the particulars of the conference and some of the terrific blog and news coverage of the event for those that weren't able to make it. Also, I'd like to thank leading-edge Web 2.0 technology firms JackBe and Nexaweb for their terrific support of the conference as well as numerous other sponsors which helped make it possible. A Fast-Paced and In-Depth Day of Web 2.0 and Business The day opened up with a rousing speech by Secretary of Technology for the State of Virginia, Aneesh Chopra, who gave quite a talk about technology, the state government, and how they are Web 2.0 capabilities on the state's Web sites for things like online support communities for Iraq veterans and improving job prospects for the less affluent in the south of the state. Aneesh introduced the day's first keynote speaker, Jobster CEO, Jason Goldberg. Jason provided a pretty compelling video introduction of the television coverage Web 2.0 has been getting on major media including CNN and then launched into an exploration of Web 2.0 and what it means to him. His layperson explanation of Web 2.0 (Web 1.0 = Get it online and Web 2.0 = Make it work) came in at a good level for an audience that seem squarely mixed between business folks and technical people. See below for more details about Jason's talk from Web 2.0 local Ken Yarmosh. Jason was followed up by Rajen Sheth of Google Enterprise who gave quite a lucid and far ranging overview of the way Google looks at Web 2.0 as well as where the online software market is going including open platform-based application hosting, something Google has been getting increasingly involved with as they release more and more business software online that range from Writely to Google Spreadsheets. Best Concept Discussed: Search has become the most effective navigation paradigm. After this and right before lunch I hosted a panel to discuss where Web 2.0 is taking business. We had a great cast of Web 2.0 CTOs and CEOs including Chris Heidelberger of Nexaweb , John Crupi of JackBe , David Temkin of Laszlo Systems , and Jeff Crigler of Voxant . Our hour-long discussion ranged far and wide and included how rich Internet applications are fairly resistent to indexing and search, to the trend of businesses using software as a service and outsourcing over the Web to solve business problems instead of asking IT deparments for help. We also touched on whether adding social features to business applications is considered too at risk for distracting employees and much more. To keep the energy level up, the conference didn't break for lunch and had it served while Web 2.0 ubberblogger and up-and-coming "media 2.0 baron" Michael Arrington of TechCrunch spoke to the audience on "What's Next". Mike gave one of the more humorous presentations of the day that was also packed with informative analysis on the good, the bad, and ugly of Web 2.0 software today (Good: Digg , Bad: Jigsaw ). He also presented some terrific analysis of how to be successful in the Web 2.0 era (unfortunately, being lucky topped the list). Best line (paraphrased): "Be warned that I tend to make blanket incendiary statements when someone asks me a question about something I said in my presentation." See links below for more coverage. After lunch, Hart Rossman of SAIC gave an in-depth presentation on Enterprise Web 2.0 and its convergence with service-oriented architecture (SOA), a topic that I find important and write about frequently. Ross especially dived into the details of how mashups and bringing outside Web services into the enterprise are going to have unique and difficult security challenges and he tackled a tough subject head-on and introduced the new SafeSOA initiative to the audience, which aims to solve, among other things, the issues around using Web 2.0 APIs and platforms within the enterprise. Microsoft's Michael Platt , from their architecture strategy group, came up next and gave an hour-long tour that ranged far across the landscape of the Internet, the history of computing and how things like Web 2.0 (like the PC and minicomputer revolutions) are recurring phenomona. Mike talks about user generated content, mobile Web 2.0, Microsoft's Live intiative, the Red vs. Blue videos that young people are generated by recording XBox Live games, and much more including the Chevy Apprentice campaign, one of my favorite social computing stories. Microsoft has the responsibility of successfuly guiding hundreds of millions of consumers and millions of businesses through the increasingly social jungle that is the Web's next generation and Mike gave a great overview. And given the time, Mike wasn't even able to discuss major MS-related Web 2.0 news like Soapbox , Microsoft's new YouTube play. After that, Jeremy Geelan hosted a highly-interactive panel on Web 2.0 and monetization that featured TJ Kang, founder & CEO of ThinkFree , Ben Elowitz, CEO of Wetpaint , Robin ‘Roblimo’ Miller, Editor-in-Chief of OSTG , and Sean Frazier of KnowNow. The panel provided a "front row seat" to leaders in the Web 2.0 space and Robin Miller, inventor of the Slashdot new format, was clearly in fine form on the panel. The last speaker was Harvard Business School's Andrew McAfee , whom I'd invited as one of the leading thinkers of how to apply Web 2.0 to the enterprise , a vision he currently calls Enterprise 2.0. Andrew gave a riveting talk on Enterprise 2.0 and freeform, emergent tools like blogs and wikis to truly enable collaboration and capture discoverable enterprise knowledge, and more. Citing the success of Wikipedia and its early experiments that encouraged them to make it as easy as possible to contribute and edit entries, McAfee went on to discuss the challenges of getting users to adopt technologies more difficult that e-mail, currently the easiest way for most people to collaborate, and unfortuantely also one of the most private and non-scalable collaboration models. See blog coverage below for more details. (MP3 Recording) News and Blog Coverage of The New New Internet Blog and news coverage of the event was very good, here is some of the best write-ups I've been able to find so far including some good video. Be sure to add others in the comments below.
Turnout was great and interest was high so it looks like we'll do this again next year as well. Are you looking to apply Web 2.0 to your business? Why or why not?
Tue, 26 Sep 2006 03:39:00
It's been approximately 18 months since Jesse James Garrett fatefully coined the term that would go on to nearly reinvent the face of Web development. A lot has happened in the last year and a half, including the Web 2.0 phenomenon getting into high gear, the creation or resurrection of many a company building or using rich Internet technologies, and the proliferation of really great dynamic, online software. It's clear that Ajax as a name, a concept, and a popular browser development technique is here to stay, and our Web applications will never be the same again. While most of us know that the Ajax approach was fairly well known before the term ever came about, the timing was apparently just right for the idea of Ajax to capture our imagination and apply such a pithy name to an important new development trend. And just as powerful browsers, high-speed connections, online software trends, and development tools were reaching the sweet spot that needed to form for Ajax to be popular, so also came the embrace of a world extremely interested in turning their boring, static Web pages into full-blown, sophisticated applications. Since then, I've heard of or seen literally hundreds of Ajax products, tools, utilities, debated the disruptive potential of Ajax, speculated about how Ajax will be the face of our SOAs , and even watched as RIA technologies in general have risen up that truly complement the few things that Ajax does not do well, such as multimedia.
Along the way, the Web development community has learned a lot about Ajax including its strengths and weaknesses, appropriate uses, and its inevitable foibles. So to inaugurate the first print edition of a dedicated Ajax print periodical (see below for details), I thought I'd share my perspective on what I think we've learned in our 18 month journey to remake the face of the Web and the browser. Ajax has indeed helped give us the next major new platform for software, almost certainly forever surpassing our desktop operating systems as place we develop and use most of our software applications, consumer and business both. As always, this merely represents my opinion... What Every Software Project Needs to Know About Ajax
There are certainly other things software projects should know about Ajax but this is plenty of crucial food for thought. Looking ahead, we see the growing trend of in-browser mashups which is making the habit of combining pulling together -- entirely on the fly -- sets of Ajax components, Javascript snippets, and Flash widgets from all over the Web into a new set of often user-generated ad hoc software . Backed by the growing Global SOA , online Ajax components such as Google Maps, that can be referenced over the Web by a line of Javascript, and you have a recipe for an increasingly emphasis on assembly and glue instead of "green field" development of RIAs. This is an important use of the Web that I've called the "mashosphere " for the lack of a better term, which ushers in a whole new era of dependency and configuration management problems. The rich palette of software components and high value services on the Web will be a irresistable siren call for developers and expect more and more Ajax applications to be mashups in one form or another. But all of this talk of the evolution of Ajax does bring up some exciting new industry events...
For the cover story of the premier print issue, I worked with the OpenAjax Alliance -- a big thanks to IBM's Jon Ferraiolo and Joseph Becker -- to get a premium article series on both the strategic and technical direction of this significant and important new development in the Ajax world. OpenAjax holds the promise of true Ajax component interoperability, consistent tool support, and much more. I've urged Microsoft to consider joining -- they're one of the major holdouts -- and they've promised to seriously consider it after they get Atlas shipped, so hopefully we'll see nearly 100% industry support soon. Thus, the story of OpenAjax has been one of the bigger Ajax stories of the year as the number of vendors on board continues to grow in leaps and bounds, never mind the relatively light hand and welcome avoidance of a heavyweight standards approach to Ajax interoperability. I'll be blogging more about Ajax and less about Web 2.0 here in the next week or so as coverage of AjaxWorld and the many exciting announcements and information begins to flow forth. Happy Ajaxing and hope to see you next week in California! Mon, 30 Oct 2006 04:54:00
The next Web 2.0 Conference will be upon us in early November and things are busier than ever in the Web 2.0 world. Along the way, I've managed to miss the one year anniversary of this blog, which I began back in late September of last year. There have been over 2.5 million direct hits on this site since inception, a large percentage of it due to my Web 2.0 lists such as last year's Best Web 2.0 Software List , but I also get e-mail frequently from die-hard readers as well. Most importantly however, from all my conversations with people all over the world, it's clear that Web 2.0 remains more than ever a topic of major popular interest and industry fascination. While the general understanding of Web 2.0 is improving all the time, we have a ways to go before we have a concise, generally accepted definition. My favorite is still networked applications that explicitly leverage network effects. But while most of what we ascribe to the Web 2.0 name falls out of these definition, it's fairly hard for most of us to extrapolate meaningful ramifications from this. People that read this blog know that I'm in the camp of folks that try to look beyond Ajax and the visual site design aspect of Web 2.0, and try to capture the deeper design patterns and business models that seem to be powering the most successful Web sites and online companies today. Though concepts such as harnessing collective intelligence and Data as the Next Intel Inside, as described by Tim O'Reilly , most directly capture the spirit of the Web 2.0 era, it does seem to me that there are a few other elements that we haven't nailed down yet.
At the AjaxWorld Conference and Expo earlier this month, I gave my usual talk about how to formally leverage Web 2.0, with plenty of examples coming from things happening out on the Web. If you accept that it's the power and size of the Web today , particularly the number of highly interactive network nodes (who are mostly people), give them extremely low-barrier tools, and we should be able to find plenty examples of emergent behavior; significant events happening suddenly and unexpectedly. Tipping points are getting easier and easier to reach as site designers learn how to create better network effect triggers, draw large audiences suddenly, and as those same audiences increasingly self-organize spontaneously, such as in the KatrinaList project (suddenly) or Wikipedia (slower but bigger). And it's the arrival of Web 2.0 "supersites" like YouTube , which appear suddenly, often riding the coattails of other major Web 2.0 site's ecosystems, and apply aggressive, viral network effects that show us the true, full scale of the possibilities. Building a Web site worth over one billion dollars in 18 months is a very impressive result, but it's really only a single axis upon which Web 2.0 can be applied successfully. Another axis upon which to apply Web 2.0 focuses less on pulling in every single user possible with a horizontal network effect, but on building a difficult to reproduce but highly valuable data source, such as the Navteq mapping database, or Zillow's real estate database. One might argue that these are still very horizontal but these are merely just well known examples. The variety and depth of the Web is such that not every Web 2.0 site will have tens of millions of users, nor should it. An effective Web 2.0 site is largely powered by its users, whose feedback and contributions, direct and indirect, make the site a living ecosystem that evolves from day to day, a mosaic as rich and varied as a sites users would like it to be. In other words, creating a high quality architectures of participation is becoming a strategic competitive advantage in many areas. I'm often asked, particularly after one of my presentations on Web 2.0, to articulate the most important and effective actions a site designer can take to realize the benefits of Web 2.0. As a result, I've created the list below in a attempt to catpure a good, general purpose overview of what these steps are. My plan in the near future, is to dive into each one of these as much as time permits and explain how they make highly effective Web 2.0 sites not only effective, but often possible at all. In the meantime, please take them for what they're worth, I believe however that they are instrumental in making a Web site or application the most successful possible. The Essentials of Leveraging Web 2.0
Of course, there a lot of work in the details and these are just some of the important, general essentials. Unfortunately, a lot of careful thinking, planning, and engineering goes into any effective Web 2.0 site and it's having these ideas at the core of it, which can help you get the best results. Final Note: I'll be on the road the next two weeks and will be at the Web 2.0 Conference in San Francisco from Nov. 7th-9th. I'll be there writing coverage for the Web 2.0 Journal and here as much as possible. If you're going to be there, please drop me a line if you'd like to meet. Thu, 09 Nov 2006 22:44:00
The leadup to the conference was John Musser's great 100-page update of the famous five page Web 2.0 description from Tim O'Reilly (John's comments on the new report here) and the conference also had an exciting Launchpad event to unveil a series of interesting new Web 2.0 sites. Richard MacManus has the details with links to the sites here on ZDNet. The two topics that seemed to come up the most often these last three days was 1) how existing major players on the Web can continue on in their leadership roles without significant changes in their business strategies and 2) the need for Web sites and platforms to be as open as possible in order to draw the broadast range of audience and adoption. In a profiled afternoon conversation on day two, AOL's Jonathan Miller seemed to clearly understand these issues -- which are actively facing his company today -- as it heads into the world of user generated contact and social networks, two forces that are growing large new Web startups, and hence competition, very rapidly. These new fast growth site models , such as the ones used with YouTube and MySpace, are not however providing clear paths for way for public company to please their investors (net revenue.) Miller also observed that many large companies are not in a position to acquire hot properties like Google did with YouTube.
In another public conversation in the main ballroom right after Jonathan Miller was Microsoft's Ray Ozzie delved into the issues that Microsoft is facing, that started out by focusing on the challenge of how to adapt Microsoft's flagship operating system product, Vista -- as well as their most profitable product, Office -- more effectively to the Web. The Internet, particularly with Web 2.0 sites, has become the pre-eminent new "superplatform" and it's a significant challenge to Microsoft to stay relevant in a world where the browser is increasingly the center of attention for the software experience. Ray seemed sanguine about the opportunities however and Vista certainly has many features, such as pervasive built-in syndication, that will certainly pull Vista closer to the Web. But it was openness that was clearly the most prevalent topic, with discussions on how companies should free their content and services to be used a wider range of situations, particularly from 3rd party entities, even forming the foundation of other products and services offered by entirely different companies. Openness can also take many forms, from syndicating content to providing well-defined and monetized Web service APIs, and if you don't provide a technical and legal basis for doing so, challenges will only increase as the limited numbers of ways that content and services will reduce the number of overall business opportunities available. And it puts companies that don't do this at a competitive disadvantage to companies that do open up. Finally, openness creates the potential for unintended uses, particular as small, more focused content is opened up (smaller chunks are more reusable and general purpose). It was clear in many discussions, such as with Jonathan Miller, that it's well understood that walled gardens just aren't a viable online business model any longer. Strategies for Creating Open Web Sites and Platforms As culled from Web 2.0 Summit discussions and other known best practices...
There were plenty of other good sessions at the show and I attended one of the best ones late on the morning of the first day, a great talk from IBM about enterprise mashups, situational software , SOA, and Web 2.0, which are all colliding and combining to make it easier for companies to clear out their application backlog. Also see great coverage by Stowe Boyd, Richard MacManus , and I hate to say it but ValleyWag, who has relentlessly live blogged the conference. Announcing Web 2.0 University Finally, and pardon the shameless self-promotion, we did have our own big news at the Web 2.0 Summit, namely that O'Reilly Media -- the company that coined the term "Web 2.0" and described the trend to the world -- and my firm, Hinchcliffe & Company, jointly announced on Wednesday that we've formed strategic partnership to join forces on a series of premier services around Web 2.0. You can read a complete overview of our first major new service, which is already available, called Web 2.0 University. We believe this full series of education and consulting solutions around Web 2.0 will bring intensive, hands-on services around the specific design patterns and business models of Web 2.0. The premise is that companies are increasingly becoming aware that they need to apply Web 2.0 models to the core of their existing products and services and these services will help them get there quickly and with a minimum of disruption. So far, early interest has been intriguingly high. The Web 2.0 Expo will be upon us before we know it. The deadline for proposals is tomorrow, November 10th, so get them in if you're interested in presenting. See you there! |
||||