Friday, September 29, 2006
The Problems With 2.0, pt 1564622
Ross Mayfield waxes poetic about "helping" the CIA get the potential of 2.0.
One might reasonably wonder whether this goes against everything 2.0 stands for - decentralization, transparency, the edge, etc.
It's a contradiction (or sell out, if you like) which points to a bigger problem.
Every revolution needs principles. They need to be defended and nurtured because the market (analysts, etc) are inherently myopic - and revolutions take time to create value/upset the status quo.
The problem with 2.0 is that there aren't really any principles (hypotheses, if you like) anyone is standing up for. Entrepreneurs, for the most part, are just flipmeat - they have little intention of investing the time it takes to build something solid and durable. McVenture guys, for the most part, are just flipping the burgers, if you like.
In neither case are players trying to revolutionize much of anything. Hence, the long gap in any kind of significant liquidity event in 2.0. It's a shame - but it's squarely down to standing for exactly nothing.
cool post. although IMO the CIA will never be able to get 2.0, no matter how much ross mayfield or anyone shows them how to do it. it's an organization fundamentally designed to be secretive, IMO that's not a 2.0/web strategy.
although the CIA is already a bit of an edge institution, if you think of how they leverage both the data around them (my favorite: acoustic kitty) and institutions external to them (mafia, ISI, SAVAK, foreign insurgents, etc).
but they're certainly not into the sharing part, and it's tough to imagine them ever being into it.
// kid mercury // 3:55 PM
This is yet another clear example to show that technology, and in this case, technologies of participation, that even distribution processes and cultural arrangements like Open Source are separate from their moral component. See how Al-Qaida works, think of open source chemical weapon development on darknets...its pretty scary stuff! I recently got asked by the police to consult them on Police 2.0. These technologies will be adopted...but how.? Maybe the responsible citizen/organization/company rep/father/son/etc will only able to have any influence in how we frame their use. We need some leaders to step forward in this area and cut a path.
// james burke // 8:31 AM
I have completely missed the train here. Do you mean that web 2.0 doesn't have any principles? Maybe it's just me, but I think they have to do with user participation and developer mashups.
Blogs and Wikis aren't really 2.0, they are new media. 2.0 is just the name by which the hype goes.
// Tiago Silveira // 4:02 PM
Post a Comment