Social Networking - A New Definition

Loraine Lawson

If you read about technology on a regular basis -- and if you're on this site, I'm guessing you do -- then you would probably say Web 3.0 will be all about semantic technology. Essentially, we're talking a context-smarter, integrated new frontier.

 

But as with Web 2.0 a year ago, it turns out the term "Web 3.0" is still very much up for grabs. And, I suppose, it should be if you're going to use versioning. After all, we still don't know which technologies will actually work out or come along to transform the Web.

 

So I guess it's only fair that we consider a new definition put forth recently by a group funded by the European Community called the WIP Project. WIP is devoted to wireless mobile network architecture and is not to be confused with other WIPs, including the World Internet Project or women in prison films.

 

Actually, it's a shame they opted to call it Web 3.0, because now it will just get entangled in the semantic -- ahem -- debate over that term, rather than being considered for its merits. As it turns out, WIP presents an intriguing use case for a new type of networking.

 

WIP is proposing a future where you can extend social networking to, well, the network level. Instead of connecting through a social Web 2.0 site, you'd be able to use devices and your Internet connection to build your own network with friends, neighbors, and so on. This would allow users to do things like create a building network by inviting neighbors in an apartment complex to share a connection.


 

OK, so you can do that now. But here's where it's a different concept, as this ICT Results piece explains:

You all have Internet connections via an ISP, ranging from 1, 2 and 5 megabits/second (Mbits/s). You decide to pool your money and rent a fibre-optic line that handles voice, data and TV for the whole building. Suddenly you all have 10Mbit/s connections.

WIP is already testing phase some components for this technology. It really does sound like a new twist to the architecture -- and not just a new way to use Web pages. Too bad Web 2.0 is already taken.



Add Comment      Leave a comment on this blog post
Oct 6, 2008 11:11 AM Casey Casey  says:
I think that the term 'Web 3.0' will suffer the same fate as it's younger brother. Web 2.0 so often is miscategorized and overused. I've heard the term 'Web 2.0' used to describe elaborate Flash-based websites, for instance.I think if the community understands that we are talking about a shift in technology, and not just an aesthetic renovation, then we'll have a much clearer understanding. Reply
Nov 4, 2008 4:51 AM rubal rubal  says:
I think Web 2.0 has more to do with collective intelligence on Web , involving more user interaction and comments, blogs etc, but here we are talking about something other than collaboration on web , It has more to do with networking using physical hardware or instruments , we cannot call it Web 3.0 Reply

Post a comment

 

 

 

 


(Maximum characters: 1200). You have 1200 characters left.

 

null
null

 

Subscribe to our Newsletters

Sign up now and get the best business technology insights direct to your inbox.