The Web Is Dead. Long Live the Internet | Magazine. Two decades after its birth, the World Wide Web is in decline, as simpler, sleeker services — think apps — are less about the searching and more about the getting. Chris Anderson explains how this new paradigm reflects the inevitable course of capitalism. And Michael Wolff explains why the new breed of media titan is forsaking the Web for more promising (and profitable) pastures.
Who’s to Blame: Us As much as we love the open, unfettered Web, we’re abandoning it for simpler, sleeker services that just work. by Chris Anderson You wake up and check your email on your bedside iPad — that’s one app. You’ve spent the day on the Internet — but not on the Web. This is not a trivial distinction. A decade ago, the ascent of the Web browser as the center of the computing world appeared inevitable. But there has always been an alternative path, one that saw the Web as a worthy tool but not the whole toolkit.
“Sure, we’ll always have Web pages. Who’s to Blame: Them Chaos isn’t a business model. The Web is not dead, but many wish it so. With an inflammatory headline and a misleading graphic, Wired has declared the death of the World Wide Web. This is nonsense, but many wish it were true, and the piece is worth reading as a starting point, just not a conclusion. Plenty of publishers rue the invention of the Web. It has demolished barriers behind which publishers had built comfortable businesses. Customers have become competitors, business models have been demolished. The Web's empowerment of everyone has included bigots, hatemongers, professional and amateur liars, and terrorists. It's all so messy. Those with power always seek to retain and increase it, so it should come as no surprise that corporations like Verizon and Comcast and individuals like Steve Jobs and Rupert Murdoch want to create a future where they can decide what's available, to whom, and how it works.
One of the few advantages of getting older is historical perspective. Is the Web Dying? It Doesn’t Look That Way - Bits Blog. The Web Is Dead. Who Cares? - PCWorld. No doubt many netizens of cyberspace were surprised to hear this week that the World Wide Web is on death's doorstep while the Internet is alive and well and ready to be the platform for an electronic Camelot. That's because for many folks the Web and the Net are synonymous. They use the words interchangeably in their daily lives, and they're likely to continue using them that way even if the prediction of the Web's fade from glory becomes a reality. Let's face it, all this talk of the Web's rapidly diminishing importance is simply "inside baseball" palaver for many cybernauts who just want to get things done and don't care about what enables them to do it.
Wired's Chris Anderson is absolutely right when he writes in his obituary for the Web: "Openness is a wonderful thing in the nonmonetary economy of peer production. But eventually our tolerance for the delirious chaos of infinite competition finds its limits. So the Web is dying. Why should we care? Will it happen again? 90-9-1. Close Sean founded Ant’s Eye View's Austin practice, where he launched special practices, developed business and oversaw project delivery. He has worked extensively in marketing operations, brand management, customer service, product development, strategy, process design and measurement projects.
Before Ant's Eye View, Sean worked with Dell and pioneered a Social Media Model to improve global brand health, customer service models, and Dell's overall culture. The Model has been cited by books, periodicals and university research for its innovation. Information Explosion & Cloud Storage. Informavore. The term informavore (also spelled informivore) characterizes an organism that consumes information. It is meant to be a description of human behavior in modern information society, in comparison to omnivore, as a description of humans consuming food. George A. Miller [1] coined the term in 1983 as an analogy to how organisms survive by consuming negative entropy (as suggested by Erwin Schrödinger [2]). Miller states, "Just as the body survives by ingesting negative entropy, so the mind survives by ingesting information. In a very general sense, all higher organisms are informavores.
" An early use of the term was in a newspaper article by Jonathan Chevreau [3] where he quotes a speech made by Zenon Pylyshyn. More recently the term has been popularized by philosopher Daniel Dennett in his book Kinds of Minds [5] and by cognitive scientist Steven Pinker .[6] References[edit] External links[edit] "informavore" at Word Spy. Information foraging.
Information foraging is a theory that applies the ideas from optimal foraging theory to understand how human users search for information. The theory is based on the assumption that, when searching for information, humans use "built-in" foraging mechanisms that evolved to help our animal ancestors find food.
Importantly, better understanding of human search behaviour can improve the usability of websites or any other user interface. History of the theory[edit] In the 1970s optimal foraging theory was developed by anthropologists and ecologists to explain how animals hunt for food. Details of the theory[edit] "Informavores" constantly make decisions on what kind of information to look for, whether to stay at the current site to try to find additional information or whether they should move on to another site, which path or link to follow to the next information site, and when to finally stop the search.
Information scent[edit] Information diet[edit] Models of information foraging[edit] Information Foraging: Why Google Makes People Leave Your Site Faster (Alertbox) Models of collaborative tagging. Many have argued that social tagging or collaborative tagging systems can provide navigational cues or “way-finders” [1][2] for other users to explore information. The notion is that, given that social tags are labels that users create to represent topics extracted from Web documents, interpretation of these tags should allow other users to predict contents of different documents efficiently. Social tags are arguably more important in exploratory search, in which the users may engage in iterative cycles of goal refinement and exploration of new information (as opposed to simple fact-retrievals), and interpretation of information contents by others will provide useful cues for people to discover topics that are relevant.
One significant challenge that arises in social tagging systems is the rapid increase in the number and diversity of the tags. As opposed to structured annotation systems, tags provide users an unstructured, open-ended mechanism to annotate and organize web-content. Google Search Appliance: Now Without HCIR!
Riepl's law. Riepl's law is a hypothesis formulated by Wolfgang Riepl in 1913. It is frequently cited in discussions about newly emerging forms of media in the scientific community in German-speaking countries. [citation needed] Riepl, the chief editor of Nuremberg's biggest newspaper at the time, stated in his dissertation about ancient modes of news communications (original title: "Das Nachrichtenwesen des Altertums mit besonderer Rücksicht auf die Römer") that new, further developed types of media never replace the existing modes of media and their usage patterns.
Instead, a convergence takes place in their field, leading to a different way and field of use for these older forms. This hypothesis is still considered to be relevant, explaining the fact that new media never make the "old" media disappear. Riepl, Wolfgang (1913).