Why I Don't Like Web 2.0

For the first time I decided to write something not about F #, and maybe in vain. :)
Probably, having read the following, some will say that this is just a shapeless stream of thoughts, others will consider me a retrograde, others - Don Quixote, struggling with windmills. Maybe. But sometimes why not fight.
Yes, I don’t like Web 2.0, not even all of Web 2.0, but its specific part, but the part, I would say, is quite educational. After all, how often do you determine the current state of the Internet? Like the era of user-generated content. And what is the main apologist for this concept, if not the blogosphere? So, I do not like blogs. And not the blogs themselves, but mainly the way they are used.

You must admit that in the definition of user-generated content there is a certain amount of cunning - well, before, what did the robots generate this very content? Another thing is that the content generator and the creator of the site used to be the same person, but now they are different. So, before, in order to post your content on the Internet, you had to dig into HTML, make yourself a website, and only then ... But people wanted it easier. To no problem. To sit down, wrote and everything is ready. Moreover, this was mostly wanted by people who, by and large, have nothing to write, except perhaps for their personal experiences.
I think I will not be mistaken if I say what it was for these people was invented, and they supported the concept of blogs - online diaries, where it is so convenient to post your daily thoughts, which in most cases except the author himself are interesting only to close friends and his own cat ( especially if her photographs are posted there). But there were (and still is) a lot of such people. And blogging platforms are all developing, expanding and multiplying, to such an extent that we now hardly imagine any other way of self-expression on the network.
So what's the trouble, well, you don’t like “cozy diaries”, well, do not pay attention. But the problem is not in these diaries. She is a little deeper. The problem appeared when people who really have something to say, professionals, after ordinary users began to create their personal sites in the form of blogs. And now this is really a problem.

Tell me, what is the significance (in the array) of articles of a large financial analyst about various models of stock market analysis (time) for the publication of an article? That's right, no. But the trouble is, the blog does not think so. It seems to him that the newest article, it is the best, and deserves the best place on the author’s site, at the top of the main page. And it doesn’t matter that this article is written about the release of version 1.4.67.865 of any framework-specific domain, but the article about key concepts that describe this same area, written first in some shabby 2000, has long been hidden under the cover of history.

Webdin.nol sites had a terrible design, disgusting fonts and an unimaginable layout, but they had one important advantage, they allowed the author to structure the information contained on the site at his own discretion.
Today, having accidentally got to some blog, I sometimes want to get to know it better, but I simply don’t know where to start and where to end. Read it from the beginning, from the end, or maybe from the middle? Sometimes it comes to the ridiculous: going into the post, "tram-pam-pam. Part 7 ”I have a natural desire to get acquainted with the 6 previous ones first. And then I have to parse a half-site in search of the necessary articles. But they are also located back to front, well, complete beauty. Thanks to some authors, they first place links to previous posts, understand to see that something their blog platform is doing wrong.
And all the pribludy for Wordpress, like a list of the most popular posts, or a list of related posts, they try to solve this very problem, but to no avail, because no computer brain can better than the author figure out what to do with his pile of materials.

By the way, all this blogging is generally close to killing the concept of personal sites as some unique objects that have their own identity. Having visited a new blog site that we liked, what are we doing? - subscribe to it, and in most cases we no longer see it. It turns for us into one straight stream of information like a gut, and the information that is already somewhere far away in this gut will most likely remain unexamined by us, simply because the author did not explain to us where to look.

I don’t know exactly what the ideal personal website of a professional expert should look like, but certainly, the constantly changing appearance of the main page, depending on the momentary mood of its owner and reflecting only his current thoughts, is not the best option. I am not saying that there should be no news of the site in the order of their dating at all, but in my opinion they should not be the only possible way to communicate with this site.
And you know, I can still understand when a specialist in the field of cross-stitch organizes his content in such an ineffective way, but when the situation is the same with a guru who writes high-witted posts about the same ASP.NET every week, I think it's sad the irony.
PS I haven’t seen a completely ideal personal site from my point of view, but if you take the one most striving for this, then this is probably the site of Martin Fowler. martinfowler.com