PC Magazine / RE Editor Hates Web 2.0

I do not believe Web 2.0. Just do not lynch me, as this sacramental-caustic “I do not believe” does not apply to my writings. And the phrase and this article belongs to the editor of the Russian PC Magazine Oleg Lebedev, who, apparently, just hates Web 2.0. The material is controversial and ambiguous. Read it is worth it.

The first postulate set forth by Lebedev can be rephrased as "Web 2.0 sites work on their own."

“He made a simple system of blogs or“ social bookmarks ”, gave them personal blogs - insert contextual advertising and sit, count profits while the“ collective unconscious ”is working.

The second - "no altruism, all for the sake of working out investments."

“Stories about ingenious students who made an Internet empire from a search engine designed for pocket money, or stories about how the topic of a million-pixel website was spun up by itself - myths for the gullible. Behind every major modern project is a bourgeois investor. ”

The third is “the presence of a“ social ”wrapping system”.

“What should a person do who has an investor above his soul?” Well, think about it. If in the world of Web 1.0 there was a usual cheat, then here ... That's right, in Web 2.0 you need a social cheat system. This is more difficult than just twitching the picture of the counter, hiding behind proxies, but the vast majority of blogging, bookmarking, and social sites have an ingenious solution. It’s dumb (or maybe intellectually, whatever the programmers can do), but we’ll “draw” ourselves any audience, then - on our own site - run a script that, walking through the base of “social bookmarks”, votes, opens links ... "

And finally, as a consequence of the previous one: “virtual space is full with bots”.

“Writing a bot that pretends to be an average stupid teenager of the“ Pepsi generation ”is trivial today ... But in the end there are sheer pluses:“ we have a powerful and active audience ”, moreover, such a“ virtual ”community in every sense is easily“ honed ”to any requirements ( “Yes, yes, we have 99% of users - glamorous girls, they will perceive your advertising well”). All this abruptly mixes up with a small percentage of real people (there will always be some) and it works, it doesn’t ask for bread ... "

No less interesting is the proposal “to count on the heads of users of social networks, separating the lambs from robots by a rather flimsy technique” ...

The idea is simple: we “pulled” the heels of social services. A section was posted with announcements of journal articles, firstly, test links were scattered, and secondly. The feed of announcements played the role of “boring but constant” content so that it would crawl out regularly and eyes were corridor all the time. ... Then we wait a month and look at the statistics, if you wish, we can calculate a general index that reflects at least the efficiency of traffic generation, at least the “liveliness” of society.

Hmm ... Don’t feed someone with bread, let’s think about Web 2.0. And, most importantly, "I’m one smart, you’re all generating free content for websites and correspond with bots in the comments." Why, then, does Mr. Lebedev fail to fulfill his Web 2.0-style website, populate it with bots, use the “collective unconscious”, and “cut the coupons” with increased traffic?

But, on the other hand ... After all, there is some truth in the material. Don't you find?