Log in

No account? Create an account
Web 1.0 - J. M. [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
J. M.

[ website | Librarything ]
[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

Web 1.0 [Sep. 26th, 2010|02:35 pm]
J. M.
I saw The Social Network on Thursday night. A very interesting movie (even though I never use Facebook). It was a fairly accurate representation of what was going on at the time, but it really got me thinking of the past and how everything now is so different from Web 1.0. I grew up with the internet, and was using it as early as 1993. I remember it as a time where you made your own websites, tried to bring useful information to the table, and were taught to keep your identity a secret. There were so many different search engines to choose from that used different algorithms so search censorship had yet to become an issue. I did switch over to a blog right at the beginning of Web 2.0, but LJ has fallen out of favor with networking sites which aggregate everything onto one page. I'm used to trying to write out a few paragraphs, not one or two sentences to mesh in with the general public. I'm used to having so many choices in how to search for something and not have it tailored to try and think for me and decide what would be in my best interest.

I think Terry Flew described the change between 1.0 to 2.0 very accurately:
"move from personal websites to blogs and blog site aggregation, from publishing to participation, from web content as the outcome of large up-front investment to an ongoing and interactive process, and from content management systems to links based on tagging (folksonomy)"

The most curious change with all of this is I used to save everything I came across obsessively because it was uncertain how long it would be available to view. Now many sites have features that anyone can edit content and I have excepted the fact that information on the web is in a constantly ebb and flow. As such, I never bother to save anything anything anymore and I have moved back to relying more on physical media as a source of information. Now I use the web to figure out a good starting point and also to track down said physical media.

Many good things have come out of 2.0 and I can find books faster than I ever could before.

But my mind is still stuck in 1998.

[User Picture]From: blackjackrocket
2010-09-26 09:40 pm (UTC)
What's the difference between 1.0 and 2.0? To me it comes off as the same thing.

Also, is that movie REALLY very darkly lit like the previews indicate? Even the scenes set outside in broad daylight come off in the previews like they went through a filter to make them darker.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: thegrapeofdeath
2010-09-26 10:35 pm (UTC)
To me it's hard to explain the differences in it. It was a gradual shift, but I was so ingrained in the 90's feel that I didn't keep up with it. Web 2.0 is generally though to have started around 2003 when RSS feeds, weblogs, and many sites came about that had user-editing features. Wikipedia grew in popularity, youtube came about, and a flood of social networking sites arose.

I honestly can't remember how dark lit it was. The scenes at night were, and I guess they did show a lot of those in the trailer. But a lot of the movie did happen during daytime.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: slipperieslope
2010-09-29 03:07 am (UTC)
Because I am so much older than you, I know because of age I cannot learn as much as quickly as you and other young people born into this time of the computer so I have kind of picked and chosen my way through 1.0 amd 2.0 and now 3.0. 3.0's swarm/sound-bite/facespace aspect is not impressing me - I don't like suggestions when I am searching because quite frankly I can spell and I am more creative/better than that ; )

Always good to hear from you, dear!

Edited at 2010-09-29 03:08 am (UTC)
(Reply) (Thread)