Concept 2.0

I'm not sure there is much debate as to whether the semantic web is the future and whether the next step is web 3.0.

The real question is, what name is it going to go by? Is the semantic web actually going to be re-named to web 3.0 by popular adoption?

I have a feeling this would be a bad idea for several reasons. For a start, the semantic web is a huge step forward. Web 2.0 wasn't. I love web 2.0, but it wasn't the huge step forward that the semantic web *should* be.

Secondly, even though this is really the same point, it gives the idea that web 2.0 is the progression from web 1.0. It is, sort of, but it is really just a new way of thinking rather than the next step.

I was watching some pointless show at like 4am the other day which involved people who wanted to find dates going on this show and you could phone and text in and speak to them and they could communicate with you back. In between this the presenters talked to the various people looking for dates.

One thing got me thinking about this - this reaks of Web 2.0. But on TV.

After all, who is to say this new user-based community orientated  thinking should be confined to the web? TV has recently seen a massive rise in interactivity, with digital bringing loads of extra content to TV channels, Tivo is putting the user in control and while phone in votes are nothing new, they have seen a massive rise in recent times.

Take for example music channels too. These are almost exclusively controlled by viewers who send in their song requests by texts and the videos played are (presumably) those selected by the people viewing the channel - i.e. the users. Indeed, these types of things were around before the Web 2.0 buzz so perhaps TV 2.0 was the original revolution.

The rise in user generated content sites has opened one very important avenue for small time content producers and users looking to get a real voice on the web - they have the ability to leverage an existing and indeed very large site's userbase in order to promote themselves.

Yesterday Worfolk Pictures launched their new show, Jimmy Turtlehouse Guitar Hero. The main method of promoting the new show - it's on YouTube, it's on Metacafe, it's on Revver, it's on MySpace, it's on Bebo, the list goes on.

By getting on all the various social networks you are exposing yourself to an audience of millions, hundreds of millions with the biggest sites. And it works. The success of things like Lonelygirl15 that clocks up, up to a million views per video just by sticking it on YouTube.

In exchange of course the big sites that are offering people this voice get a mass of high quality content uploaded free for them to use. Of course there is far more crap on that good content but just consider some of the fantasic quality shows that are on YouTube. Some of them are amazing, almost TV worthy pieces of film that have clearly had a lot of work put into them. And they were given to YouTube free. How much would it cost them to make that kind of content themselves? It's a very sympbiotic relationship.

About a month ago I got into a discussion with a college over the future of the web, most notably where the next revolution on the web would be. Namely, the idea of the Semantic Web. The thing is though, if Web 2.0 is all about AJAX, integration and so forth, does this mean the Semantic Web will be Web 3.0?

Although of course the problem is that Web 3.0 already has substance to it. So if you really want to get ahead of the game you need a Web 4.0 start-up ;).