I wonder if Leonardo da Vinci was alive if he was using almost all the social media such as Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn or probably working with Google, or appearig in Ted, or working with NASA, the MIT in new theory and knowledge challenges. In Fact Leonardo da Vinci greatly advanced the state of knowledge in multiple fields probably as few in the history of mankind. However at our present of technological, financial and economic bubles and crisis we advanced by far more that in any stage of the history. The internet opened far more access to knowledge than several Alexandrian livraries and so forth.
Technology and Social Media Platforms are key to understand and read the world surrounding us at the mega gigabyte scale of data (the new name for knowledge) where we live. In fact information / knowledge is not a matter of taxonomy, or something that belongs to the academy but a case of dimensionally agnostic data, statistics. Information/ knowledge is more and more how human and machines integrate / read behavior and data and how they colaborate with the contemporary technology. Of course machines (search engines, algorythms, micro-processors, bots…) are a natural evolution of humans, whether you like it or not.
Our movements in a day, the way we act, behave and even how we show our emotions with search able moves are based in data. Looking to the most trivial information or the most complex definition in Google, in Facebook, or searching for the best product to buy online are result and constructed with data layers of meta data and mathematics. This new dimension of reality (living, interacting and perceiving the world that surround us) calls for an entirely different approach, one that requires us to aim for a near visualisation of the entire spectrum of knowledge in its totality (even we know that is impossible to bear all this total quantity / quality of data / knowledge). It is like being ine presence of a couple of kind of meta Alexandrian Library alive that forces us to view and manage data instinctively: mathematical and semantic data. This in a way at the same time with mathematically approach first and with establishing a context for it later, the semantic, the lexicon, the keywords. Google that is now as popular as the TV in the 50s conquered almost most of the web space and advertising world with nothing more than applied mathematics and analytic. The Search Giant of Palo Alto didn’t pretend to know anything about the culture and conventions of society and advertising — it just assumed that better data, with better analytical tools, would win the day. And Google was and it is still right. Although the challenges now are even faster and even more complex than just ten years ago.
Google’s founding philosophy is that we don’t know why this page is better than that one: If the statistics of incoming links, result of the algorithms going through the keyords in a site and the links to the website say it is, that’s way it goes. No meaning or causal analysis is required. That’s why Google algorithms are translating languages (still not with 100% quality but getting closer and closer) without actually “knowing” those languages (given equal corpus data, Google can translate Klingon into Farsi as easily as it can translate Chinese into German). And why it can match ads to content without any knowledge or assumptions about the ads or the content.
“The concept of “Web 2.0” began with a conference
brainstorming session between O’Reilly and MediaLive International.
Dale Dougherty, web pioneer and O’Reilly VP, noted that far from having
“crashed”, the web was more important than ever, with exciting new
applications and sites popping up with surprising regularity. What’s
more, the companies that had survived the collapse seemed to have some
things in common. Could it be that the dot-com collapse marked some
kind of turning point for the web, such that a call to action such as
“Web 2.0” might make sense? We agreed that it did, and so the Web 2.0 Conference was born.” http://oreilly.com/oreilly/tim_bio.html
The success of the projects born in the Web 1.0 who have survived to conduct and create what we now call the Web 2.0, thanks to Tim O’Reilly, was the fact that they understood and embraced the power of collective intelligence. In fact Tim O’Reilly is in part one of the contemporaries Leonardo da Vinci with his quest for knowledge and to take the internet challenge further in a serious and independent way.
Have a look at the graphic about “Social Graphics” by Armano
The first phase of the internet has been dominated by “front doors”. Front doors being web projects such as Wikipedia, Google and Yahoo, something that mix the principles of web 1.0 and the present web 2.0 partly front doors partly social. The next wave the web 3.0 (?) will be all about “platforms”, social living platforms and social behaviour. Customers and users will be able to make more complete decisions about which
tools and processes they need in order to transform their ideas, communications and business to
some new end. The trend will change from the vast majority of thinking focused on the IT as an element of
a social business transformation to the questions such as:
– “In what way do I/we share my emotions, dreams and communications and with which
tools should I/we use to collaborate?”,
– “What are the case studies, advances of
social networking in a self perspective and in relation with company?”,
– “What are the results, challenges and dangers of using
web social platforms such as twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn and so forth in a personal level and in relation / action with the business(es) / enterprise(s)?”.
In this new scenario I believe these are the new concerns that presuppose the necessity of
further personalisation and at the same time collaboration, mixing the platforms of social networking and other Enterprise 2.0 tools. Web 3.0 it will be about simplicity to create simple software with all the power and integration of personalisation with social providing the emotional behaviour and at the same time a quite data measurement. This all in a landscape of fast changes that mix in a symbiotic way with the complexity of the living semantics of the crowdsourcing / nowcrowding:
my + we
+ analytic + source + social technology
+ links + emotion
+ behavior + semantics + real time data + social software
knowledge -> living meta-data