Oh yes it is….or is it?

I just posted a comment on one of the threads around the Google Autolink debate, thusly:

“Is there another way of looking at this? It seems to me that the debate has only been framed so far in either…or terms, ie of the web either being read/writeable or read-only whereas actually it’s been both for some time. Some bits are information served up that could be enriched in any number of ways. Some bits need to be kept sacred. Some bits need to keep the original intact while comments and modifications can be added in an explicit way.

Would it be too complicated for those people who are happy for their content to be ripped, mixed and burned to insert some sort of flag or licence (heard this before somewhere?) in their html that allows for that and for those who wish to only have their stuff read and perhaps re-presented in an aggregator to have a different kind of licence?

Then if I get really pissed off with Dave ‘cos his content doesn’t get “enriched” in the way I like it, I can raise it with him, and he can ignore me if he wants to or change if he wants to – isn’t that a more grown up conversation than “This is evil!”, “Oh, no it’s not!”, “Oh yes it is!”…. “

My gut is with Dave and Scoble on this, but I have this nagging feeling that saying “Autolinks is bad for the web” sounds too much like “P2P is bad for the recording industry”

About these ads

4 thoughts on “Oh yes it is….or is it?”

  1. Whoa, the web is changing at quantum rates at the moment–all user controlled. Just last year–no podcasting: Everyone is up in arms about it at the moment and it doesn’t look like it’s going away anytime soon. Good or Bad it’s here. Bad–why? Can’t control the content. . .who cares. . . .etc. People are just looking from the wrong perspective. RSS–what else could possibly have the chance of “breaking the web”. Tags–this is all so new in its current application. The exchange of knowledge and information is at root what the web is all about. Creative Commons Licences–everywhere you go, there they are. I can’t help but think that what is “bad” or “evil” now will be the norm, if but in a different way some time in the future.

  2. Yeah, I think the problem with this is that it represents centralisation (concentration of power to link in Google’s hands) whereas we’ve got used to the web only being used for decentralisation and empowering the little guy. So I don’t think it’s ‘evil’ as much as anti-web-as-we-know-it but then so were advertisements and commercialisation ten years ago…

  3. It really reminds me of 1996 when mime-types jumped through the ceiling. Were there no limits? NO! There weren’t/aren’t.

    Now we have non-standard standards abounding. We’re adopting and shedding these things like Franco/Itanlian couture d’jour. It’s bee you teeful baby!

    It’s actually a kick seeing the coders having such a good time again. Great things are happening. Keep some loose cash on hand. Bubble 2.0 is coming :)

Comments are closed.