I, Web 1.0. You, Web 2.0, Us, Web 3.0. Them, Web 4.0. We-b?

The return of Web 1.0.

• A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
• A robot must obey orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
• A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

However, they do not directly to what I have defined as the Four Laws of Web 2.0, I have merely used them as a premise. In its most coherent guise, Web 2.0 was known as the second phase of the Internet, since the .com boom where every company wishing to impress its clientele had a web page. Even if that web page was not particularly good, the mere .com address gave it a presence in a "new world" - a virtual world.

 The technical boom included a flood of web developers, web designers and amateur web builders all talking HTML but after a while it was the "users" who wanted to participate in this Online lineage of virtual creation. High end web developers and companies brought together ideas established by guestbooks, geocities DIY webpages, forums, IM (Remember the ICU buzz?) and email to establish a user-interface that could be franchised so to speak by the ones who used them. After all, the Internet was becoming more accessible, and unlike Television which appeared in every household on passive Televisions, the Internet was fixed to machines called computers which were tools for creating content by manipulating data. Computers would allow for people to not only view this information but also contribute and build its surrounding platforms.

This was where Web 2.0 comes in, so called the second phase of the Internet where user-generated content opened its gates and companies opened up its virtual spaces to make it public inclusive. Now with the era of the so called Web 3.0, one still might be asking "How do we apply these applications?" These social networking tools and open source technologies. The other question is about providing content. If content is King, what sort of kingdom shall we have?

The Web 1.0 attitude lingers on with many people. Perhaps this is because we haven't yet fleshed or filed out seamless systems for applying user-generated applications. I have come across many people who are proficient in HTML yet struggle to configure a Blog, or more so, struggle with its malleable user-generated purpose. The philosophies behind the "older" ways of thinking (although a decade is not really enough time to re-engage new thoughts and thinking behind things) are to do with static structures. I often give the example of architecture in our physical space. This is where locative technology becomes the bridge between Web 2.0 and Web 3.0.

Old Spencer Street station, Melbourne.

New Spencer Street, now called Southern Cross station.

Look at developments in modernism and post-modernism, but not just in shape, but functions of buildings. Spencer Street Station is a perfect example of transforming space. Whether you like what has been done with the design is another matter, related but not part of this observation. The old station above (Interior) was a dense networking of tiled tunnels channeling passengers to their respective platforms. Although some features stand out such as the funnelled exits to the walkways, the feeling as a whole was maze like. As a traveller you had no choice but to follow the directed path to your destination. The new station has even had a name change, Southern Cross, paying tribute to its undulating roof. Southern Cross Station is an opened space. It allows passengers to wander across it without being snaked along corridors. The entire outside it glass making you feel like you haven't even gone inside. You will also notice that shops are spread out along an open space like Medieval Fair tents, allowing for visitors to freely walk around them.

In this same way, re-designing the Internet has been much about how we enter the environment. Much of this logic stems from Multi-Orientated Multi-User Domain theory, which you can read up on here, the whole premise is about participatory spaces, putting our mouse in and clicking it all about. It is said that Web 3.0 is the first indication that a metaverse is being created around us.

Wikipedia describes Web 2.0 as "creativity, information sharing, collaboration and functionality of the web". These four ideas. Creativity: Information Sharing: Collaboration: Functionality: they become part of our culture of use. The architecture built around those four ideas, the semantic web, that of which is seen as Web 3.0, determine how those four principles are applied. However, development, no matter how successful it is may still apply the model found in the old Spencer Street station. Facebook for example is a fine example of the closed space. Much like old Spencer Street, it wants you to enter and exit as per the structure of its architecture. It doesn't want you to wander around in its space. As the model of old Spencer Street station was built on the premise that commuters were needing to travel to and from work. Why were they travelling to and from work? To make an income. Why were they making an income? The companies they worked for needed an income. The government needed these companies to make an income to keep the economy growing. Et cetera. So the premise of funnelling people to and from work efficiently, quickly, and without time to even consider that juncture was essential to keep money flowing.

So why did the architecture of Spencer Street change? In one respect it didn't. Physically yes, thematically, I am not so sure. Once the idea is conditioned within the psyche of the people to continue going back and forth, basic behaviorism, the space could be opened up for other reasons. So, with Web 2.0, the four principles of creativity, information sharing, collaboration, and functionality in the semantic world of Web 3.0 are in my opinion being subjected to this same behaviorism. As I have surmised in the past, Web 4.0 will be the augmented phase of net use, locative technology and the continued use of applications such as Crowdfunding. It will assist in challenging the protocols already in place by the semantic web, which is riding off the back of Web 1.0.

The return of Web 1.0.

• A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
• A robot must obey orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
• A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

However, they do not directly to what I have defined as the Four Laws of Web 2.0, I have merely used them as a premise. In its most coherent guise, Web 2.0 was known as the second phase of the Internet, since the .com boom where every company wishing to impress its clientele had a web page. Even if that web page was not particularly good, the mere .com address gave it a presence in a "new world" - a virtual world.

 The technical boom included a flood of web developers, web designers and amateur web builders all talking HTML but after a while it was the "users" who wanted to participate in this Online lineage of virtual creation. High end web developers and companies brought together ideas established by guestbooks, geocities DIY webpages, forums, IM (Remember the ICU buzz?) and email to establish a user-interface that could be franchised so to speak by the ones who used them. After all, the Internet was becoming more accessible, and unlike Television which appeared in every household on passive Televisions, the Internet was fixed to machines called computers which were tools for creating content by manipulating data. Computers would allow for people to not only view this information but also contribute and build its surrounding platforms.

This was where Web 2.0 comes in, so called the second phase of the Internet where user-generated content opened its gates and companies opened up its virtual spaces to make it public inclusive. Now with the era of the so called Web 3.0, one still might be asking "How do we apply these applications?" These social networking tools and open source technologies. The other question is about providing content. If content is King, what sort of kingdom shall we have?

The Web 1.0 attitude lingers on with many people. Perhaps this is because we haven't yet fleshed or filed out seamless systems for applying user-generated applications. I have come across many people who are proficient in HTML yet struggle to configure a Blog, or more so, struggle with its malleable user-generated purpose. The philosophies behind the "older" ways of thinking (although a decade is not really enough time to re-engage new thoughts and thinking behind things) are to do with static structures. I often give the example of architecture in our physical space. This is where locative technology becomes the bridge between Web 2.0 and Web 3.0.

Old Spencer Street station, Melbourne.

New Spencer Street, now called Southern Cross station.

Look at developments in modernism and post-modernism, but not just in shape, but functions of buildings. Spencer Street Station is a perfect example of transforming space. Whether you like what has been done with the design is another matter, related but not part of this observation. The old station above (Interior) was a dense networking of tiled tunnels channeling passengers to their respective platforms. Although some features stand out such as the funnelled exits to the walkways, the feeling as a whole was maze like. As a traveller you had no choice but to follow the directed path to your destination. The new station has even had a name change, Southern Cross, paying tribute to its undulating roof. Southern Cross Station is an opened space. It allows passengers to wander across it without being snaked along corridors. The entire outside it glass making you feel like you haven't even gone inside. You will also notice that shops are spread out along an open space like Medieval Fair tents, allowing for visitors to freely walk around them.

In this same way, re-designing the Internet has been much about how we enter the environment. Much of this logic stems from Multi-Orientated Multi-User Domain theory, which you can read up on here, the whole premise is about participatory spaces, putting our mouse in and clicking it all about. It is said that Web 3.0 is the first indication that a metaverse is being created around us.

Wikipedia describes Web 2.0 as "creativity, information sharing, collaboration and functionality of the web". These four ideas. Creativity: Information Sharing: Collaboration: Functionality: they become part of our culture of use. The architecture built around those four ideas, the semantic web, that of which is seen as Web 3.0, determine how those four principles are applied. However, development, no matter how successful it is may still apply the model found in the old Spencer Street station. Facebook for example is a fine example of the closed space. Much like old Spencer Street, it wants you to enter and exit as per the structure of its architecture. It doesn't want you to wander around in its space. As the model of old Spencer Street station was built on the premise that commuters were needing to travel to and from work. Why were they travelling to and from work? To make an income. Why were they making an income? The companies they worked for needed an income. The government needed these companies to make an income to keep the economy growing. Et cetera. So the premise of funnelling people to and from work efficiently, quickly, and without time to even consider that juncture was essential to keep money flowing.

So why did the architecture of Spencer Street change? In one respect it didn't. Physically yes, thematically, I am not so sure. Once the idea is conditioned within the psyche of the people to continue going back and forth, basic behaviorism, the space could be opened up for other reasons. So, with Web 2.0, the four principles of creativity, information sharing, collaboration, and functionality in the semantic world of Web 3.0 are in my opinion being subjected to this same behaviorism. As I have surmised in the past, Web 4.0 will be the augmented phase of net use, locative technology and the continued use of applications such as Crowdfunding. It will assist in challenging the protocols already in place by the semantic web, which is riding off the back of Web 1.0.

I, Web 1.0. You, Web 2.0, Us, Web 3.0. Them, Web 4.0. We-b?