<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Web 2.0 is now Business as Usual 2.0</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ravinglunacy.org/index.php/2007/08/27/web-20-is-now-business-as-usual-20/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ravinglunacy.org/index.php/2007/08/27/web-20-is-now-business-as-usual-20/</link>
	<description>where memes come to die</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 17 Jul 2010 23:31:06 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: the head lemur</title>
		<link>http://www.ravinglunacy.org/index.php/2007/08/27/web-20-is-now-business-as-usual-20/comment-page-1/#comment-11</link>
		<dc:creator>the head lemur</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 02 Sep 2007 20:51:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ravinglunacy.org/index.php/2007/08/27/web-20-is-now-business-as-usual-20/#comment-11</guid>
		<description>Adam,

Aggregation currently has at it&#039;s core, self generated descriptions, which reflect the owners bias. My tags and category descriptions while spelled correctly and are for me extremely pungent and focused, have limited utility without the context of the  the person generating the tag. 

Moving beyond individual context, and looking at tagging as played at Technorati and others, tags are &#039;exclusive&#039;, in terms of boxing bits and ideas into chunks, and where tags get adopted by others for their ideas of the concepts engendered by them, in almost all cases, we end up with an amorphous  sack of of things, that wiggle and look like jello having puked up by ferrets on meth.

Wikipedea and the DMOZ directory before it, are both poster children for the road to hell being paved with good intentions. 

Aggregation has no long term business model. What is happening today are pet rocks. Nice Idea, and you can show it off to your friends, but it will be on the garage sale table next week.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Adam,</p>
<p>Aggregation currently has at it&#8217;s core, self generated descriptions, which reflect the owners bias. My tags and category descriptions while spelled correctly and are for me extremely pungent and focused, have limited utility without the context of the  the person generating the tag. </p>
<p>Moving beyond individual context, and looking at tagging as played at Technorati and others, tags are &#8216;exclusive&#8217;, in terms of boxing bits and ideas into chunks, and where tags get adopted by others for their ideas of the concepts engendered by them, in almost all cases, we end up with an amorphous  sack of of things, that wiggle and look like jello having puked up by ferrets on meth.</p>
<p>Wikipedea and the DMOZ directory before it, are both poster children for the road to hell being paved with good intentions. </p>
<p>Aggregation has no long term business model. What is happening today are pet rocks. Nice Idea, and you can show it off to your friends, but it will be on the garage sale table next week.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adam</title>
		<link>http://www.ravinglunacy.org/index.php/2007/08/27/web-20-is-now-business-as-usual-20/comment-page-1/#comment-10</link>
		<dc:creator>Adam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 17:01:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ravinglunacy.org/index.php/2007/08/27/web-20-is-now-business-as-usual-20/#comment-10</guid>
		<description>I&#039;d be interested to hear why you think aggregation isn&#039;t a useful thing for people to be doing.

Or are you just suggesting that, while it&#039;s useful, it&#039;s not going to be a business model in its own right?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;d be interested to hear why you think aggregation isn&#8217;t a useful thing for people to be doing.</p>
<p>Or are you just suggesting that, while it&#8217;s useful, it&#8217;s not going to be a business model in its own right?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Guild Media &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Future of Search, SEO and Social Networks.</title>
		<link>http://www.ravinglunacy.org/index.php/2007/08/27/web-20-is-now-business-as-usual-20/comment-page-1/#comment-9</link>
		<dc:creator>Guild Media &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Future of Search, SEO and Social Networks.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Aug 2007 13:30:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ravinglunacy.org/index.php/2007/08/27/web-20-is-now-business-as-usual-20/#comment-9</guid>
		<description>[...] a posting by Adrian Lukas, I was reading Web 2.0 is now Business as Usual 2.0. They raise some interesting points. But there was one in particular that grabbed my [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] a posting by Adrian Lukas, I was reading Web 2.0 is now Business as Usual 2.0. They raise some interesting points. But there was one in particular that grabbed my [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
