Taking theory into practice
As many of you may know - Danny is all about rdf and the upper case semantic web - so Danny uses Dave’s idea to launch into a detailed analysis of the factors that will be needed to implement such an idea. This gives Danny another opportunity to flog his favorite horse, hoping it’ll come around the bend and actually get picked up, deployed and make it to the finish line. Yah gotta love Danny for his determination. But this ain’t a one horse race or even one race.
This doesn’t make what Dave is doing - wrong. Dave has a different angle on this issue and I’m sure he thinks he can build personalzied search - in his OWN way.
I love Danny, and I love Dave - too.
I’m just happy to see Danny and Dave working at this sort of intellectual level - and hope that Danny realizes that for every FOAF - there’s a vCard and XFN. And I hope Dave sees that there are people getting jazzed on his ideas, but that they might wanna implement them THEIR way.
For every particular implemnetation scheme that utilizes X, Y and Z - there are college hackers, Indian and Bulgarian collaborators and entire bevvies of VC funded startups - all trying to do the same thing - but differently utilizing A, B and C.
The on-slaught and growth of the software business has created an enviornment where the exact same solution to the same problem could be solved five entirely different ways. I find that amazing.
That certainly ain’t how it was back in the ’80’s.
Everyday now - almost - I hear of another open source PIM, dashboard BoF, search engine, video tagging tool, new XML language or viral acquisition rumor.
We also hear of acquisitions and consolidation. And who’s right and wrong. And of folks learning how to demo and deal with their ‘betas’. But I can tell you - Yahoo buying Technorati doesn’t solve anything anymore than AOL launching a soical network.
It’s what WE do WITH all this software that counts. Sometimes that’s called content, other times community, still other times profits. It’s sort of like the relationship of a noun to a verb. We both need each other.
January 15th, 2006 at 10:46 pm
Uhh, Marc, my idea wasn’t personalized search.
Problem with this medium is no one reads what the other guy says before they go off and “riff” on it.
You guys want users to enter metadata, I’m looking for ways to get around taht, because I have found that people don’te ven spell things right, much less label things.
Aren’t you the guy who never categorizes his posts? ;->
Sorry.
I know your heart is filled with love, but if youd on’t erad the posts what is it you love so much?
January 16th, 2006 at 2:50 am
Marc, I agree entirely on your main points, it is interesting (and good) that any given problem can (and probably will) be solved in many different ways. Like you say: “This doesn’t make what Dave is doing - wrong”. There is an important side-point - that when we’re talking about implementing things on the web, to properly get the benefit of the network some attention needs to be paid to working against established standards to enable interop, rather than focussing on application-level interop. Your compatibility-matrix approach can certainly help loads here.
Dave, personalised search may not be the best description of the general idea, but I think it does apply in the piece of your blog post I quoted - all you write about on your blog is cars and you want search results to prioritise car-related information. The common factor is your personal interest in cars.
re. “You guys want users to enter metadata” - explicit metadata is certainly useful, but if you read my post you’ll see that categorization/tagging/labelling is only one aspect mentioned. I agree totally that it’s good to reduce the amount of user effort required to derive associations between resources.
January 16th, 2006 at 8:38 am
[…] Dave Winepoints out in some comments here that what we was really trying to say was: You guys want users to enter metadata, I’m looking for ways to get around tha because I have found that people don’t even spell things right, much less label things. […]
January 23rd, 2006 at 11:17 pm
[…] The evolution of advertising, PR and marketing services enabled by technology I have been banging on about since 1998 is now in full swing. Over the last ten days I’ve been approached by two venture capital companies each looking for a stake in Fulfil. What sparked their interest? Well it turns out that a new US marketing services provider called Bazaarvoice recently raised $4m in first round venture capital funding. Each of the VC’s are developing software within the same space and are looking to bolt it onto a front end marketing services provider. How did they find out about Fulfil? They have been reading my weblog. While flattered by the attention technology alone is not some magic bullet. Marc Canter put it best recently when responding to Dave Winer … It’s what WE do WITH all this software that counts. Sometimes that’s called content, other times community, still other times profits. It’s sort of like the relationship of a noun to a verb. We both need each other. […]
April 17th, 2006 at 7:20 am
Very good site! I like it! Thanks!
Coffee
April 17th, 2006 at 7:23 am
Very good site! I like it! Thanks!
banff hotels
April 26th, 2006 at 8:27 pm
google pr main
April 26th, 2006 at 9:23 pm
online directory main
May 26th, 2006 at 1:27 pm
Keep a good job up!
July 21st, 2006 at 12:46 am
illinois internet hold em tournaments
bisections,abash moistness detections play for fun internet hold em http://www.uniqueinternetholdem.com/