24
Dec

Web 4.0, Another Definition.

   Posted by: wkossen   in Social Networking, Web2.0, green IT

Mood: overflowing with joy

Lessig_CCOk, I know, Many have gone before me and came up with a definition of Web 4.0. I could add a ton of links, but won’t. This link will do:http://www.google.nl/search?q=”web+4.0″. Check that out, but read on first…

Let’s start the counting. Web 1.0 was the original web. It’s still alive and kicking today, don’t worry. This is the web where those with either money or a geeky mind could put content online for you to read. Read-only, unidirectional web. If you wanted interaction, you would have to use other protocols than HTTP on which the web is build. Use ICQ (still alive!) or e-mail or IRC (Yup, I’m that old…). There are the egroups (now Yahoo) and some bulletin-boards (that’s what BB stands for remember?) but that was it. It would take Web2.0 to get to a Read-Write web. Thanks to Ted Lessig for letting us know that! How about http://youtube.com where you, yes you, can create and publish your content. How about blogs, how about social websites where you create your content on your profile. How about http://flickr.com and http://picasa.com. That’s Web2.0.

Web 3.0 is also called the Semantic web. What’s that all about? Well, semantic means meaning. A word is just a couple of characters until you give it meaning. Semantic web is all about letting applications and service understand what the content means. This in turn allows for real data-portability and interoperability since different websites could understand the content coming from other sites. You could ‘take your content with you’ when you go to another site. Would be nice ay? I sign up to ‘socialnet2.com’ and my friends and profile information from ‘socialnet1.com’ are already there… A simple example of semantics is tagging. The problem here is we have to manually attach the meaning to the words and different people may give different meaning to the same word. A good example of this would be the word Cock. It’s an animal right?.

Semantics is important to allow for better searching, or if you will, better finding. Semantics are important for exchanging information and tying services together. To create better services like mash-ups, but without the need for specific knowledge about specific APIs and a lot of proprietary programming. In fact, to really make Web 2.0 come to life, we would need web 3.0 first. And the same dependence is applicable to what I call web 4.0.

And remember, Different people mean different things when they say Web 4.0. So I repeat that this is only My Personal View and not necessarily the truth. It could well be that other people give other numbering to the same concepts. (are you still here? ready for the secrets?)

Web 4.0 is the web that extends to the real world. It’s the web of things. where your house becomes part of the web, and your car. Where your body becomes part of the Internet. Where you DM your Thermostat using http://twitter.com to turn the heat up because you are home early. Where the refrigerator orders milk when it notices it’s running out. Where your car checks the Google-Calendar of you and your garage to make a service appointment and where your general practitioner is notified of changes in your glucose-levels in your blood automatically and remotely. It’s the web where a seat in a plane is automatically registered when the location in your google calendar is remote and a taxi is already waiting to pick you up, without you even thinking about it.
You can easily see that almost all technologies are already available You can easily book airplane seats online, you can remote control your house-alarm system, you can order a taxi at the airport without using your phone and you can read what products are sitting in your fridge with a simple bar-code-reader. We have web-cams, arduino boards, ip-based thermostats and light-switches, we have health monitors that ip-connect and we have lots of web applications. In fact, we have lots of open standards to use. The only thing missing is the interoperability of all these services and standards. It doesn’t happen yet or happens on a very small scale with a lot of – alas – proprietary API and Programming stuff…..

There is one more thing the web 4.0 would definitely need. Since all this web 4.0 stuff is running on electricity, we would need greener alternatives to oil (with which we make plastics and electricity and heat and transportation) and lithium (which is running out quickly and needed for batteries) and gas (which we burn up like crazy) and lots of other pollutants… We would need energy efficient appliances and gadgets and we would need to harness the free and clean(er) energy from wind and sun and waves. We would need cleaner fabrication and a more equal sharing of wealth, we would need eco-awareness and local production to limit transportation needs. We would need an ‘Economy of Less’ rather than an ‘Economy of More’. But that’s a different post I’ll write someday…

So what’s your view on the Web 4.0, Would you like to live in such a world? Can you come up with more examples? I hope you like this post and don’t hesitate to comment on it!

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Related posts…


If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Tags: , , ,

This entry was posted on Wednesday, December 24th, 2008 at 16:01 and is filed under Social Networking, Web2.0, green IT. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

Word count: 924

You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

20 comments so far

 1 

Yep – I like your definition of Web4.0.
Maybe also nice example; via the wifi signal (or other signal) from the car you get into a certain range = it will see you arriving soon at the house…. and turn on the coffee machine, bubble bath, heating etc ….
(or maybe dinner ready..??)

December 24th, 2008 at 3:12
 2 

Nice blog post…cool definition of web 4.0…more aware home and social networking !!!

Wish you and yours happy holidays, merry Christmas and happy new year !!!

December 25th, 2008 at 8:31
 3 

I'm not a big fan on the 2.0, 3.0 3D, 4.0 etc definitions of the web, but you raise some interesting ideas. One thing that is necessary for your vision of Web 4.0 to happen is for people to move over to IPv6 We are running out of IPv4 style addresses and probably the only reason we haven't run out yet is because of the vast amounts of Network Address Translation being done by firewalls right now. However, this makes it harder to access all those devices inside the home.

I've got IPv6 up and running nicely on my home network with an IPv6 gateway up and running. I'd love to hear experiences of other people experimenting with IPv6

December 26th, 2008 at 1:46
 4 

I wonder if you realize that discussions like this about Web 4.0, or IPv6 even, help some of us not-so-worldly or savvy about them to at least be aware of their existence? I think that W4.0 will be implimented just like cell phones or other modern conveniences have been: as an individual needs choice. Some people use their cells full out (camera, blog posts, etc.) and then their are old geezerettes like myself who use them minimally. In my circles though, we are the geeks. As someone who was totally disillusioned when the Jetson's way of life didn't materialize when I got older, I would love to have some of the things of which you speak integrated into my home, car, and anywhere else it is feasible. I'm IN!

December 27th, 2008 at 4:47
 5 

I think Carol makes a very important point. As a simple example, I have my cellphone set up so that when I take a picture, I can send it directly to Flickr, Facebook, my wife, and several other places in a single message. Many of my less geeky friends view this as bordering on magic, until I show them how easy it is to do this. (I do something similar with video, and also blog from my cellphone from time to time).

It used to be said that people only use 10% of their brains. As we've come to understand how the brain works, this is pretty much discredited. However, I do believe that many people only use 10% of their available technology.

Rather than spending a lot of time on Web 4.0 or IPv6, I think we need to help a lot of people move to Web 2.9

December 31st, 2008 at 6:33
 6 

A lot of the web 4.0 examples you gave I saw as prototypes at the annual Comdex conference in Vegas 10 years ago. Now 10 years later the infrastructure is getting closer to making these prototypes affordable and logistically feasible. I saw a 2009 prediction the other day that says wireless will become more normal then wired pretty soon. I think that is the key to many of these 4.0 examples. Once wires are not needed and the cost of electricity becomes virtually nil, all of these 4.0 examples will be a reality. I can't wait.

January 1st, 2009 at 4:17
 7 

Very nice description. I would love to leave in such world (web 4.0) Coming soon… for non-bilionaire people ;o), I hope.
Do you know if such standard are under study in construciton business, such as High Environmental Quality (HQE) principles…

January 1st, 2009 at 4:36
 8 

Enjoying technology is one thing, but as a child who grew up in the 50's and 60's, I feel very fortunate that I know how to live without some things too. Yes, I could survive by relying on my wits, such as they are. If the whole world goes to hell and technology is lost, it may be the older generation who lived much of their lives without technology who will be able to save the day. I don't mean that in a smug way at all. Just an observation of the difference in generations and their skills.

January 2nd, 2009 at 5:03
 9 

Thanks for the reply, I don't think wifi would be the right tech for this. It lacks range and the handshake takes too long, you'ld be allready home. And why make it so complicated? All it takes is a GPS (which is in your navigation or phone anyways) and you know where you are… If you come within a certain range, run any script you like…. Cheers

January 2nd, 2009 at 12:31
 10 

Thanks!

January 2nd, 2009 at 12:31
 11 

IPv6 is on my wishlist to implement at home. However. There is a simple reason why hardly anyone is adopting it. There's no real need yet. Even though the number of free IP4 addresses are decreasing fast, everyone is happy with NATting. Most of these home-automation systems would work perfectly behind NATted firewalls. The real IPv6 growth will come from the upcoming economies in Asia. With the start of the internet, the developed world of the time (USA and Europe) were pretty generous to themselves when handing out IP-ranges…..

January 2nd, 2009 at 12:33
 12 

You're right. Awareness is good. However, I hesitated to write this post because it contains an 'expectation' that's not yet very realistic, even though all technology needed allready exists…

January 2nd, 2009 at 12:34
 13 

I think the Web x.0 versions don't necessarily come sequentially. Even web 2.0 isn't all that fab since semantic interoperability (web3.0) isn't really there yet…. Rather than sequence, It's about different views that need each other to rise simultaneously. Oh, You're way ahead of me when it comes to using phones…

January 2nd, 2009 at 12:36
 14 

I agree. The technology is available. The problem, again, is integration. Open standards are rare. X10 is one that was promising and open hardware like Arduino boards will help. The wide spread availability of Internet and TCP/IP is now available. All we need is people to open up their protocols and become more interoperability-minded. (is that a word?).

January 2nd, 2009 at 12:38
 15 

I would love some of these technologies too. However, there is a problem as I already explained. What happens when the power goes out? What happens if we run out of the raw materials (like Lithium) we need for operation? Our dependance of these materials and technologies is in fact rather dangerous. Do you know how to survive with only a knife and some rope?

January 2nd, 2009 at 12:39
 16 

I think that they should stop calling them web 1.0,2.0 …. It tends to confuse a lot of people. Why can't they just give it a proper name like social web, semantic web or reality web or something instead of giving them version numbers. LOL! BTW, Your description of web 4.0 hits the spot. The technology is already a reality even before web 3.0. There are applications which allows you to control your computer, toys, home gadgets remotely. That's why I think that they should stop giving them version names.

If we rely too much on technology to run our lives.. What happens when all our power and energy runs out? Scary stuff!

February 16th, 2009 at 5:26
 17 

In a sense, I agree. The numbering is trivial. However, 1 through 3 are quite accepted and 4 was just on the doorstep, waiting to enter… The point I wanted to make in the post wasn't so much about numbers, but about available technology not being used effectively because people won't use open standards and won't agree on dataportability. And I guess from your comment that you got the point perfectly. Thanks for commenting, and thanks for your blog as well (I'm a regular visitor as you no doubt have noticed…)

February 16th, 2009 at 14:32
 18 

let the noobs go for the ipv6, ip6 should still be able to get to ip4… so let them worry about it.

February 17th, 2010 at 23:04
gest
 19 

I could run with that. App uses GPS range setting to turn on. Sounds good, need a host at the house. App for the car phone and WiFi device to turn on. Sweet..

February 17th, 2010 at 22:51
bposting2
 20 

gas powered remote control helicopters

July 24th, 2010 at 4:43

Leave a reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Copyright © 2008 - 2010 Willem Kossen

you're welcome to reuse under certain conditions. It is licensed: Attribution-Non-Commercial-Share Alike 3.0 Netherlands

Internet Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory


Page Rank

look here:

Blog Directory Blog Directory
Theme Tweaker by Unreal