MySpace was where you went in the past, WordPress and Movable Type were where people went if they had the patience and writing output to maintain a traditional blog, Facebook was where you went to define yourself by schools and checkboxes, and Tumblr was where you went to make your own identity and express your creativity.
While adding new blogs to WP Roll I noticed that a lot of them still redirect their RSS feeds to FeedBurner. I guess it’s because of subscriber stats, email delivery and other little features that FeedBurner provides.
However, like others I have a strong feeling that FeedBurner will be the next product that Google shuts down. Luckily, FeedBurner offers 30-day feed redirection option, if you decide to remove the feed from FeedBurner:
So go ahead and claim back your short and awesome feed URL that WordPress provides by default.
If you have a self-hosted blog, meaning that you have the access to the files on the server, then implementing OpenID might be the greatest way to help your readers and yourself.
If you haven’t heard about the OpenID before, then in a nutshell it is your universal login name, which you can use to authenticate yourself on other blogs and websites without ever filling out those registration forms again. Read more →
Note: In the previous article I suggested that some writers should avoid using the term ‘web 2.0’, and thus probably wrongly implied that they don’t know what web is. The following is an explanation of what I actually meant.
If definition means “the act of defining or making definite, distinct, or clear” then the definition of ‘web 2.0’ provided by Tim O’Reilly is neither distinct nor clear. He tries to put way too many things under a single umbrella, under one next version—the 2.0—while many of these things are in a continuous development with varying speed and can not be defined by ‘versions’.
On the first page of the article he formulates the “sense of web 2.0” by giving a few examples of how web 2.0 is different from Web 1.0, like, “publishing –> participation”, “content management systems –> wikis” and “Britannica Online –> Wikipedia”.
If these are the chosen examples to illustrate the principles of web 2.0, then the arrow used between them means something different in each of the examples, which however contradicts to the use of an equal type linguistic/symbolic link among all examples. As none of the known symbols of logic are used (like ⇒ or ∈), then lets try figure out what the author meant. Read more →
I have finally found a few great articles that try to critically assess the otherwise hyped “user–generated content” and “social networking”. Read more →
I disagree with the idea that personal publishing on the web is a threat to journalism. Read more →
The problem is with the journalists who write about the web, with their understanding of the subject and literacy of the web in general. The final drop of encouragement for writing this essay was an article by Jonathan Richards in Times Online titled Web 3.0 and beyond: the next 20 years of the internet.
Web is not a software that is developed and released in versions. Actually, the “versioning” of the web is the worst thing that could happen to the hype of the internet. In the particular article, the author was informed by “Mr Spivack, the founder of Radar Networks, a leading Web 3.0 company” that the cycle of the web development is ten years.
Think of “Mr Einstein, the founder of General theory of relativity, a leading Physics 2.0 theory” saying that the cycle of physics development is 30 (or any other number) years until the Physics 3.0 which concentrates on strings and membranes in an eleven dimension environments. Can you see the absurdity of such statements? Read more →