Tim O’Reilly entra con questo post nella conversazione sull’etica del web 2.0 e sulla distinzione fra siti che consentono una vera condivisione dei contenuti (ovvero dove i contenuti oltre ad essere visualizzati possono anche essere scaricati) sullo stile di Flickr e quelli che consentono una condivisione solo “di facciata”.
In particolare mi sembra interessante quello che
But Larry’s on to something. I’ve been seeing the distinction that he makes coming more and more into focus as a defining issue for Web 2.0. Google has been a key enabler of the decentralized nature of the net — they make other sites more visible, distributing attention, rather than concentrating it. But some of the newer sites, and the newer applications from Google and the other big guys, are increasingly aimed at centralizing user activity and user data.
These are unresolved issues, and I do worry that the YouTube acquisition moves Google’s model from switchboard to repository, and I’m not sure that’s good for the company’s DNA. So I’m hoping that Google will remember Eric Schmidt’s dictum, “Don’t fight the internet,” and will work to make both YouTube and services like Google Book Search progressively more open, not progressively more closed.
Evidence is strong, though, that top management at Google understands this distinction, and wants to open up all their services. What folks like Larry remind us, though, is that even people of good will need to be reminded from time to time about the choices they face. Web 2.0 is still a work in progress. We can get it right, or we can screw it up.
Source: Real Sharing vs. Fake Sharing
Originally published on Mon, 23 Oct 2006 13:00:08 GMT by Tim O’Reilly