Is Web 2.0 ever so wonderful?
 

I don't think it is.

Copyright violations will become a major, major headache since web 2.0 principal is about 'users making the site', creating a community with their own input.. more often than not involving pictures/videos they have no right to use..and website operators can say "we didn't moderate his post/blog/site/whatever, don't blame us. Just report the site and we'll take it offline in 24 hours.". Which is total bullshit, why should I hire someone fulltime to check out the entire internet for my stuff? The site operators should have some responsibility.

Youtube clones popping up, filehosts that don't give a shit (megaupload/rapidshare etc), ever easier and more anonymous ways of making sites (blogger etc)...

"free shit" is getting out of control within the next few years if this trend continues. Mainstream media sees web 2.0 as a good thing too, none of the negative sides are mentioned, and nobody's forcing any copyrights.

Opinions on this?

well in the piracy perspective -- they need to sell their stuff easier

for example, i wanted to watch a movie "Hook" a couple weeks ago, they didnt have it at the video store, so i thought i could just see it online

but apparently amazon only lets US customers download movies for a fee :\

thats the kind of fucked up shit im talking about

same thing with itunes, they let US customers download TV shows but not anyone else, wtf?

if they put ads on the download pages of thepiratebay saying that people can legally download that movie or whatever for 7$ they would feel guilty for illegally downloading it and buy it, its very simple...

and the people who wont buy it dont have the money anyways

anywho, ive lost my train of thought so im just going to post what i have

I think the majority of web 2.0 content is actually user generated. the copyright infringements, though easier to commit, make up only a fraction of the stuff.

I'm way off topic, but whenever I hear someone say "Web 2.0", "blog", "rss", "podcast" or some other ridiculous term, it always reminds me of:

1. "you can have it in cornflower blue" (or however that character said it.
and
2. If these words were people, I would embrace their genocide.

Back on topic -- I see the trend to be a beginning of a heard thinning. I haven't been in adult since '98, or whatever, but the mediocrity and absolute ripping of other's ideas is prevalent in this industry.

Seriously...

There's maybe one tour per thousand that has some originality, for example: "1000's pictures" = 20 unique pictures + blah blah you'd see anywhere else.

This industry is filled with a "good ole' boy club" strategically keeping their reign. Perhaps "web 2.0" (yea, I punched myself in the face for typing that) will spawn some actual innovation again, as did the first days of adult internet and its influence on the entire web.

Who knows... guess I just wanted to rant in this thread for some reason.

Feel free to, that's what I made the thread for. :thumbsup

Well then.....

Furthermore, we're in an age of increased software to help the "newb" gain entry. Great for the software maker; bad for the actual webmaster who can make a website from hand - which, being a developer, I find the craft to be something "special". Right there, you've got a million people using the same template, much like that first tour that appeared with the one large thumb, followed by three to four smaller thumbs repeated a few times down the page. What the fuck? How many bitch executives / designers decided to follow that fucking pattern?

Yea. Generates quick money. Where's the innovation?

It's a business. I can understand that: Anyone with a free host and an internet connection can get into an online business these days. Good for them.

I guess I just have issues with the whole "let's disseminate to desaturate" a market, mentality. I'm a prime example, with my linkswhore site. It pains me everyday that fucking self-sufficient, rss-feed sucking fucker is up. I hate my own site and actually spend time I'd rather sleep, thinking about how to make it "innovative". -- Cuz' that's the key... innovation. "Web 2.0", "rss", bullshit like that -- they're just buzzwords for pussies to use to make themselves feel better after they copied an original idea.

Innovation, brethren.... Innovate.

anyway... i'm back to my nap and shot, or whatever.... Sorry TGF for polluting your thread.

On a further note -

My posts have nothing to do with content producers... I'll always want to see some hot chick being fucked. Perhaps not by a guy in a monkey suit, and though there's a market out there for that, good for them.

To all the "best" content producers: Keep shooting your hot content and shoot it well.

To all the "other" content producers: Do what you do and shoot the shit you shoot.

To all the webmasters: With the right traffic, you could sell candy rappers if you marketed it right. Fuck... If you packaged the shit you shit in the toilette right, you could probably sell it.

-- For me, I suck at marketing ( those who fail, teach ) : )

Well here is a little "diddy" for ya! I have an itunes account on one of my blogs, and if you want to use an album graphic to load your affiliate link on to, they actually tell you to "go out and find it" and it seems to be OK as long as you are using it to actually sell the album.

As far as Photos go....give it up. You can't police the world alone, people are just going to use your shit.

A Far as content goes (text), unless you are splitting the atom using cold fusion, most text isn't so brilliant that it's worth a court case over.
Just handle it when you see it, "mano a mano", (or Lawyer to Lawyer).

1 Strongly worded letter with your Attorney's letter head will last you for years

Below are two popular Web 2 elements. They are discussed around the net in various forms. The adult industry is master in the second and now the first is paying them back.


Democracy

We now have several examples to prove that amateurs can surpass professionals, when they have the right kind of system to channel their efforts. Wikipedia may be the most famous. Experts have given Wikipedia middling reviews, but they miss the critical point: it's good enough. And it's free, which means people actually read it. On the web, articles you have to pay for might as well not exist. Even if you were willing to pay to read them yourself, you can't link to them. They're not part of the conversation.



Don't Maltreat Users

During the Bubble a lot of popular sites were quite high-handed with users. And not just in obvious ways, like making them register, or subjecting them to annoying ads. The very design of the average site in the late 90s was an abuse. Many of the most popular sites were loaded with obtrusive branding that made them slow to load and sent the user the message: this is our site, not yours.


Don?t be complacent about Web 2, it has the power of a billion surfers. Those still hanging onto the word "newb" should think again.


.

I so enjoy the rare poster of which offering a rare post of solid reading.

Thank you.

the Viacom vs Google lawsuit is HUGE - if Viacom wins user upload sites are finished - if Viacom loses or settles out of court goodnight Irene to anybody who wants to protect their copyright. The DMCA doesn't work, it's given huge multi millionaire and small frie sites alike the balls to run sites the owners know work only by the copyright infringements of their loyal 'users'. It's a joke and I pray a judge sees it for what it is.

You can't control the global mob (web users) They will decide the final outcome and eventually a balance will be found.

I don't think "Web 2.0" (punched my face again) has anything to copyright laws. You're just hearing that stupid buzzword when laws are finally catching up to technology. I'm sure, the first video link you posted, even before the insanity of the "<blink>" tag, you had to have been worried about content protection, and how; in the venerable words of someone, "security is a myth."

If web2.0 is purely about people uploading stuff, then yeah, you're prolly right. But then there's much more outside that box to make a new social web. Anyway, web 2.0 isn't about that.