Web 2.0's Oedipal Trajectory

Web 2.0 is borne of Pater Cyberspace and Mater Human Interface.  Recently Alex Pang at IFTF has been blogging up evidence that cyberspace as a concept is dead (defintion | discussion).  At a meeting a few months ago, Alex hosted an open space discussion about the death of cyberspace, but unfortunately it was simultaneous with a conversation I was hosting so I couldn't attend.

Cyberspace is nicely described in this post by Karl Schroeder. He says:

My personal theory is this:  when the only way to use a computer was to sit still and look through a little window (the screen) into a virtual space, the cyberspace metaphor worked best for us. But with cell phones, PDAs and geographical applications such as store-finders and the proposed "taxi" key for cell phones (which simply summons the nearest cab when you press it), we're no longer staring through a window into cyberspace. The window's been broken, and the cyber world has spilled out into our own space.

This says to me that Web 2.0 combined with pervasive computing devices have integrated the combination of computing, data and communications directly into our daily lives.  Cyberspace was a concept that said, in order for human interaction with the net to occur, it has to come to the net.  Paternal, stoic cyberspace.

Web 2.0 grew out of this mingling DNA of humans interacting and cyberspace providing a meeting place.   As Web 2.0 matured, it became clear that human interaction was the goal and the cyberspace, increasingly, was the impediment.  We had to go to cyberspace to cooperate - how inconvenient.  Lessons we learned from cyberspace were invaluable, certainly, but cyberspace's integration limitiations were stifling the conversations. 

Web 2.0's peers are pervasive computing devices and applications.  Wireless phones, wi-fi cameras, PDAs, and such increase Web 2.0's network.  In order for Web 2.0 to fully mature it would need to transcend the personal computer.

The PC is the domain of cyberspace.  It exists through the screen, the look, the assumption that there is a single device that equates with connection to the net.  That the "net" itself is a single location you arrive at through the browser.

The goal of cyberspace's journey is to get to the net.

The assumption of Web 2.0 is that the net is as pervasive in human existence as being on Earth is.  I rarely leave Seattle to get to Earth.  Earth's existence is pretty important to me, but I never have to leave where I am to get there.  So "surfing cyberspace" is becoming similar to saying "going to earth".

So while Web 2.0 is based strongly on its cyberspace roots, it must kill some of the primary concepts of those roots to continue and better serve human interaction.

       

Technorati Tags: cyberspace web 2.0 cooperation

Comments

[Nancy White]

OK, I can't resist. Is there meaning in the fact that Pater (male) is technology and Mater (female) human interface? Big grin.

Seriously, lots of good stuff to chew on in this post. It reminds me of when I took theater history and they talked about the movements that broke the third wall - the space/place between the players and the audience.