- From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
- Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2011 16:41:20 -0500
- To: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Cc: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>
On Jun 16, 2011, at 4:38 AM, Richard Cyganiak wrote: > On 16 Jun 2011, at 07:05, Alan Ruttenberg wrote: >>>>> I think that we are beyond the point where that kind of extremely idealised account is useful for evaluating web technologies. >>>> >>>> We will agree to disagree then. Perhaps in another thread you will say >>>> what *will* be useful for evaluating web technologies. >>> >>> Adoption trends, ergonomics, fit with the existing technology ecosystem, existence of migration paths, marketability, potential of network effects. >>> >> >> Does what the technology *accomplishes* fit in there somewhere? > > Web technologies are never about accomplishing anything new; they are about taking something that already works on a small and local scale, and making it work across the internet with its loosely coordinated actors. > >> Looking at the above, one might conclude that a successful Ponzi scheme of some sort would score well. > > :-) > > If you want to look at it that way, standards, like anything that exhibits network effects, are a bit like a ponzi scheme: once you're inside, you benefit from getting others in your vicinity on board. The difference is that “late adopters” in a ponzi scheme are the suckers who lose their investment; while late adopters of a standard get the largest benefit at the smallest cost. LOL Pat ------------------------------------------------------------ IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Thursday, 16 June 2011 21:41:54 UTC