- From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2011 10:38:43 +0100
- To: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
- Cc: Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>
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. Best, Richard
Received on Thursday, 16 June 2011 09:39:16 UTC