The Web 2.0 will produce Porn 2.0 but not the Porn:Ontology#FreePorn

reposted from a Submission to http://www.oreillynet.com/xml/blog/2006/06/the_7_flaws_of_the_semantic_we.html

This is a reposting about my thoughts on this thread before, which have not been published on the oreillynet yet, that is fine, but I would like to get a copy of my post please? Basically I said that Ajax was Sexy and that the semantic web is not viable to sell sex, that is why the Web 2.0 will produce Porn 2.0, but not the Porn:Ontology#FreePorn.

Let me restate my point about the advertising without going into name of the the #1 consumer of internet advertising : The semantic web seen as a pure web of logic is not viable because it cannot be used for advertising. Otherwise it will be forced to contain opaque data designed to stop logic and appeal to the more primative forces . Thus you will always have chunks of data that are opaque. For them to be only small chunks, then they could be filtered out. Therefore the chunks of advertising have to look the same as the rest of the semantic web. But in a closed, secure semantic web of trust there will be be no way for such information to be hidden, thus it is excluded.

This is not the problem of the Web 2.0. It can be the advertisement and the logical content at the same time. the user can be lead to something that they dont even want, and then the search engines will get money for that.

This fuels the industry and that industry is powerful.

see a quote of my previous post here :

The Content Wrangler, Inc. (presumably Scott Abel) writes :

"Nowadays, adult entertainment companies are not just leaders in earning revenue from the Net, they’re also leaders in the technology arena. In many areas, they are the dominate force. The leaders, not the followers. And, they’re doing as much as possible to protect their turf. They file patents to protect their content matching algorithms and online content management and manipulation functionalities. "

Thanks for listening,

Mike