Web 3.0: A story about the Semantic Web

What will be Web 3.0? Why we should build it and how? Is it real possible? Make the world digital or make the machines able to understand the world? This is one, is one of the deepest questions in Western philosophy. This short documentary by Kate Ray tries to answer this questions; or at least make you think about them.


Web 3.0 from Kate Ray on Vimeo.

Web 3.0 must & will be the future, the evolve from Web 2.0. Location will not play anymore a core-role as it’s been fragmented already. We have built tons of geo-loc enabled applications that satisfy every need, thus now we need to link data. As Sir Tim-Berners Lee said in his TED talk: “Open your data, open your data!”

We need to make computers understand all of an item’s connections with other things/people/everything. That’s trillions of trillions of collections. Here we get to the question as Clay Shirky puts it:

I’ve often joked that the Semantic Web is a witness protection program for AI researchers. That what the Semantic Web held out was the possibility that instead of making machines think like people, we could describe the world in terms that machines were good at thinking about. So we would switch from trying to build up brains in silicon, and instead rerender the actual world as information. And that gets very quickly to one of the deepest, you know, questions in all of Western philosophy, which is: Does the world make sense? Or do we make sense of the world? I don’t think you can unambiguously describe the world. I don’t think you can describe the world, or even large subdomains of the world, in a way that all observers or even most observers will agree with.

You see, this is very tricky.

What do you think? Is Semantic Web real possible in computing or even in philosophical terms, or it is not?

posted: May 21, 2010
under: Computers, Web

5 Responses

  1. Mike says:

    We are way past upgrading, we need a whole new system, be it optical or whatnot, there is just so much you can upgrade to an existing system until it can’t be upgraded anymore. Take mosfets for example, we are stuck at 30nm, can we improve it? No, because after the material is thinner than it has to be in order for the circuit to have an architecture of 30nm it begins to act as a conductor, it is so thin, electrons go through it, we can’t change that, we need to change the whole thing (namely not use Silicon). It’s like that with the web, imo.

    ~w/e

  2. Apostolos says:

    Well, if we upgrade our hardware that has a direct impact on Internet an software. But I’m talking about the next step Internet we are going to live and breathe in the coming years. It’s here an it’s gonna stay. Semantics is probably *the* next big thing.

  3. Mike says:

    I want to study com.sci. and focus on AI modules so i hate semantics on principle : ). I know we cannot describe it, essentially it all comes down to this, can we know everything about a given situation? Because that is what a pc needs in order to interpret the environment, every information about it. Well Heisnberg has proven that we cannot, with his uncertainty principle. That in my opinion is a big hole in semantics that i don’t know if it can ever be repaired. (look uncertainty principle up, i think you’ll agree with me)

  4. Apostolos says:

    There’s a video I want to link it to you but I’m away from home, so I’ll reply here in full on Monday or Sunday evening.