<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" 
      xmlns:thr="http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0">
  <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/yaw2d_paul_grah.php" />
  <link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/atom.xml" />
  <id>tag:,2009:/1/tag:72.47.210.69,2005://1.4643-</id>
  <updated>2009-11-23T20:00:42Z</updated>
  <title>Comments for YAW2D - Paul Graham on Web 2.0</title>
  
  <generator uri="http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/">Movable Type 4.23-en</generator>
  <entry>
    <id>tag:72.47.210.69,2005://1.4643</id>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/yaw2d_paul_grah.php" />
    <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-atom.cgi/weblog/blog_id=1/entry_id=4643" title="YAW2D - Paul Graham on Web 2.0" />
    <published>2005-11-20T23:04:06Z</published>
    <updated>2007-12-16T23:15:54Z</updated>
    <title>YAW2D - Paul Graham on Web 2.0</title>
    <summary>YAW2D = Yet Another Web 2.0 Definition. But this time it comes from Paul Graham, whose every essay is treated like a tablet from Moses by the Slashdot crowd. Surprisingly, Paul Graham&apos;s essay entitled Web 2.0 is not a Naysayer one. It&apos;s critical of Web 2.0 in parts, but overall the essay is well thought...</summary>
    <author>
      <name>Richard MacManus</name>
      <uri>http://www.readwriteweb.com</uri>
    </author>
    
    <category term="Web 2.0 Culture" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.readwriteweb.com/">
      <![CDATA[<p>YAW2D = <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yet_Another">Yet Another</a> Web 2.0 Definition. But this time it <a href="http://www.paulgraham.com/web20.html">comes from Paul Graham</a>, whose every essay is treated like a tablet from Moses by the <a href="http://slashdot.org/">Slashdot</a> crowd. </p>

<p>Surprisingly, Paul Graham's <a href="http://www.paulgraham.com/web20.html">essay entitled Web 2.0</a> is not a <a href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/002905.php">Naysayer</a> one. It's critical of Web 2.0 in parts, but overall the essay is well thought out and offers weighty insights. </p>

<p>So how does Graham define Web 2.0?</p>

<p>"Ajax, democracy, and not dissing users."</p>

<p>What, that's it?! Well, it turns out Graham's essay illustrates the problem of trying to define Web 2.0: you can't, in a single sentence or paragraph that is. This extract is a good example of that:</p>

<blockquote><p>"Web 2.0 means using the web the way it's meant to be used. The "trends" we're seeing now are simply the inherent nature of the web emerging from under the broken models that got imposed on it during the Bubble."</p></blockquote>

<p>Of course that is just repeating what most of us 'Web 2.0 Wankers' have been saying for the past year, as is the rest of Paul Graham's essay. But for Graham to give this thing called Web 2.0 his Tech God blessing is a good thing. </p>

<p>I think he overdoes the Google = Web 2.0 theme, but hey we all have our biases.</p>]]>
      
    </content>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:72.47.210.69,2005://1.4643-comment:36617</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:72.47.210.69,2005://1.4643" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/yaw2d_paul_grah.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/yaw2d_paul_grah.php#c36617" />
    <title>Comment from Alex Barnett on 2005-11-20</title>
    <author>
        <name>Alex Barnett</name>
        <uri>http://blogs.msdn.com/alexbarn/</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blogs.msdn.com/alexbarn/">
        <![CDATA[<p>Web 2.0 Wankers. Brilliant.</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2005-11-21T05:32:15Z</published>
  </entry>

</feed>