Web's Future: More Content, Fewer Sites

Good points, and very thought provoking article, Peter.

I think this points out that technology at large, as well as the Web, will increasingly be driven by increased use and value created through content and use of data.  I agree that we have not begun to tap into the implications of this.  It is certainly true that smart businesses will begin to look at connectivity and linkages in a whole different way.

DHagar

Geni is another popular web 2.0 family site that uses a slightly different model...give away that data the community generated for free, but charge them to do cool things with it. Definitely a better approach than a blog or generic Facebook "space." In fact, Geni distributes its entire site and database through its Facebook application, realizing that it's not all about redirecting users to their fully featured main website.

peter, i definitely subscribe your point of view

I think the web 1.0 has fed the ego of many companies, especially the small ones, which could finally have their own personal window on available to the world, and could feel themselves as important and reachable as the big ones.....

corporate web sites are something to get proud of: "have you seen my new web site?"

but at the end of the day the thing you want is reaching your customers, your stakeholders, maybe interact and relate with them, not just have a fancy web site to show to a bunch of persons....

Content seeding, content syndication, and in general being present and available in the environment where people gathers, is the important key for a brand

a brand might eventually do without a corporate web site

it cannot do without developing a social media marketing strategy, instead

m

Joe,

Rarely do I call things out like this but do you realize you posted content and/or information freely on a site that IBM sponsors? By the very nature of your comment, am I to assume that sponsor check is made out to you?

pb

Internet is always evolving and evolution by definition defies prediction. Observation is the key.

I agree, a new way of content evolving is underway. Towards an overlall conscience I think. That woul be the greatest achievement of internet. To become the collective conscience of mankind.

Intriguing...

Yeah,

Good move, give information away freely, so some other entity can profit from it...

Why not create a Family Tree blog or FaceBook space and share with your relatives freely??... Dooooh!!

Another case of a 'Net idea relying on the laziness/cluelessness of the general user populace.

Joe

You got me thinking... one site I use regularly, Ancestry.com, a fairly expensive subscription service, might be on to something I had not thought much about before reading your article.

Ancestry provides probably the world's best data base of family records for folks looking for long dead ancestors. Ancestry has access to actual U.S. census reports from a hundred and fifty years ago up to 1930.

But more importantly Ancestry is really a social site disguised as a data source. Amateur geneaologists around the country have volunteered family data that Ancestry resells. From the data, subscribers can find hundreds of reliable clues to their familiy history and ancestors, often more clues than they have time to look at as the data base must be huge.

What is interesting is the way subscribers freely provide tons of family data to Ancestry, which Ancestry sells back to them and their relatives.

Subscribers to Ancestry are really hooked on the idea of completing their family trees and don't mind that everything they add is being sold to others. Gee, my cousins may be buying the info I provide about Aunt Tillie, and do I care? Not really, as where else can I find tons of data about my dead relatives so easily.

First - Peter, this idea is intriguing to think about and try to vision. I think you did an excellent job of turning it on its side. Great post for some (sustained) thought here and offline.

In response to Chris, I wonder if several of the smaller players, microsites, specialty sites, etc will pool their collective together and be as the "biggies" are. Could be possible. There could also be different webs for different purposes. You know, like dot com being for commerce, dot gov being for government, dot biz being for business.

Maybe a dot soc or some such can be used for social networks... ... ...hmmmmm.

Now you've got me thinking too Chris.

The scenario for the next cycle in the use of the Internet is quite intriguing. Interestingly it seems to be cost saving as well (something that endeared end-users to the Internet).

It is worthwhile that time be spent in looking at how best to use various tools to find out where content must be pushed?

A question though? What would this mean to Internet traffic? Will the existing Infrastructure support such massive movement of data to various specific nodes?

An interesting item this morning on the resolution of an unsettling accusation against Sears, appropos of this discussion.

Seems Big Brother is watching, but we may not be watching back closely enough.