Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T15:36:02.119Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Web 2.0 vs. the Semantic Web: A Philosophical Assessment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 January 2012

Luciano Floridi
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The paper develops some of the conclusions, reached in Floridi (2007), concerning the future developments of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) and their impact on our lives. The two main theses supported in that article were that, as the information society develops, the threshold between online and offline is becoming increasingly blurred, and that once there won't be any significant difference, we shall gradually re-conceptualise ourselves not as cyborgs but rather as inforgs, i.e. socially connected, informational organisms. In this paper, I look at the development of the so-called Semantic Web and Web 2.0 from this perspective and try to forecast their future. Regarding the Semantic Web, I argue that it is a clear and well-defined project, which, despite some authoritative views to the contrary, is not a promising reality and will probably fail in the same way AI has failed in the past. Regarding Web 2.0, I argue that, although it is a rather ill-defined project, which lacks a clear explanation of its nature and scope, it does have the potentiality of becoming a success (and indeed it is already, as part of the new phenomenon of Cloud Computing) because it leverages the only semantic engines available so far in nature, us. I conclude by suggesting what other changes might be expected in the future of our digital environment.

Type
Research Article
Information
Episteme , Volume 6 , Issue 1 , February 2009 , pp. 25 - 37
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Anderson, Nate. 2006. “Tim Berners-Lee on Web 2.0: ‘Nobody Even Knows What It Means’.” Ars Technica. Retrieved 2 November 2008, from http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060901-7650.htmlGoogle Scholar
Berners-Lee, Tim and Fischetti, Mark. 1999. Weaving the Web: Origins and Future of the World Wide Web. San Francisco: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
Berners-Lee, Tim, Hendler, James, and Lassila, Ora. 2001. “The Semantic Web.” Scientific American 284(5): 34–43. Retrieved 2 November 2008, from http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=the-semantic-webCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dreyfus, Hubert L. 1992. What Computers Still Can't Do: A Critique of Artificial Reason. 3rd ed. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Duguid, Paul. 2006. “Limits of Self-Organization: Peer Production and Laws of Quality.” First Monday. Retrieved 2 November 2008, from http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue11_10/duguid/CrossRefGoogle Scholar
The Economist. 2008. “Blogging – Oh, Grow Up”. 8 November.Google Scholar
Floridi, Luciano. 2005. “Information, Semantic Conceptions of.” In Zalta, E. N. (ed.), Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/informationsemantic/Google Scholar
Floridi, Luciano. 2007. “A Look into the Future Impact of ICT on Our Lives.” The Information Society 23(1): 59–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Floridi, Luciano. 2008a. “Data.” In Darity, W. A. (ed.), International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Floridi, Luciano. 2008b. “The Method of Levels of Abstraction.” Minds and Machines 18(3): 303–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Floridi, Luciano. 2008c. “Artificial Intelligence's New Frontier: Artificial Companions and the Fourth Revolution.” Metaphilosophy 39(4/5): 651–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Floridi, Luciano, Taddeo, Mariarosaria, and Turilli, Matteo. Forthcoming. “Turing's Imitation Game: Still a Challenge for Any Machine and Some Judges.” Minds and Machines.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John. 1997. “AI as Sport.” Science 276(5318): 1518–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Reilly, Tim. 2006. “Web 2.0 Compact Definition: Trying Again”. Retrieved 4 March 2007, from http://radar.oreilly.com/archives/2006/12/web_20_compact.htmlGoogle Scholar
Shadbolt, Nigel, Berners-Lee, Tim, and Hall, Wendy. 2006. “The Semantic Web Revisited.” IEEE Intelligent Systems 21(3): 96–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vaas, Lisa. 2007. “Striptease Used to Recruit Help in Cracking Sites”. Retrieved 31 October 2008, from http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2210674,00.aspGoogle Scholar
W3C. 2008a. “W3C Semantic Web Activity.” Retrieved 31 October 2008, from http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Google Scholar
W3C. 2008b. “W3C Semantic Web Frequently Asked Questions.” Retrieved 31 October 2008, from http://www.w3.org/RDF/FAQGoogle Scholar
Wikipedia contributors. “Cloud computing.” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_computingGoogle Scholar
Wikipedia contributors. “Dublin Core.” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 31 October 2008, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dublin_CoreGoogle Scholar
Wikipedia contributors. “Infosphere.” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/InfosphereGoogle Scholar
Wikipedia contributors. “Web 2.0.” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 31 October 2008, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_2.0Google Scholar