Response to web 2.0 testicles

This makes me cringe more than I would over the lovechild of Basil Fawlty and David Brent.
Whoever made this video epitomises the type of middle-layer, airhead, cretin that really believes there is such a thing as “Web 2.0” and also believes there is something special about XML.
Go away. Unless you can write an XML parser in whatever language you prefer (English included) then you shouldn’t be philosophising about it or making statements about how it has changed the world.
You seem to think that we don’t use HTML anymore. WRONG!
You seem to think that web 2.0 precludes the use of HTML and therefore that web 2.0 sites don’t use it. WRONG!
You seem to think that separation of style and content was not a facet of HTML (and presumably SGML). WRONG!
You seem to think that before web 2.0 (whatever the bloody hell that is) there were no online communities. WRONG!
You didn’t mention the improvements in developer tools for web technology (cgi/asp/php/ruby-on-rails), or the consequent improvement in on-line software (blogger/myspace/flickr/etc). STUPID!
You seem to never have heard of SGML…

In all,
It has nothing to do with the markup language.
It has nothing to do with a change in attitude.
It is to do with the slow, inevitable change in technologies.

It was not because of a “switch to web 2.0”

This is the same type of irritating twaddle that leads many to believe that Karl Popper invented falsification. He didn’t, he merely named it. Without such “thinkers” the real scientists would have continued and developed regardless. The clever people do the stuff, the practical people help them. The morons write about it and get jobs in the media.

I haven’t forwarded this to him, but I figured that he’d probably be the sort of person to Google himself every week and so would find this.


Leave a Reply