DISQUS

France is a people of the same quality as Greece and
Italy. She is Athenian in beauty and Roman in
grandeur. Moreover, she is generous. She gives
herself. More often than other peoples, she knows the
mood of devotion and sacrifice. But it is a mood that
comes and goes; and this is the great danger for those
who seek to run when she is content to walk, and to
walk when she wishes to stay still. France has her
relapses into materialism, and at certain moments the
ideas which obstruct the working of her splendid mind
contain nothing that recalls her greatness but are
rather of the dimensions of Missouri or some other
southern state. What can be done about it? The
giantess plays the dwarf; great France has her
fantasies of smallness. That is all.

--Victor Hugo

So, yes, it could be French protectionsim. Or it
could be contrariness (even Hugo admits to this). Or
it could be both.

Thanks. It is obvious that the government was outsourcing aspects of the projects to vendors, Yet my point about governmental monopoly still standing.
As much as I think about the wireless project and the "lower economic classes" the points made in the project justification document seems more ridiculous. Nobody addressed the simple fact that there is nothing wrong with dial-up unless you need to download movies...

LOL

Mine is the best:)

Peer production is only one aspect of it. You are ignoring the “Long Tail”, “Rich User Interface”, Tagging and some other features I forgot.
What I basically claim is that people uses terms freely without really understand what they are. The argument if Web 2.0 is a marketing slogan, Real technological development and business model or both is a different discussion.
on a different note, I'm looking at your product and it is very interesting concept. I wrote about this type of aggregations in the past.

very well

LOL, you aren't fair. I always supported the right to strike ( you can ask Michael - what did I say during the Verizon strike). The fact that I believe that Government should not be involved in the market just increase the need of workers to unites.
The problems with Unions, and TWU in particular, that they are loosing sight of what is important and they start to protect inefficiencies and become burden on the companies - but this is a different problem.
Are you coming here in April?

Thanks!
It is always seems simple after someone shows you what to do:)

Wow, you really missed the point. It is actually simple. let's try again: the explanation you gave to the phenomena called Web 2.0 is extremely vague. It can be because Web 2.o is just a hype or that you have no idea what you are talking about.
now you got it?

Thanks Dror

did you get them?:)

Thanks!!!

The key is how you determine the users needs/desires without relaying on them to "work" for you. This, as well, is and old knowledge:)

You committed the biggest sin in this blog - you are boring me. I’ll try to explain again, for the last time. The concept of having users submitting content into this site is wrong. If the idea, the money maker, is that you will be able to provide first hand information for travelers then people will usually come to check for information. Why should someone submit content into a “site” when they can do that in their own blog? I do not need to open an account to know that I browsed enough to get more then the general Idea. Unless you develop a method to extract this type of information from other sources you are going to be around for short time.
Now unless you have something interesting to say, don’t bother.

And by the way to claim that you are just a user is simply not Sirius when I see the I.P. address you are using....

Why do I need to use the site if the concept of using it is wrong? instead of being defensive and attacking my rhetoric you can do one of two productive activities:
1. Ignore me
2. Think about what I said

I'm still thinking that if you will change the concept of your data gathering you have a chance to create value. Otherwise you are just waste of time.

Guys,
as I wrote I agree that site that deals with travel experience has justification, really! what I claimed was also that the technic of having people writing in this site (which is a way of data gathering for the site owner!) is the wrong approach. In the long run people will write in personal blogs and not in your site.

This is a good point. I need to look into this issue more closely.
Thanks

I'll be more then happy to be wrong and I will be more then happy to write about it .I just don't think it is going to happened.

Dave,
this is all fine and I'll be willing to take what I wrote back if you will be able to convince me that:
1. there is added value for people (the large population not the early adopter that will try every new service) to share searches. Your business model is based on the assumption that the public will share - I do not see it happened. The following link discuss it better than me: http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2005/12/05...
2. Thay you developed real search methodology and not just ride on Yahoo capabilities.

Complete waste of time and money. the sad thing is that people going to loose jobs and saving over this again.

I agree with you Doug, the distinction between "Big entities" and Individual is superficial and wrong.

I'm impressed. By the way if a company produced something, doesnt the owner/s of the company has the right for it? I met today with CEO of a company that built wonderful product, really, and I think that they have the right to keep the code for themselves if that what they want.
We all hate RIAA for the ways they abuse the rights, but until the artist and we stop using them they will get along with it. doesn't make a different between Individual and Corporation here.
I'm impress with your intellectual honesty, really!

$40 million sound like a good business model...
http://gigaom.com/2005/11/16/googles-riya-designs/

Thanks Nana

Thanks for your kind comments Tara. I’m not dismissing motives of people to create for reason other then money. For me money is one, but not the only one, of the ways to exchange value. Ayn Rand wrote in Atlas Shrug about the expression “to make money” – since the money represent innovation, creation etc. the making of things leading to creation of wealth.
Web 2.0 as a movement has several flows and one of them is the OSS “ideology” (not as a practical tactic). If I created something it is mine and I will decide how to use it. I might decide to give it to the world; I might want to charge for it. The people (or the way we the “Capitalists” call it – the market ) will make a decision if the value of using what I created worth the exchange. For example – I decided that Tara’s blog worth my time and attention - this is my part in the exchange of values reading what Tara’s created.
The most common method of value exchange is money, and at the end of the day the people that are working for the companies (not organizations – companies) need to pay bill, to buy food, to pay for theater etc. I sow what happened at 2001, when Web 2.0 will not be connected to very simple economical values it will collapse.

That being said I have to admit that what is being created is very powerful. When I wrote this post it was like singing in the bath – something that I will never do in public. The fact that I receive these comments and the tracking information that I saw in Google analytics about how wide was this, and other, post circulation make me impressed.