carmen on Thu, 20 Dec 2007 04:30:01 +0100 (CET)

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: <nettime> Critique of the "Semantic Web"

i agree with t byfield's post.

the so-called semantic web/web 2.0 *is* a kind of invasive scheme 
designed to provide a cultural/social ground of approval whereby your 
subjectivity, your social habits and your desired identity and image can 
be fetish-ized and sold to you like bath soap or athletic shoes.  it is 
also, on another level a kind of ritual-mask-for-hire scheme.  (i agree 
also that we are talking epistemologies not ontologies.) 

and yes, i agree that it has provoked a cottage industry of professional 
Explainers, most of whom seem to have missed the basic point. 

it may be noted that facebook did not miss the point:  facebook's 
mistake was perhaps a lack of diplomacy.


t byfield wrote:

> (Wed 12/19/07 at 10:40 AM +0100):
>>This is the wrong assumption that makes the further critique of the
>>Semantic Web missing the point. The semantic web is not about building
>>one big upper-ontology but about supporting many (usually very small)
>>ontologies. The domains of those ontologies may overlap or not. A user
> <...>
>Web 2.0 is a massive expropriation of the integuments of subjectivity, so 
>you and your "social networks" can be sold^W I mean *licensed* back to you. 
>And The semantic web is a cottage industry for people to explain what it 
>"really" means. From 2003:

#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info:
#  archive: contact: