This is a response-post to a different blog titled, “Web 3.0: An Official Definition.’

“Give me liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely
according to conscience, above all liberties.” -John Milton

This post is not to criticize any points, but to bring up a point for discussion. According to, the official Web 3.0 definition is as such:

  • Web 3.0 is defined as the creation of high-quality content and services produced by gifted individuals using Web 2.0 technology as an enabling platform.

My concern is with the term ‘gifted individuals.’ Web 2.0 is technology that has given a voice to many individuals, who previously, were left unheard. I think that our forefathers, John Milton and John Stuart Mills would be beaming at the bursting free marketplace of ideas. Indeed, some believe that the web allows us a real chance at really discussing issues and revealing new truths. I wonder what Milton and Mills would think of technology designed to hand that freedom over to select ‘gifted individuals.’ This post is not to argue against the technology. I am all about it. Instead, this post is to ask a question on how that technology will be used, especially when dangerous gray areas lead away from information of many, to the information of the select few.

In the post, the author also states:

Web 3.0 throttles the “wisdom of the crowds” from turning into the “madness of the mobs” we’ve seen all to often, by balancing it with a respect of experts.’ Web 3.0 is a return to what was great about media and technology before Web 2.0: recognizing talent and expertise, the ownership of ones words, and fairness. It’s time to evolve, shall we?”

I think the author makes some great points, and I understand his general idea. However, I am cautious to say that the new Web 3.0 technology is only for experts and gifted individuals….and will be saving us from any mobs. With this technology, who will decide what is talent, and what is expertise? Where will the power be left? For myself, I welcome the new technology, yet at the same time, I like being able to read the spectrum of opinions and decide for myself where the truth lies.

My view on this other blog’s post was also formed when I saw that he censored the comments towards his post. Though I understand his point of wanting constructive dialogue, I’m glad he could outline his expertise on what a free discussion should entail. =)