[euske]

The discussions around web3 reminds me of the days when people were looking for a "killer app" for Web 2.0. Was there any? I don't remember much, but I don't think there was a single thing that stood out as "the" Web 2.0 app. I expect web3 to be more or less the same. A lot of buzz, not much material.

[cehrlich]

If you define Web 2.0 as content being created by users and using AJAX or something similar to create interactivity on websites, then I'd say Web 2.0 was enormously successful - Facebook, Twitter, etc. fit that definition.

I guess the big difference is that none of them got there by yelling from the rooftops, "Look at us, we're Web 2.0".

[root_axis]

Web 2.0 was a post-hoc description of interactive web pages, there were no web 2.0 evangelists pushing web 2.0 as the future, it simply happened organically based on its own merit. The web3 movement is astroturfed by enthusiasts trying to make a buck.

[denton-scratch]

> it simply happened organically based on its own merit

I think I agree with you. I'm not sure I agree with "organically", though - it happened almost instantly[0] when IE delivered XMLHttpRequest. It was irresistible because it was so useful.

[0] By "almost instantly", I mean over about 6 months. By the time Firefox delivered XMLHttpRequest, AJAX was already everywhere.

[paulgb]

I don’t recall anyone looking for a killer web 2.0 app, because they already existed when the term was coined. Examples included Flickr and Wikipedia; YouTube came not long after.

https://www.oreilly.com/pub/a/web2/archive/what-is-web-20.ht...

[EtienneK]

Wikipedia was the example most people pointed to.

What is the web3 version?