Eternal debates
Someone (I don't remember who) recommended me this WSJ article, a debate between Andrew Keen and David Weinberger on the usefulness (or lack thereof) of Web 2.0. I saved the article, as I often do, on Instapaper and read it on my iPhone while in the subway yesterday.
Only after reading it for a while I got the feeling that something was wrong. Keen referenced Second Life (that is, forgive the pun, virtually dead), and none of the two mentioned Facebook. Plus, who would start an article with "What exactly is Web 2.0?" in 2010? After checking online, I found out that the article was published on July 18, 2007.
What struck me, though, is how little the debate has changed over these years. People are still debating the fundamentals of the social web. Shouldn't we be past that? Or am I just too impatient? Is the fact that we're still having these discussions even a good sign?
