Online Trading :What is Web 3.0 and Why Should I Care?

Maybe you shouldn't.
Let's cut to the chase. When Web 2.0 was introduced as a concept, the "marketects" jumped on it and decided that everything new that related to the web was Web 2.0. In reality the term was coined by Dale Dougherty, an O'Reilly executive, and O'Reilly used the term as a brand for a line of successful conferences - and hence it became a trademark. I'm not sure if anyone claims ownership of Web 3.0 or whether O'Reilly can darken the sky with lawyers if you arrange a Web 3.0 conference, but let's get back to Web 2.0 rather than go into that.
The term "Web 2.0″ was invented to describe the new wave of dot com companies, from Google onwards, that became highly valuable after the dot com collapse. The majority of those companies implemented social networking applications (which could also be described as Telecomms applications) because they involved person-to-person (P2P) or group collaboration. All of this made sense until some marketects decided, on the basis of nothing at all, that rich interfaces and web services were also Web 2.0.
Web 3.0 is the Semantic Web
So let's get it straight from the get go. If Web 3.0 means anything at all, it means the semantic web. That's the accepted meaning. If O'Reilly wants to dispute this (legally or otherwise) then I suggest they take issue with Project10x, a company that has produced a Web 3.0 Manifesto, which speaks of nothing other than Semantic Technologies. I'll do a Q&A on the Semantic Web in a posting in the next week or so, but right now let me just say a few simple things.
The hype phase for the semantic web is upon us. I'm now getting inundated with email about semantic this-and-that and I keep running into software that claim to be "semantic" and hence "can leap tall buildings in a single bound"
Right now there is no killer application for semantic technology. Some commentators say it's web search. I say "merde du taureau."
Semantic Technology is Artificial Intelligence. At least some people claim that it's AI, which is normally enough to sink a technology without trace. However, it isn't AI. Reasoning has nothing to do with it.
There are some useful applications of Semantic Technology. I've written about one here. It has found a good area of application - advertising.
The Semantic Web will not destroy Google. Facebook stands a better chance of destroying Google than the Semantic Web. If any start-up company does produce a compelling semantic search capability, Google will buy them. I read through the Web 3.0 Manifesto and, basically, I didn't buy much of what it was saying. It was telling the usual silver-bullet-vast-ROI story. For example, let me quote:
"Semantic solutions deploy rapidly, incrementally, iteratively, and flexibly, resulting in lower exposure and faster time to value."
What can I say? I'm glad I only read it and didn't step in it.
The problem is that the manifesto talks in vague generalities. The reality is that semantic technologies can improve the act of filtering in many situations because they can guess at meaning better. If you build that into some systems it will make a difference, and in some contexts it may make a significant difference.
But in many situations, the current level of semantics of the system are adequate. For instance most databases have adequate semantics to describe the data they contain. Most applications too have adequate semantics at the interface - so the user understands what the user is looking at. Semantic technology will improve text applications for sure, but by how much? Probably a good deal if you're searching through academic papers, probably now much if you're searching the news.
From now on, whenever you read about semantic technology, do yourself a favor. Turn your hype detector on.