With all of the hype over the Semantic web, I feel a necessity to re-iterate that there is a technology already before us. This technology which we have dubbed “Web 2.0” in its present state of development, is alive and ever-changing. It allows us to communicate, collaborate, and express ourselves with others in ways previously unimaginable. But, as a digital humanist, I have been bothered by the frustratingly passive nature of the web. Despite the omniscience of Wikipedia, among us mortals knowledge is still power. Man cannot yet, and perhaps never should, depend entirely on digital technology to retain information. Our minds, equipped with higher reason and logic than that behind a server, must be enhanced through technology, not replaced by it.
What I mean when I say that the web is passive is that, for the most part, it requires our effort and constant instruction in order to give us information. Of course there are exceptions, such as email, when we get input and information from people and websites without really doing anything besides staying signed into Gmail. But if I wanted to know that the second Emperor of Rome was Tiberius, I would need to wiki “roman emperors” and look for the successor of Augustus. Now my issue isn’t simply in having to search myself, which is what the Semantic web addresses. My problem is having to conceive the thought: “Hmm. I wonder who the second Roman Emperor was.” As a classical civilization major, that is a critical point of information, but honestly who goes around thinking about Imperial succession?
I want to receive information critical to me, without having to specify each fact first. Think of it this way: web technology is like any other assistant that we employ. Sometimes we have assistants to help us, for example, make a website. We have to tell them what we want on the site, how it should look, and give them feedback when they’ve put something together. In such a situation, we are mostly active agents, while the assistant receives instructions passively and performs them.
Professors at universities are also assistants whom we employ, but we employ them to perform a very active role. My professor has been instructed to teach me Latin, and with that simple prerogative he teaches me Latin grammar and style in minute detail. When web applications perform similar roles, I think of them as part of the Active Web. For instance, I can go to nytimes.com and tell it that I’m interested in classical civilization. Whenever a new article is published that is related to that interest, the NYTimes sends me a notification, or updates my RSS reader. Twitter alerts me when a friend has an interesting thought. Facebook sends me a txt when a close friend gets engaged to someone. These are things that I want to know, and do not have to go to Facebook and query, almost clairvoyantly, “John engagement Sarah,” to find out. The Active Web brings information to me, no matter what I am doing, and increases my overall awareness.
I think this sector of Web 2.0 needs to be developed much more vigorously. “Mobile technologies” and the like are allowing the Active Web to move past sending emails to my inbox, and towards sending messages to my pocket. This type of interactivity, which I am using at the moment to intercept important gossip, should be used by more educational applications to help students, and mankind in general, to become more knowledgeable.