The Dick In a Box video, first introduced to me by Teejay Green many moons ago has finally met with web 2.0 to create the Dick in a Box shirt. This video that represents one of five funny things that SNL has produced since Will Ferrell left. Anyway, the shirt is available through tshirtbordello. I particularly like the person modelling the shirt trying to avoid eye contact because he’s wearing a Dick in a Box t-shirt.
|
|||||
Dick In A Box meets something between say Web 1.2 and Web 1.7 |
|
||||
|
Copyright © 2010 Suburban Adventure - All Rights Reserved |
|||||
I’m going to call you out on this on. I wasn’t going to at first because you’ve already given me another result on google:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&hs=83Z&q=%22teejay+green%22&btnG=Search
Damn those bots are fast! Anyway, back to calling you out. How is this web 2.0? I know that web 2.0 is very ambiguous and buzz-word-ish, but there’s nothing web 2.0-e about T-Shirt Bordello. No fancy AJAX, no interactivity with the user, none of the trademarks of sites branded 2.0.
Ok, I’ll stop being a dick now and compliment the word press use! I was going to comment on it the other day by making a worthless comment just to mention the new lay out, but the whole ordeal felt much to contrived. If there was a “Hot damn, Suburban Adventure on web 2.0″ post, I most certainly would have commented there! Anyway, glad that I can finally comment on posts and navigate around quicker. Very nice! If you want/need any help with it let me know! When I was feebly trying to update my own word press “blog” I was noting how nice it would be to cecome some sort of contributing author here, but for the mean time I’ll just flood your comments with my diatribes.
The Web 2.0-ness refers to the transformation of a web-based meme into a marketable good over low-cost, public-friendly channels. T-shirt Bordello uses a production back-end from a much larger distributor and I’ll file this under “collaboration” and “affiliatization” which I think are sufficiently embedded (pun!) in the marketing psychology of web 2.0.
As I suspected, our disagreement stems from the ambiguous definition of Web 2.0. The definition you supplied is not nearly close to what I would say web 2.0 is. In fact, I’m not sure if it even works for your example. Even though the dick in a box shit is, the majority of the t-shirts on T-shit Bordello aren’t derived from web-based memes. Which would exclude T-Shirt Bordello from web 2.0 as defined above.
That definition also excludes the most notable “web 2.0 sites” like Flickr, You Tube, Gmail, Wikipedia, Facebook, etc. I think of Web 2.0 as web based applications. The web page itself isn’t a static body of text, but rather an interactive page with mostly user generated content. Web 2.0 sites utilize AJAX, or similar technologies, to drive the web based application. Web 2.0 sites are closer to traditional applications you’d use on your computer, then the web 1.0 sites you simply “read”.
In Web 2.0, the browser becomes an operating system and each site becomes an application.
As I suspected, our disagreement stems from the ambiguous definition of Web 2.0. The definition you supplied is not nearly close to what I would say web 2.0 is. In fact, I’m not sure if it even works for your example. Even though the dick in a box shit is, the majority of the t-shirts on T-shit Bordello aren’t derived from web-based memes. Which would exclude T-Shirt Bordello from web 2.0 as defined above.
That definition also excludes the most notable “web 2.0 sites” like Flickr, You Tube, Gmail, Wikipedia, Facebook, etc. I think of Web 2.0 as web based applications. The web page itself isn’t a static body of text, but rather an interactive page with mostly user generated content. Web 2.0 sites utilize AJAX, or similar technologies, to drive the web based application. Web 2.0 sites are closer to traditional applications you’d use on your computer, then the web 1.0 sites you simply “read”.
In Web 2.0, the browser becomes an operating system and each site becomes an application.
My definition is neither absolute nor exclusive and much of your ensuing information stems from that which I will then rightly skip. I agree that the definition of Web 2.0 is both imprecise and abused. I’d respond that your definition of application is harsh as an application simply performs a task of which flat reading (eg. Acrobat Reader, eReader) is included and yours implies a larger degree of interactivity.
The attribute missing from Web 2.0 that you are right in calling me out on would be community participation. In this case, t-shirt Bordello is the end-user of the producer’s back-end rather than rightly the community. It would meet the “strong” definition of Web 2.0 by allowing end users to produce content (which they may through some other venue) rather than my broader definition.