What is Digg?51 Comments
- jmpeagle, on 10/11/2007, -3/+28the only thing college graduate should fear from web 2.0 is now that a lot of your personal information is on the web that you volunteered plus your bosses can now see who your friends are and what you talk about at some of these websites
- LordSkywalker, on 10/11/2007, -2/+17BREAKING: Putting personal info online allows others access to said information.
- bruinexmo, on 10/11/2007, -0/+12Did anybody (including the submitter) actually read the article? This is about businesses fearing the free flow of knowledge the Internet fosters.
- Godlike, on 10/11/2007, -1/+12The problem with corporate america (and anyone who works in truly 'corporate' america will tell you this) is that anyone who makes a mistake is utterly blamed and crucified so nobody will admit any failure. If people in business could get past the fact that people ***** up then we'd be doing a lot more efficient work.
- jmpeagle, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8the old people just hire people like us with technology knowledge to spy on others. They win.
- vertinox, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7Unfortunately, for every one person like you, there will be 10 marketing or sales managers who will not hire unless they hear Web 2.0... And maybe the word synergy.
- swavalier711, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6BREAKING: Don't let them know it's you. Specifically, make up a username that can't be traced back to you.
I mean, it's your own damn fault if you say "Durrrrrrr im John Smith and im a part of the DIEHARD RACISTS CLUB!" I have no sympathy for you. - VtmnR, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6That is the other extreme of the story, but the reality is that both of these fears exist. Thanks to sites and blogs like Dell Hell, corporations have to be more careful and considerate of their actions/images.
But because so many users (whether they are aware of it or not) integrate so much of their lives into such a publicly open and accessible profile, like MySpace/Facebook, they are allowing their lives to be 'watched', or 'inspected' by larger companies.
So, here's the first step to get away from it: get an 'unattached' email address to sign up for stuff. Don't attach your name to it in any way whatsoever. Just use it to horde your junk mail from signing up with services and whatnot. And keep your 'real' email address private by giving it to only people you can unquestionably trust with it. - meshman, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4"What if any role does Web 2.0 have in the enterprise?"
That statement makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
"Answering that question can start uncomfortable conversations with CIOs who aren't happy with its openness and don't know how to fit it into their infrastructure "
Fit what into our infrastructure? User submitted content? User rated content? It's already there. it has been for a long time. Why now start calling it something completely inaccurate and not what it is?
We have not yet seen the "next version" of the web. There is nothing new in Web 2.0 at all other than the marketing blather. - CryptiniteDemon, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Anyone else getting really sick of hearing the term "Web 2.0"? All they did was take the MTV mentality and shove it on the internet and make internet cliques an virals. Whoopdee *****' doo.
Of course they should fear IT people. They've spent the last 12 years shunning IS and IT people acting as if they were nothing but a burden on the company, constantly cutting department budgets every year. And now companies depend on it and if they don't wanna be ass-***** with network viruses, then they need to pay them more and start treating the IT/IS department as if it's a real, profit-generating sect of the company. C execs expect nothing but miracles out of IT on the thinnest budget imaginable. And when such large parts of a company's security are controlled by a few nerds, you better be damn sure you treat them with respect because IT is becoming the backbone of almost any large infrastructure business, no matter the industry. - packetstorm, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Or they just want you "think" they are too clueless until they bust your ass after collecting enough evidence that your are running VNC out of their corporate network, which they own by the way. The fact they probably have banned VNC's is more than likely in the acceptable use policy manual within your organization. You might want to read it sometime, if it exists. If your company doesn't have one, consider yourself lucky.
Don't let your hubris blind you. For every person that thinks he's "so" smart, there is always someone who is smarter with better tools, skills and resources who will pwn your ass. Remember Kevin Mitnick and how he got pwned by Tsutomu Shimomura?
Nuff said... - GoatMonkey2112, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3This whole article is retarded. Doesn't make any sense.
- stockjones, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3College grads need to steer as far away as they can from the hype of techy loaded word syndrome. In other words, the term web 2.0.
Cliffs for the article, corporations fear a lot of the "collaboration communication" web technology and hardware (cellphones and such) because it loosens the control of information within. - Lasereth, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Buried because the word "enterprise" was used in the description; anyone who works in IT hates the word also
- jmpeagle, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4I believe it is totally legal and employers love using facebook now to check up on potential employees
http://www.unlvrebelyell.com/article.php?ID=700
http://daily.stanford.edu/article/2006/1/20/employersSnoopOnFacebook
http://www.collegerecruiter.com/weblog/archives/2006/05/nbc_interview.php - krinthekuz, on 09/16/2008, -0/+2the article sucks. it's completely speculation. the only example of 2.0 "embracing" is apple with their iphone that is so crappy that it FORCES the user to use ***** 2.0 apps (i fail to see how having reduced functionality is a good thing). there's not a single company listed that has fought back against 2.0, or a single interview with a job applicant who asked for a wiki and was denied. marked as lame.
- phoenixawe, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2The author equivocates. In one sentence he uses "Web 2.0" to mean socially based products for customers, and then in the next sentence to mean a company's internal structure. The two things aren't the same. Apple can release the archetype of a web 2.0 device for its customers and not incorporate any of those ideas into its corporate structure.
Also, this article has nothing to do with employers finding info about their employees on social networks. Read the bloody article before you open your mouth. - nwoantibody, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2You really think this is all?
Wait till they go to your house to collect your guns and they read your entire collection straight to your face because you put that in some local pro arms club that has affiliations to corporate firms and the corporate firm sold your info to the government.
In Web 2.0, you will live in fear of people knowing who you are, what you have and what you stand for...
Just wait to Web 3.0, your entire life will be online... - freakystyley, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Web 2.0 is a technological manifestation of the principles of the Cluetrain Manifesto, written in 1999: http://cluetrain.com/
Note the thesises 41 to 50:
41. Companies make a religion of security, but this is largely a red herring. Most are protecting less against competitors than against their own market and workforce.
42. As with networked markets, people are also talking to each other directly inside the company—and not just about rules and regulations, boardroom directives, bottom lines.
43. Such conversations are taking place today on corporate intranets. But only when the conditions are right.
44. Companies typically install intranets top-down to distribute HR policies and other corporate information that workers are doing their best to ignore.
45. Intranets naturally tend to route around boredom. The best are built bottom-up by engaged individuals cooperating to construct something far more valuable: an intranetworked corporate conversation.
46. A healthy intranet organizes workers in many meanings of the word. Its effect is more radical than the agenda of any union.
47. While this scares companies witless, they also depend heavily on open intranets to generate and share critical knowledge. They need to resist the urge to "improve" or control these networked conversations.
48. When corporate intranets are not constrained by fear and legalistic rules, the type of conversation they encourage sounds remarkably like the conversation of the networked marketplace.
49. Org charts worked in an older economy where plans could be fully understood from atop steep management pyramids and detailed work orders could be handed down from on high.
50. Today, the org chart is hyperlinked, not hierarchical. Respect for hands-on knowledge wins over respect for abstract authority.
Most corporations operate like glorified boys clubs and such hierarchy-subverting technologies are bad news -- and rightly so. By implementing Web 2.0 systems in corporations, soon or later, everybody will realize that the people in charge are either idiots or douchebags. - Murdats, on 10/11/2007, -9/+10ffs sake, web 2.0 is a valid term to refer to the relativley new paradigm of socially oriented websites
web 2.0 is a lot easier to say then this site is a socially oriented site with user driven content. - tobias1482, on 10/11/2007, -3/+4It's actually easier to say that web 2.0 is just has popups, uses css, ajax, and other *****.
Web 2.0, though... It's ***** lame. It's not a protocol just biz speak. - richard2, on 10/11/2007, -4/+5I seriously want to punch anyone and everyone who uses that term.
- judsond, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1That's one of the many problems, communication issues are high up there also though.
- putnam, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1None of those articles demonstrate the existence of an "all access account" people can buy -- because there isn't one (and never was).
- acl123, on 10/11/2007, -6/+7Internet neologisms are rarely accurate, but whether or not the term is suitable, you can't deny that there has been a major evolution over the last couple of years in the way that the internet is being utilized by the masses.
- jerbaker, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Our IT department is too disorganized to have a manual. They have nothing. My machine is checked weekly for any rootkits or keyloggers. The only thing they can see on my machine is one TCP connection to a Verizon DSL machine. Nothing wrong with that unless they have figured out the problem of factoring large primes.
- jerkfaceirl, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1exactly, if you don't want your bosses to know who your friends are, don't use the site. /obvious
- meshman, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1The term "Web 2.0" infers that thre's a new "version" of the world wide web. There isn't. It's the same web we've been using since its creation. Find a term that makes sense and applies to technology.
- THE4IRON, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2It's difficult to get anything done in large corporations...I wouldn't worry too much about it.
Just fall in line and do what you are told and you will do fine. - fkr3, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1No...... browser + mouse + keyboard + internet connection.... sounds about the same to me.
- Genma, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1as long as there are noobs who had no idea... aw crap
- zaffir, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Do what I did - introduce Web 2.0 into the workplace. My IT department was having trouble with communicating information about how to fix different user issues. Before I arrived they had a document based how-to "system" consisting of .txt and .doc files on a Windows networking share. It sucked. So I set up a wiki, spent a day "converting" those text documents to wiki entries, and now we have a MUCH easier time sharing information.
Of course, the article is talking about people who don't share information. That's the downside. One of our employees is steadfastly against sharing information with the rest of the group, and thankfully our boss doesn't approve of it. Everyone else's managers may not be so enlightened. - giants1, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Ummm...Web 2.0 was dead years ago only the media is lagging behind those of us that work with the technology.
- MikeonTV, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2So lets go back to the caveman era of Web 1.0?
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -4/+4Please. Web 2.0 is the way things are going to be, fear or not. Do something about it. I'm a college grad that will be writing these apps. Yay4Me.
- ShyGuy91284, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0I don't really think "Web 2.0" ideology is foreign to a workplace. I'm currently working at a large multinational corporation, and we use things such as IM, wikis, and mobile communications quite often internally. Digg's spell checker on the other hand doesn't seem to agree with Web 2.0's presence in the workplace....
- ebizniz, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0The internet is here to stay. We just have to embrace it or be left behind. Web 2.0 is just a better way for a community of like-minded people to communicate and share their interests which the media are unable to.
- slapthemonkey, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2Their fear is genuine.
- 1laradream, on 10/11/2007, -6/+5@jmpeagle - very true. If the article's right, then the grey haired old fogies won't know their way around Google to be able to "digg" up this info. We have the technology knowledge, they have the power. Who wins?
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -15/+14If I ever interview anyone who uses the term "Web 2.0" without scorning it, THEY WILL NOT BE HIRED. So really, the point is moot.
THERE IS NO "WEB 2.0". How goddamned long do we have to suffer this *****? - crushfan, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1What? Weren't people doing as you said all the time? HAHAHA? Is there a person who really gives her/his primary email address to sign up MySpace or anything else?
Well, then you (I mean, them) deserve to be tracked -- not saying tracking or stalking is good. - dannyzen, on 10/11/2007, -1/+0The sharing of information INSIDE a company with those who work WITHIN it is the best possible way for analysis and problem solving. So the web2.0 concept is prepping students for a more functional internal information structure
- vertinox, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1@"Cliffs for the article, corporations fear a lot of the "collaboration communication" web technology and hardware (cellphones and such) because it loosens the control of information within."
However, the corporations that embrace this fact use this to their advantage will be the victorious ones. How much you want to bet Microsoft has a team devoted to reading over competitors blogs and Wikis, but at the same time encourage their employees to post disinformation on their blogs? - crushfan, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1Yeah, at least you can use your first name with your middle name's or surname's first letter as a username or a screen name. This is what the people who knows how to use Internet do.
- fluffythekitten, on 10/11/2007, -2/+0yep...but if we deliver moonshiney results the'll never really know....Harharhar..
- jerbaker, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1"Web 2.0 infringes on the historical IT control and power"
Ignoring the extraneous "is that it" in the summary, everything that goes beyond a restricted user account in Windows goes beyond what the IT department wants you to do. I am so grateful for things like ERD Commander CDs and SSH tunnels to my proxy server and VNC. My IT department is too clueless to know what's going on. - pfhackett, on 10/11/2007, -4/+2wtf are you talking about? do you have ANY evidence of this?
ps. you look stupid wearing that tinfoil hat - fkr3, on 10/11/2007, -7/+3Why would corporate anycountry fear "Web 2.0"? The kids growing up with the superficial feel-important buzz Web 2.0 promises them are the ones looking for jobs and pay cheques. Being irrelevant and having no voice is something the kids have to learn to deal with - it's a shame if the internet's led them to believe otherwise about themselves, but they'll adjust.
I think the funnier fear would be all the anti-whatever tards when they eventually grow up and apply for jobs. I can just see some pimply-faced grad student announcing to a corporation that they should ditch 20,000 XP + Office licenses and install Ubuntu and Google (cr)Apps lmfao. - has2k1, on 10/11/2007, -9/+4I think it should be the other way.
CORPORATE AMERICA FACING WEB 2.0 FEAR
What is more likely,
"I am in yo diggz, fearing to give out your secrets"
or
"I am in yo diggz, sharing your routerz secrets" - resta6, on 01/12/2009, -10/+3actually facebook allows corporations to buy a all access account that can view profiles etc, allowing them to spy on you. And with facebook, you volunteer your name, so its easy to find who you are looking for
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is