Digital Content and Related Issues - Report Example

INTRODUCTION The modern technology and innovations have reformed the use of the Web. Previously the scope of the web was limited but as the time passed the quick advancements introduced new method to name a few of which is Web 2.0. The evolution of the World Wide Web emphasizes on sharing information and ensures maximum collaboration of the users(O’reilly, 2005). Different tools are used for this purpose. For naming a few of such tools which contribute in enhancing the transitions and assist with dynamic information sharing is static HTML. The functionality of the system can be improved with the advancements which ease open communication and marketing the information of the products excessively through the web. The Web 2.0 gained its popularity for the additional support which it provided to the marketers. Different platforms such as the blogs, wikis and other forms of web based arenas attract the users (Oreilly, 2007). The usage of the terminology has evolved with time. In this report, a discussion will be presented which will discuss the development in the technology. The use of media and the web 2.0 along with the current technological devices have made everyone a consumer, audience and a producer.The portability of the devices has supported the production of digital content. The future development of the process will show the significant development in the future. The development has been done for signifying the aspects of the development which have and have not supported the progress of the topic. All the discussion presented in this report will be supported with reasonable examples of the topic. All the issues related to the Web 2.0 will be elaborately presented in this report. REVOLUTIONIZED TECHNOLOGY The advancements in technology have revolutionized the approach of the people. The current devices have connected the people, and this has made use of marketing easier using the Web 2.0 (Williams, & Chinn, 2009). The difference in technology is that the Web 1.0 was a limited interface which only supported collaboration using a browser and email. The Web 1.0 was developed highly on the basis of published content and very little on the basis of user generated content (Cormode, & Krishnamurthy, 2008). In 1996 when the media was popular 45 million users were part of it (Miller, 2005). The number of sites at that time was 250,000 sites. In 2006, Web 2.0 had more than 1 Billion global users. The information on the web included mainly the published content and the significantly portion is also based on the user generated information. This represents the strong presence of the collective intelligence (Goodchild, 2007). The components available on the web are widely read and written. The total websites which are inclusive in the system are 80,000,000 websites. All the details of this elaboration have been shown in the chart below (Barrett, 2008). (Barrett, 2008) The understanding of the development explains the factors which have led to the development and the advancement of the web. DISCUSSION OF THE STATE OF WEB 2.0 The advancements over the years lead to video, mobility and virtualization of the process. The systems that have been developed include the use of portable technology and the digital content(Taringa, 2008). The development in the web shows the evolution process of the internet. This signifies a combination of video, virtualization and mobility. The development and advancement of the technology have contributed to the excessive use of the wikis and blogs (Murugesan, 2007). This has made the entire communication process effective and easy(Taringa, 2008). (Taringa, 2008) The advancement of technology and the issue found in the Web 2.0 led to the development and the making of the Web 3.0. The convenience associated makes sure that the system is portable, and the media can be used on several devices (Cooke, & Buckley, 2008). The speed of reform will ensure that access to the web is easy and can be done anytime.The development and the need of the web has increased so dramatically that the users seek mobility and ease of access at all times. The development of the Web over time can be seen in the chart below. The Web 1.0 was developed on the text based flash which included the excessive use of graphics. The Web 2.0 includes all the blogs, wikis and video sharing with the advancements of the personal sharing portals (Constantinides, & Fountain, 2008). The data storage devices and the portable technology storage have made transferring data and digital content a lot easier. Lots of data can be stored using the cloud computing methods which ease storage. The use of the social media and the information extracting portals such as the wikis and blogs has created an ease of access to information. The development of the Web 3.0 includes the use of the 3D portals along with the avatar representation. Integrated games business and the media flow represent the strong presence and dominance of the virtual web worlds (Barrett, 2008). (Barrett, 2008) KEY WEB 2.0 SERVICES The key activities associated with Web 2.0 are associated with the human disposition process. This includes the playful, expressive, reflective and exploratory attributes of the human disposition (TLRP, 2012). The four major services where the application of the web 2.0 is used are based on the following 1. Playful: This can be done by promoting the application in the games and the virtual world. 2. Expressive: This is done through media sharing and publication which keep other informed and promote sharing of information 3. Reflective: This is connected to the blogs, social networks and wikis 4. Exploratory: This is relating to syndications and recommendations (TLRP, 2012). This is the applicative use of the web 2.0 in which the application in different dimensions can be used. There are several uses and issues of the Web 2.0. This signifies the development and advancements of the Web 2.0. ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH WEB 2.0 The issues associated with the Web 2.0 are following: 1. Security: The information available on the web is difficult to monitor. This affects and causes problems with securing the information that is available. The provisions for monitoring the content and securing the information from the traffic are not available on the Web 2.0. The usage of the tools available with the Web 2.0 also requires assurance that the data and the pathway of the data are secured (Cunningham, 2009). 2. Resilience: Service interruption is beyond the control of the organization. Specific attention will be required for monitoring the uptime and access to the information. The information will require strong attention on the process using which it is stored. The problem in the service will impact numerous customers (Cunningham, 2009). In the future the issues can be addressed through strict monitoring. The security if the data can be done through applying the cloud computing methods. 3. E-discovery: The process of E discovery is difficult without the access of actual storage to the media. Most of the organizations are aware of the fact that where there information is being stored (Cunningham, 2009). The customers are mostly worried about the stored information and its security. Information sharing on such a large scale promotes the spectacular use of the social media. This pools the information and at the same time enables excessive sharing through limited access. The methods proposed have worked and through this the system has also improved. 4. E-discovery and the law: The data available for the forensic examination is lost when the storage location of the data is moved from the local storage. The legal framework will regulate the framework using which the specific location of the place will be changed (Cunningham, 2009). 5. Computer forensics:For some of the organizations the segment of computer forensics is very important. It is a critical component which forms the e-discovery component and is responsible for managing the internal investigations. The Web 2.0 does not allow control and creating, storing and deleting the information. The computer forensics method requires physical access to the storage device. The process is limited and requires examining the data which limits contamination of the evidence (Cunningham, 2009). 6. Record management, data privacy and connectivity problems:The system lacks the loss of connectivity which prevents from work when the workforce is relying on the systems when needed most. 7. Casual nature: The casual nature of the business may prohibit from effective use of the system. The casual nature of the business may blur the line formed between business and personal use (Cunningham, 2009) The discrepancies of the system have been identified due to the excessive use and development in the field of IT. The need for the development is increasing as more and more people engage in the use of the system. The applicative use of the web is increasing, and it is considered as an effective tool for knowledge sharing. The future of Web 2.0 and resolution of all the issues is the development of the Semantic Web and Web 3.0. These systems have been developed with the sole intention of advancements in technology and rectifying the discrepancies associated with the previous systems. FUTURE APPLICATIONS AND EXAMPLES Besides the discrepancies of the system development and the advancement of the system is highly predictable. This can be supported with an example which shows the future of the system through collaboration with the government (Deloitte, 2009). This can be supported with the U.S. National Issues Dialogues. The Web 2.0 is being put to work in the government. This system is adaptable and can be used for the development of the US transportation security administration. The system has transformed the application of the system in the form of a large super-sized brainstorming session. This has been possible from the collaboration of the organization with its employees. New ideas regarding the system are promoted and for boosting the morale of the employees. All these methods suggest new methods in the development and improvement in the screening process (Deloitte, 2009). The US patent and the trademark office are another example of the organization which use the Web 2.0 for the development of the system. These web based tools are used excessively for using the information presented by the crowd. Some of the work is allotted to the external members of the public who are interested in promoting the interests of the organization. The review of the patent application dramatically advances the overall reviewing process. The entire process is connected to the 37,000 members of the national intelligence community (Deloitte, 2009). The system has the potential to reform the methods using which the intelligence reports can be developed. The officials part of the intelligence teams raise the spirited debates which form the content which is used by the Web. All these qualities signify the development of the system which can prove beneficial for the entire society and reform the ways using which the development systems of the society can be reformed. The assessment of the development of the idea can be done by pulling together all the pieces. The application of the system bears the potential using which the system conducts its day-to-day business. For examining the organizational changes a collaborative application model requires focusing on the structure of the government. In the future the forensic examination process requires to be made better. This is so that the law can be applied and the stored data can also be safeguarded. The issues which are associated with the e-discovery are that the entire system is becoming complex over the years. The new technologies are making the data complex and the pool of information is also growing dramatically. The change in the technology is resulting in the evolving rules and regulations and the personal and professional line is blurring. The cost is unpredictable and the line is blurring. The spectrum of the law needs to be determined in the global form. All these are the issues associated with the system. This also supports the limitation of the system. E-discovery is a transactional system and hence all the issues must be resolved accordingly. The relevant examples can be extracted from the formal and informal usage of the Web 2.0. CONCLUSION The terminology 2.0 attached to the Web 2.0 signifies the changes in the web and the advancements which are enabling people to do different things. This shows that the development of the system is built using from the change in the web. The change or advancements in the methods which have been adopted previously lead to the development and utilization of various different tools. The use of the technology in a completely different spirit helps in utilizing the system. Different methods of application signify the development and advancement of the web in the different domain. This has enhanced the use of the system and has assisted in the development and making of an entirely knowledge based system. In other words, this can also be called a knowledge based system. The Web 2.0 is a collaborative setup which is used for connecting people and making information sharing easier. The entire setup is based on the fundamental of connectivity and making information sharing an easier process. In this report, all the issues associated with the Web 2.0 and advances in technology over the years have been discussed. The details of the systems and the future application of the process have been explained in the light of practical examples in this report. References Alexander, B. (2006). Web 2.0: A new wave of innovation for teaching and learning?. Educause review, vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 32. Barrett, H. (2008). Web 2.0 Tools for Lifelong & Life Wide Learning. Available from http://electronicportfolios.com/web2/class/index.html [Accessed 29 December, 2013] Constantinides, E., & Fountain, S. J. (2008).Web 2.0: Conceptual foundations and marketing issues. Journal of Direct, Data and Digital Marketing Practice, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 231-244. Cooke, M., & Buckley, N. (2008).Web 2.0, social networks and the future of market research. International Journal of Market Research, vol. 50, no.2, pp. 267. Cormode, G., & Krishnamurthy, B. (2008).Key differences between Web 1.0 and Web 2.0. First Monday, vol. 13, no. 6. Cunningham, P. (2009). Web 2.0: Issues & Risks. ARMA, Available fromhttp://content.arma.org/IMM/JanFeb09/Walk_In_The_Cloud/web_2.0_issues_risks.aspx [Accessed 29 December, 2013] Deloitte. (2009). Web 2.0: The Future of Collaborative Government. Available from http://www.deloitte.com/assets/Dcom-UnitedStates/Local%20Assets/Documents/us_ps_web20government_March2009.PDF [Accessed 29 December, 2013] Goodchild, M. F. (2007). In the World of Web 2.0. International Journal, vol. 2, pp. 24-32. Miller, P. (2005). Web 2.0: Building the new library. Ariadne,  vol. 45, no. 30, pp. 10. Murugesan, S. (2007).Understanding Web 2.0. IT professional, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 34-41. O’reilly, T. (2005).What is web 2.0.Available from http://www.ttivanguard.com/ttivanguard_cfmfiles/pdf/dc05/dc05session4003.pdf [Accessed 29 December, 2013] Oreilly, T. (2007). What is Web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. Communications & strategies, no. 1, pp. 17. Taringa. (2008). Evolution Of The Internet. Available from http://www.taringa.net/posts/info/6675145/Evolucion-de-la-internet.html [Accessed 29 December, 2013] TLRP.(2012). Education 2.0?Designing the web for teaching and learning.Available from http://www.tlrp.org/pub/documents/TELcomm.pdf [Accessed 29 December, 2013] Williams, J., & Chinn, S. J. (2009).Using Web 2.0 to support the active learning experience. Journal of Information Systems Education, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 165. Read More