meta

No.

4chan is just one step ahead of BBS. If you consider BBS to be 2.0, then sure.
Doesn't count as social media.
Sage and report, this isn't really technology.

>>60126517
it is technology

File: flat,800x800,075,t.jpg (31KB, 800x800px)

31KB, 800x800px

bumping for answers

>>60126517
why doesn't it count as social media
which board can i ask this question on

>>60126497
4chimp is an early form of social media, as defined by POSIX.

File: 1367122248245.jpg (66KB, 500x667px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 500x667px

>>60126497
>web 2.0
>noun
>The second stage of development of the Internet, characterized especially by the change from static web pages to dynamic or user-generated content and the growth of social media.

> user generated content.

One could argue we are one of the progenitors of web 2.0. We are not a social network by a modern definition though, and only marginally under a BBS style ideal. No persistent accounts equals no persistent network. Even BBS's had that.

no and no.
can be considered a community or a forum i guess though.

>>60126733
>we are one of the progenitors of web 2.0
>>60126765
>no


...so which is it?

Web 2.0 is dynamic content like facebook where the end user can interact with content on a page and everyone can see it. Technically 4chan isn't web 2.0 because all lasting changes are done server side. Pages are static content.

4chan is a kind of forum. Social media platforms are basically forums as well but they don't have a particular topic. They require personal information and users to "friend" each-other so they can stay up to date with what other people are doing daily. 4chan doesn't do that, it's purely about content on the pages. People can make their own identities on here but there's no way to follow a particular user around because the usernames aren't permanent.

its pretty much dependent on what definition of web 2.0 and social media you want to use.

4chan is a BBS, those exist since before the wide spread internet.

>>60126668
You can probably get away with asking it on >>>/pol/

link your new thread here though. I want to follow that conversation

>>60126668
>>>/qa/

>>60126668
qa

web x.0 from admin perspective of the site is web 1.0 point a in time site is website 1.0 like admin coded it point b in time is website 1.0 like admin coded it vs. web 2.0 point a in time is website 1.0 like admin coded it point b in time is website 2.0: some user changed the website, so admin sees web(((sight))) 2.0 at point b

>>60126878
4chan is built on react...

>>60127933
Sauce me on that, faggot.

>>60127895
What?

>>60127895
Wut

>>60127848
>>60127856
(((qa)))

>>60128081
Who offended you on /qa/?

File: contemplating tomato.gif (1MB, 320x213px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 320x213px

>>60127895
What did he mean by this?

>>60126878
>4chan isn't web 2.0 because all lasting changes are done server side
As opposed to being done client side?

>>60128145
Dynamic content like facebook. On facebook the same page may look different depending on who is viewing it. If you view a page of someone who has blocked you then it wont show any of their information. If you have friended this person then their information might show up if they allow it to be viewed by friends. Postings can be public, friends only, or private. Only the person who owns the account can ever see all of the information. Pages are generated in real time based on who is accessing it.

Pages on 4chan are basically purely static content, everyone gets basically the same pages. 4chan thread updaters kinda blur the line a little but they're still serving up static content.

>>60128145
I think what Anon is trying to say, is that Yotsuba still essentially just a big list of static HTML pages that get served up by the server. Any changes are you sending data to the server, and it adds another chunk of HTML to the thread.

>>60126517
>this isn't really technology.
What did he mean by this?

>>60126497
yes and yes, and quite obvious too.
fucking anons in this thread stop trying to be special, yes this is a fucking social medium you edgefucks

>>60128219
that meme reminds me of the data vs. information meme

>>60126728
>defined by POSIX.
Can confirm. Am running 4chan on GNU/Linux as we speak.

>>60126497
it is 2.0 as it allows some form of user interaction and isn't just a set of static pages
It isn't social media as it doesn't define user relationships and doesn't rely on user relationships to decide who gets access to what content

ITT: contradictions upon contradictions

>>60126497
>does it count as social media?
no, because it is anonymous. There is no social persona to build and maintain.

>>60126497
It's both
Kind of like Digg pre v4, Reddit, etc

These are all web 2.0 sites from the mid 00s, largely populated by 30-somethings

More like antisocial media

File: 1492707826325.gif (899KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

899KB, 600x600px

>>60127895
mmmmhhhh

"web 2.0" is stupid
4chan is basically just a mailing list, and those existed before the web, presumably before the internet as well, but it's proving difficult to find out

>>60128219
4chan users can filter content, so the page might look different to users

>>60131525
that's client side though
you might as well call newspaper web 2.0 because someone can tear sections out if they want

>>60128886
unavoidable, web 2.0 is a marketing thing, it has no technical, unamiguous definition. so arguing if something "is" or "is not" web 2.0 is going to lead nowhere

>>60131623
>web 2.0 is a marketing thing, it has no technical
interesting, can you elaborate on that?

>>60126497
4chan is basically a web forum. Web forums are not social media.

>>60126497
Since they got rid of the frames and put the gradient on the front page, it's been web 2.0.

It's kinda social media. Antisocial media is probably more accurate.