On Lost on Wednesday, Locke was stuck in the hatch and the blast doors came down. Who know what that’s all about, but there was an interesting image on one of them. If you want another look, here it is.

• Black and white with great analysis.
• Color W/ Latin Translations

While I think that definitions for various technologies are helpful, I think the problem with defining the next generation of web apps is that there are way too many perspectives and too many ideas to put together into a three point outline.

From my perspective, the ideas of web 2.0 are about how people want to use the internet (philosophy), and what the internet is able to do (technology) to provide these needs. Throw in a couple of collective intelligence experiments like Wikipedia and there you have it. Seriously, I like what O’Reilly has to say on the last page of his O’Reilly: What Is Web 2.0? article.

Web 2.0 Design Patterns

In his book, A Pattern Language, Christopher Alexander prescribes a format for the concise description of the solution to architectural problems. He writes: “Each pattern describes a problem that occurs over and over again in our environment, and then describes the core of the solution to that problem, in such a way that you can use this solution a million times over, without ever doing it the same way twice.”

1. The Long Tail
   Small sites make up the bulk of the internet’s content; narrow niches make up the bulk of internet’s the possible applications. Therefore: Leverage customer-self service and algorithmic data management to reach out to the entire web, to the edges and not just the center, to the long tail and not just the head.
2. Data is the Next Intel Inside
   Applications are increasingly data-driven. Therefore: For competitive advantage, seek to own a unique, hard-to-recreate source of data.
3. Users Add Value
   The key to competitive advantage in internet applications is the extent to which users add their own data to that which you provide. Therefore: Don’t restrict your “architecture of participation” to software development. Involve your users both implicitly and explicitly in adding value to your application.
4. Network Effects by Default
   Only a small percentage of users will go to the trouble of adding value to your application. Therefore: Set inclusive defaults for aggregating user data as a side-effect of their use of the application.
5. Some Rights Reserved.
   Intellectual property protection limits re-use and prevents experimentation. Therefore: When benefits come from collective adoption, not private restriction, make sure that barriers to adoption are low. Follow existing standards, and use licenses with as few restrictions as possible. Design for “hackability” and “remixability.”
6. The Perpetual Beta
   When devices and programs are connected to the internet, applications are no longer software artifacts, they are ongoing services. Therefore: Don’t package up new features into monolithic releases, but instead add them on a regular basis as part of the normal user experience. Engage your users as real-time testers, and instrument the service so that you know how people use the new features.
7. Cooperate, Don’t Control
   Web 2.0 applications are built of a network of cooperating data services. Therefore: Offer web services interfaces and content syndication, and re-use the data services of others. Support lightweight programming models that allow for loosely-coupled systems.
8. Software Above the Level of a Single Device
   The PC is no longer the only access device for internet applications, and applications that are limited to a single device are less valuable than those that are connected. Therefore: Design your application from the get-go to integrate services across handheld devices, PCs, and internet servers.

As I watched Forest Gump I thought about what makes this movie so appealing. Is it the lovable characters? Is it the fun storyline? Is it the themes of hope amidst trials? While I don’t think there is one answer for the success of this movie, one thing stands out to me. Gump and Jenny traverse the decades of American history and culture through very different paths. All of us can relate to how either Gump or Jenny moved through a rapidly changing culture.

It is interesting how Gump is woven into US history. While a tide of cultural and political changes crash down, he simply stands tall and walks through it somewhat oblivious to what’s going on around him. Perhaps he is the symbol of modernism. His saving grace is that while those around him are swiftly changing, he just forges ahead with a head full of facts and simple truth. Gump is the conservative.

If Forest is modernism, Jenny is a symbol of postmodernism. She’s swept away by the emerging culture, so much so that she loses her identity amidst the crowd. She has no reference point to her life, because everything is relative to her. Jenny finds pleasure, but only with pain right beside it. Jenny is the liberal.

Forest loves Jenny, but doesn’t know how to win her to himself. Every time Forest tries to rescue her from the recklessness of her life, their relationship is put in turmoil and Jenny runs away from him and Forest walks away alone and disoriented. She can’t love a man who won’t let her live passionately. It’s not until Jenny is much older and the mother of young Forest that she realizes that she has messed her life up and loves him too, but not long after that she dies.

Forest and Jenny are opposites. Forest is the stable, factual thinker who doesn’t care about the future, only the past and present. Jenny is the progressive, emotional dreamer. All she cares about is what suits her future fancy. Forest is the left-brain conservative and Jenny is the right-brain liberal.

In the beginning of the story Forest falls in love with Jenny, because she is kind to him while everyone else dismisses him as different. In the end Jenny falls in love with Forest, because he is generous to her despite the mess she made of her life. The two need each other. Without Jenny he is empty, cold and alone. Without Forest, she is on the edge of danger and despair. This, I believe, is why people like this movie so much. It’s the story of two different people in a world in the midst of two vastly different ideologies.

The story of Forest Gump and Jenny. In our hearts we desperately want the two together. But is there hope for the modern and the post-modern to marry? The answer this movie gives is yes, but only through a generous, persevering love and pain and sorrow.