I know the web isn't dead yet because I can still look up archived copies of Wired preaching to us about "The Long Boom" back in the 1990s.

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/5.07/longboom_pr.html

I admit I've been out of the country for most of the last 5 years, so I didn't catch it when the bottom fell out of the oil market in 2008 and we converted en masse to hydrogen power - send me pictures of the world of tomorrow from your Jetson-pod house in the clouds, please.

They do actually have some good content, but it's buried under such an avalanche of jargon, glad-handing and drooling that it's usually not worth your time to pick through the turds to find the corn.

At last someone who knows the difference between the Web and the Internet. That's one of my biggest bugbears when it comes to reporting.

Hang on a moment, it's someone from inside the IT industry so he should know the difference.

Right call, wrong prediction.

Early in 1996 and through 1998 we were still hoping that VR (Virtual Reality) would kick in and pull the Internet. Adult was certainly not doing it.

Wired is hoping IPad will be the killer App. I doubt it. It's damm silly to think a box, which we will forget about in 6 years, will be anything more than a gee-wiz moment.

Does anyone recall the Sony Walkman?

Will the "web die"? Yes, but even I can't say when, and how. However, I don't think it will take at least 10 years, maybe 20.

Jesse of Menlo Park, Calif.

I used to read Wired daily until their wild predictions of the 25-year-long dotcom boom, that entire cities would be built around the Segway, and the revolution of Push media, etc. They no-longer have any credibility with me. I sense these days Wired is more concerned with creating news stories than with reporting them. With the following they apparently have, they may well be successful with this matter.

One of the original principals (never fully realized) of the Web was that users could apply their own style sheets to control the presentation of information in their browsers.

The "rich editorial" experience that Anderson and others are pushing for is taking freedom away from users to view/use content as they see fit.

What is at issue is who controls content once it is delivered to your computer? Anderson and other want to sell users content and then say how it is used.

Users need to increasingly vote with their feet to leave Anderson and others to fight over a shrinking digital content pie that they can control. Put your content on the Web.

You talked to Chris Anderson but didn't talk to anyone who would explain why Wired's piece (and more than that the cover and the charts they presented) seemed to care more about sensationalism than accuracy.

Among others, see:
http://boingboing.net/2010/08/17/is-the-web-really-de.html
http://www.niemanlab.org/2010/08/the-web-dies-the-hype-lives-what-wired-left-out-of-its-eulogy

What does the 96th st and 3rd ave Mosque/Community Center provide for the community? No info available online.