“Everything that can be invented has been invented” is a quote infamously attributed, albeit falsely, to US Patent Office commissioner Duell. We all know he was wrong.
Andrew said an interesting thing to me the other day “all the new start-ups suck”, naturally this excludes Greenvoice 
.
Can you invent an entirely new idea online any more or is it just distorting ideas which already exist. Take Pownce as an example: Twitter distorted blogging and Pownce distorted Twitter!
Looking at Mashable today, I can only see one idea which I haven’t seen repeated a million times already – a weight-loss tracker The Daily Plate – and I no longer read Mashable for the sole reason that it only ever seems to cover ‘General Social Network 101′ these days.
I love ideas like MOO which is a Web 2.0 reincarnation of a pre-Internet idea that brings the ability to print high quality materials to the average Joe without leaving his computer desk!
But how many new ideas can be invented for use on the Internet without massive jumps in technology (such as volumetric displays)?
I grow less and less enthusiastic about Web 2.0 every single day as I no longer see as many new ideas as there used to be.
I feel like perhaps Webby’s World should blog less about Web 2.0 to match my loss of enthusiasm. What do you think? Please email me or comment here!
I have to agree with you on that. Sooner or later people are going to hate reading 20 posts everyday about the next digg killer! or video site. Mashable is now going more into providing “toolbox” posts, probably too get more diggs, as they themselves probably see a redundancy themselves to Web 2.0.
I don’t write about every startup that wants free coverage. I like to write comparative posts now, though they take longer to write, but in the end you feel good about yourself.
As for digg, it’s become more or less a groupie and iphone site rather than a web 2.0 site.