Lots of great stuff coming out of the Where 2.0 conference today and it seems it's getting covered pretty well. You have Glenn, Very Spatial, Import Cartography, All Points Blog, Ogle Earth, Geography 2.0, Ed Parsons, the GeoRSS bloggers, OpenGeoData, High Earth Orbit, and the O'Reilly Radar bloggers covering the event, and probably others who don't consider themselves apart of the geoblogger community.
Overall, nothing really sticks out as an "eye popping" experience. The new version of Google Earth is neat, but it's not mind blowing like it was last year to the industry. The location-based mobile apps are growing, but are in an initial state of growth and development.
The collaborative atlas people (Flagr, Platial, Zopto, and 43Places) have different thoughts on what they're providing to the industry and different business goals. The Flagr guys, who were on my Pixie Hunt team, seem to have targeted their little sisters and their friends who text and use MySpace. 43Places is geared towards the hopes that people share their experiences for the sake of self publication. Zopto is geared towards just capturing a share of the market in New Zealand and Australia. Then Platial is praying to make revenue off of ads based on Google's map platform, which kind of is the goal of the rest of the collaborative atlases other than what's stated.
So, the discussion with the collaborative atlas people begs the question, "What happens when Google decides to pull the plug on your map API to persue its own ventures in collaborative atlases that ends up combining Notebook, Spreadsheet, Dodgeball, Picasa, video, KML, and Writely?"
Anyway, I didn't get the chance to ask the question about the next stage of Internet and 2.0 apps? I asked Di-Ann Elsinor from Platial about what I talked about this moring in the previous post about lightweight spatial analysis. Not just lame-o buffers or viewsheds, but rather statistical probablity, or incompatablity, of like persons in the same area to share information that one would want to share with like, or dislike, persons. She didn't seem too interested in that future of geodata trends, and dismissed the idea. Oh well. (Note 6/15: I appologize if I mentioned that Di-Ann "dismissed the idea," what I meant was, "we're a conference, she's a speaker, and everyone has something to say to her, so she probably got 'hit' with a bunch of stuff already and just took it in for processing later.")
Then talk about metadata came up with Mike Leibold's keynote and the discussion with the collaborative atlas folks. The GIS peeps in the crowd seemed concern that "mashers" noted that geodata metadata stinks, but in practice don't collect or even try to address metadata. So, in collaborative atlases or other geodata sharing platforms, geodata is a total FOAF issue. You can only trust who you think you know.
Oh! The concept of "pushpin maps" is driving some GIS'ers crazy. It's "pushpin, pushpin, pushpin!" Someone asked whether yarn came with Windows Live Local.
That's about it for proceedings. As for the social scene. . .
It's a different crowd than previous GIS conferences that I've been to. I think it's the hard core mashers? There's a definite division between mashers and GIS'ers. There are some bridgers like Schyuler and Mikel, but there needs to be people who can be bridge technologies.
My Pixie Hunter partner, Miten from Freeva, is working to develop an Locative Technology program at a local state university that I am close to and asked if I could help. It looks promising, but I need to check with work to see if I can get some resources to help Miten. I would love to start something like this. Miten brings the technical masher aspect to the program where I could bring the art of geography. We'll see? I hope that I can do something.
As for the GeoBlogger meetup: Glenn found us. It was me, Jeremey from Mapdex, Brian G. and Erik H. from ESRI. I was hoping that Ed Parsons, Stefan, Sue and Jesse, and some others would show up. Alas, I screwed up this even with poor planning. Still, Where is two days long and so packed with content that its tough to do things you want to do.