<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Is Web 2.0 just one big party?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2005/11/20/is-web-20-just-one-big-party/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2005/11/20/is-web-20-just-one-big-party/</link>
	<description>... at the intersection of media, technology, business and the web</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 21 Mar 2010 13:09:34 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Why does physical proximity matter? &#187; Mathew Ingram: mathewingram.com/work</title>
		<link>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2005/11/20/is-web-20-just-one-big-party/comment-page-1/#comment-69781</link>
		<dc:creator>Why does physical proximity matter? &#187; Mathew Ingram: mathewingram.com/work</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Oct 2006 15:52:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mathewingram.com/work/index.php/2005/11/20/is-web-20-just-one-big-party/#comment-69781</guid>
		<description>[...] The New York Times has a story that looks at something I&#8217;ve been bothered by ever since I started this blog a little over a year ago: the paradoxical fact that even as Web 2.0 and ubiquitous Internet access makes it easier for people and companies to be located just about anywhere on the planet, physical location seems to still be so important. In fact, one of my first posts on this blog was about all the bloggers I read who had just run into each other at one of Mike Arrington&#8217;s parties, or bumped into some legendary tech guru at the diner down the street, and so on. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] The New York Times has a story that looks at something I&#8217;ve been bothered by ever since I started this blog a little over a year ago: the paradoxical fact that even as Web 2.0 and ubiquitous Internet access makes it easier for people and companies to be located just about anywhere on the planet, physical location seems to still be so important. In fact, one of my first posts on this blog was about all the bloggers I read who had just run into each other at one of Mike Arrington&#8217;s parties, or bumped into some legendary tech guru at the diner down the street, and so on. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sztahanov</title>
		<link>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2005/11/20/is-web-20-just-one-big-party/comment-page-1/#comment-19392</link>
		<dc:creator>sztahanov</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mathewingram.com/work/index.php/2005/11/20/is-web-20-just-one-big-party/#comment-19392</guid>
		<description>&lt;!--%kramer-pre%--&gt;Az nem alternatÃ­va, hogy maguk a cÃ©gek elkÃ¶ltÃ¶zzenek KaliforniÃ¡bÃ³l, egyszerÅ±en van az IT Ã¼zleti Ã©letnek egy olyan szocializÃ¡ciÃ³s vonala, ami nagyon erÅ‘s szemÃ©lyes kapcsolatokra Ã©pÃ¼l, ld:Is Web 2.0 just one big party?&lt;!--%kramer-post%--&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!--%kramer-pre%-->Az nem alternatÃ­va, hogy maguk a cÃ©gek elkÃ¶ltÃ¶zzenek KaliforniÃ¡bÃ³l, egyszerÅ±en van az IT Ã¼zleti Ã©letnek egy olyan szocializÃ¡ciÃ³s vonala, ami nagyon erÅ‘s szemÃ©lyes kapcsolatokra Ã©pÃ¼l, ld:Is Web 2.0 just one big party?<!--%kramer-post%--></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
