Overview of 3some wikidot

3some Wikidot work about hacker ethics is very well thought through and 4 parts of the work each have their own meaning and direction.
Hacker Ethics in Web 2.0
1st part: Hacker Ethics in Web 2.0 is talking about what differences have Web 2.0 and Web 1.0 in hacker point of view. What advantages or disadvantages Web 2.0 has. How for average person words "hacking/hacker" usually mean something bad and even criminal while historically and for those who know, it has a totally different meaning.
Structure of the article is really good, it is logical and easy to read. Material that used for the article and seen under Bibliography is excellent. Although reading the article I had a feeling for couple of times, that the article is all about putting together what others (knowers) have told, not what actually writer thinks or a deeper analyze would conclude with comparing different sources and viewpoints.

About the structure again. It was so easy to follow the sources as they were all linking and an overview box also appeared on references. It should not judging the content of the article, but it is important while reading it, because I can feel that everything I wold like to get more details about, are there.

Applicability Of Hacker Ethics
Olga in her article is talking about what purposes hacker ethic has since 90-s compared to 60-s when it actually started and was accessed to limited group of people only. This article has beginnin, content and also a conclusion which makes it really easuy to follow and understand. Althought I first felt that it might have nothing new to tell compared to first Stacy article, it did. It did not compare so much web 1.0 and 2.0 but the actual written/unwritten and followed ethics of real hackers. It talked about what difficulties have hackers had (as they have been considered as responsible for bad activities) and how they try to cope with changing and worldwide internet. Although hacker ethics approach is the same, there is difference on what hackers actually concentrate on now.

Basic Info About Hackers
Maria concentrated much on what actually "hacker" means. She has listed definitions from different sources. Her overview tells that "hacker" has never originally meant someone who deliberately harms somethings/one, but for wider public it has just turned out this way. Maria also points out that I remember from Ethics and Law reading materials - "One should not call him/herself a hacker, but others should describe the person this way". Basically there is nothing else to say about Maria article, well done, several sources found and refers them nicely.

Development of content in 21st century
Taavi starts to give an overview of most commonly used programs/software/websites connected to web 2.0 and his short explanations facts are interesting. But it seems like he did not have enough time to end his article, as the last sentence is really short and no descriptions are there about Second life or other 3D games. As his article is already a conclusion of different Web 2.0 capabilities, there is no need to have final paragraph to make a conclusion.

The main article is put together by 4 personal articles made by team-members. This brings together the idea behind all 4 parts and shows reader what was actually the purpose of all four. The conclusion states that team-member hope their article can show for some people what "hacker" actually means and what it is considered to be. It also concludes that web 2.0 would not have happened without hacker ethics and the most important part of it - control but share.

3some showed that a team can work together even if they are not in the same room. I would say this part actually shows what web 2.0 is really about, all different commmunication channels were used: special forum for 3some, probably emails, some instant messaging systems and weekly discussions as well. This is how knowledge is shared in today's web 2.0.