Not really. This is partly a reaction piece to what I posted yesterday, but it is not "hate" or "envy" to analyze a company's product, its technical basis (or lack thereof), and discuss it logically. Qwiki has no defensible business model, no compelling technology, yet gets massively funded anyway. We can all learn from exploring this.
I agree that we can learn from this, but then again Twitter doesn't really have a defensible business model, yet it is a wonderful product. I do find the technology to be potentially compelling, as there are many audio-favoring learners in the world who would much prefer a visual representation. With work, it could become something more than a picture aggregator and Wikipedia regurgitator.