David Wiley writes, "I don't think I care if learning objects are dead or not." Now if that doesn't get you to click on the link I don't know what will. Wiley recounts the reusability paradox he outlined a few years ago, and yet underlines the value learning objects were supposed to bring. He writes, "As I've thought about that need, I think it is best expressed as easily localizable resources." So where was the problem? "In retrospect, the primary weakness of this definition was supposed to be the keyword it all hinged upon: 'reuse.' [which was] almost unanimously interpreted by this group as 'technical interoperability' with no thought for the pedagogic, semiotic, or other contextual dimensions of the term." For Wiley's money (and mine too) "the technical interoperability of content doesn't need to go much further than 'can be properly rendered by most web browsers.'" I might push for an RSS feed too. But Wiley essentially captures what a lot of us feel.