Because books are written by individuals, it has often made knowledge seem like the product of individuals, even though everybody has always understood that individuals are working within the social network.
From David Weinberger
With the new medium of knowledge - the Internet - knowledge not only takes on properties of that medium but also lives at the level of the network.
In the digital age, we filter forward instead of filtering out. As a result, all that material is still available to us and to others to filter in their own ways, and to bring forward in other contexts.
We've known for a long time, and I think culturally we've accepted, that diversity is an important thing in the work of knowledge.
If explicit metadata is a real problem, it raises problems that just can't be solved. It's not that we're not good at it; it's the problems cannot be solved because we're not going to agree about these deep questions of how we organize.
Every embarrassing moment is going to be shown on the Internet, whether the candidate likes it or not. The ones that can't deal with that are going to fail.
The degree to which campaigns have become dominated by marketing is breaking the spirit of democracy, and we're all just so sick of it, across party lines.
I've learned the dangerous lesson of the web: You succeed by giving up control, and that's inverse of the normal campaign.
History keeps teaching us that we can't recognize the important events that are going to trigger changes.
The world is deterministic, but it's chaotic and emergent.
3 perspectives
2 perspectives
1 perspectives