"What information consumes is rather obvious: it consumes the attention of its recipients. Hence a wealth of information creates a poverty of attention, and a need to allocate that attention efficiently among the overabundance of information sources that might consume it." (H. Simon, Communications and the Public Interest, 1971.)
Yes, but I would argue that that kind of A-D-D is good for art - innovation can come out of collision of cultures and of ideas.
About opponents of folksonomies:
Yes, his argument is strong, but ultimately it can be summarized as "the masses are stupid, I am smart".
I heard it from ultra-conservatives too - those that oppose Swiss style democracy, where every law is voted on by everyone.
He prefers "smart" people at the top interpreting what the populace wants - father/mother figures...
Statistically and historically, the argument does not compute. In signal theory one retrieves weak signals from noise through averaging. The noise cancels out.
This approach is the basis for democracy and for collective intelligence. We just need to find ways to cancel out the noise - the tools are just coming out...
Having said this, I still think that communities of interest are ways to avoid entropy in such systems.
Scientists discover that music "moves" the brain
No comments:
Post a Comment