… of what I call wirearchy surfaced this past week with the Sierra / meankids dustup.
You are currently browsing the daily archive for March 29, 2007.
Via the Toronto Globe and mail, Matthew Ingram on Enterprise 2.0 adoption …
Social media slowly scaling the wall of corporate halls
[Snip ...]
While many companies are interested in the potential of social media, however, and some are using blogs, wikis, podcasts and other Web 2.0 tools, most corporations seem to be taking a wait-and-see attitude when it comes to social networking and social media.
Those that are interested in such tools, meanwhile, appear to be looking for a major software and services company to provide all the necessary tools in a nice, neat package, rather than having to go out and find the software
As I have said many times before, I think that the widespread use of social media in organizations is inevitable.
Doc Searls quoting Jeremy Miller’s The Meaning Economy adds some technical meat to the generalizations I wrote about (with Chris Corrigan’s help) almost two years or so ago in The Medium Is The Meaning We Consume And Create …
Open open open! Open source, open distributed grids, open algorithms, open rankings, open networks of people cooperating to provide resources. The future of search is in open cooperation (and competition) based on a Meaning Economy, create meaning, exchange meaning, serve meaning.
My vision begins with an open protocol, allowing independent networks of search functions (crawling, indexing, ranking, serving, etc) to peer and interop. All relationships between these networks are always fully transparent and openly published. Networks exchange knowledge between them, each adding new meaning to the information, each of them responsible for the reputations of their participants and peers. This is the very foundation of a Meaning Economy.
It seems reasonable, if not clear, to me that the proliferation of widgets, plug-ins and web services that I suspect are still in their infancies will help us all move beyond text-box dictatorship towards a greater flow of information, narrative and sensemaking capability (disclosure: I’ve been working for a while on a post with the working title of The Plug-In, Widget and Web Service Economy).
I will return again and again to this post of Dave Snowden’s (The blogosphere as an artefact of distributed cognition, wherein he borrows much from the Developing Intelligence blog) to think more about thinking and knowing.
Dave’s post delves into the differences between a human brain and the logic and computational abilities stemming from silicon chips and computer operating systems.
This caught my eye, from Difference # 4: Processing speed is not fixed in the brain; there is no system clock
Similarly, there does not appear to be any central clock in the brain, and there is debate as to how clock-like the brain’s time-keeping devices actually are. To use just one example, the cerebellum is often thought to calculate information involving precise timing, as required for delicate motor movements; however, recent evidence suggests that time-keeping in the brain bears more similarity to ripples on a pond than to a standard digital clock.
I have long been fascinated with trying to understand how my own brain works … where thoughts come from, why they come or not, and the way(s) in which they appear.
I have regularly been astonished at flashes of insight that appear, not seemingly connected to what I thought I was thinking about, or by the instantaneous recall of something due to just a slight cognitive nudge … a sound, a glimpse, a smell.
Powered by Qumana