The Future of the Internet-And How to Stop It » Chapter 4: The Generative Pat... - 2 views
-
Chapter 4: The Generative Pattern 1
-
tony curzon price on 26 May 08I wonder what the relationship is between the JZ notion of generativity and the anti-trust notion of verticla restraints. I think that JZ could be interepreted as taking a strong line against vertical integration, beyond anything the Coasian market would on its own support.
-
- ...37 more annotations...
-
Generativity is a system’s capacity to produce unanticipated change through unfiltered contributions from broad and varied audiences.
-
Free software satisfies Richard Stallman’s benchmark “four freedoms”: freedom to run the program, freedom to study how it works, freedom to change it, and freedom to share the results with the public at large
-
They represent tinkering done by that one person in a hundred or a thousand who is so immersed in an activity or pursuit that improving it would make a big difference—a person who is prepared to experiment with a level of persistence that calls to mind the Roadrunner’s nemesis, Wile E. Coyote.
-
The genius behind such innovations is truly inspiration rather than perspiration, a bit of tinkering with a crazy idea rather than a carefully planned and executed invention responding to clear market demand.
-
Generativity, then, is a parent of invention, and an open network connecting generative devices makes the fruits of invention easy to share if the inventor is so inclined.
-
He then noted the innate value of being able to express oneself idiosyncratically
-
We are seeing the possibility of an emergence of a new popular culture, produced on the folk-culture model and inhabited actively, rather than passively consumed by the masses.
-
The divide is not between technology and nontechnology, but between hierarchy and polyarchy.72 In hierarchies, gatekeepers control the allocation of attention and resources to an idea. In polyarchies, many ideas can be pursued independently. Hierarchical systems appear better at nipping dead-end ideas in the bud, but they do so at the expense of crazy ideas that just might work. Polyarchies can result in wasted energy and effort, but they are better at ferreting out and developing obscure, transformative ideas. More importantly, they allow many more people to have a hand at contributing to the system, regardless of the quality of the contribution.
-
But society has now fairly got the better of individuality; and the danger which threatens human nature is not the excess, but the deficiency, of personal impulses and preferences.
-
The generative Internet and PC were at first perhaps more akin to new societies; as people were connected, they may not have had firm expectations about the basics of the interaction. Who pays for what? Who shares what? The time during which the Internet remained an academic backwater, and the PC was a hobbyist’s tool, helped situate each within the norms of Benkler’s parallel economy of sharing nicely, of greater control in the hands of users and commensurate trust that they would not abuse it.
-
This is the generative pattern, and we can find examples of it at every layer of the network hourglass: 123 An idea originates in a backwater. It is ambitious but incomplete. It is partially implemented and released anyway, embracing the ethos of the procrastination principle. Contribution is welcomed from all corners, resulting in an influx of usage. Success is achieved beyond any expectation, and a higher profile draws even more usage. Success is cut short: “There goes the neighborhood” as newer users are not conversant with the idea of experimentation and contribution, and other users are prepared to exploit the openness of the system to undesirable ends. There is movement toward enclosure to prevent the problems that arise from the system’s very popularity.