Skip to main content

Home/ PEERS ONLINE INTERACTION FRAMEWORK/ Group items tagged self-organization

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Thieme Hennis

Self-organization - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia - 0 views

  • In social theory the concept of self-referentiality has been introduced as a sociological application of self-organization theory by Niklas Luhmann (1984). For Luhmann the elements of a social system are self-producing communications, i.e. a communication produces further communications and hence a social system can reproduce itself as long as there is dynamic communication. For Luhmann human beings are sensors in the environment of the system. Luhmann put forward a functional theory of society. Self-organization in human and computer networks can give rise to a decentralized, distributed, self-healing system, protecting the security of the actors in the network by limiting the scope of knowledge of the entire system held by each individual actor.
    • Thieme Hennis
       
      dit is dus belangrijk: self-reproducing communications. een stuk tekst toevoegen is ook een vorm van communicatie, wat dus weer opnieuw communicatie oproept. "dynamic communciation"
  • Most modern economists hold that imposing central planning usually makes the self-organized economic system less efficient.
  •  
    self-organization
  •  
    Wikipedia entry about self organization
Thieme Hennis

Self-organization - review paper - 0 views

  •  
    self-organization paper
  •  
    review paper about "The Science of Self-organization and Adaptivity"
Thieme Hennis

http://www.cybsoc.org/PasksIAT.PDF - 0 views

  •  
    Gordon Pask's theory of learning, evolution and self-organization (in draft).
  •  
    self-organization is something we want to achieve with Peers.
Thieme Hennis

ProjectPier.org - 0 views

  •  
    basecamp alternatief.. open source.
  •  
    ProjectPier is a Free, Open-Source, self-hosted PHP application for managing tasks, projects and teams through an intuitive web interface. ProjectPier will help your organization communicate, collaborate and get things done Its function is similar to commercial groupware/project management products, but allows the freedom and scalability of self-hosting. Even better, it will always be free.
Thieme Hennis

Community Blogging ~ Stephen's Web ~ by Stephen Downes - 0 views

  • Now I want to draw out from these descriptions two major elements that I think are probably definitive of community. First of all, the idea that there's a network. Now a lot of people capture that by saying people can interact, people communicate, there's a place for discussion. But the central thing here is that there is, in some sense, a relation among the people; it's not mere proximity. But they are connected in some way. And the second thing, and the important thing, in my mind, is semantics, the idea that these relations are about something, that the people in the community share a common interest, common values, a set of beliefs, an affinity for cats, or beekeeping.
  • If we think of meaning as use then what is the meaning of a blog post? What does a blog post talk about? It's not contained in the post. Rather, it's contained in the network of relations in which the post finds itself. In the referrers. In the use. In the connections with other things. In evaluations of the post. A whole variety of different connections, different relations, are possible which could, and in my opinion will, be used to characterize an individual post.
  • Now why does this matter? It matters this way. If we're deriving meaning and connections and communities in a random fashion everything flows from the big spike. Scoble was up here, saying, "My friend was saying, I want you to link to me." And, he said, "That's not how it works. Create something of value," he said. Right? "And I will decide whether it's worth linking to." That's the big spike telling the long tail what to do. Isn't it? That's what happens when meaning derives from the centre. And if you push it, that sort of organization and arrangement requires control. Look at Technorati Tags. Now, we've already gotten some tag spam, and we've already gotten some structured vocabulary in Technorati Tags, and eventually somebody will come out and propose and ontology of Technorati Tags, a taxonomy, and they will say, "Everyone should do it this way." And anyone who doesn't, well, they're being chaotic, they're being disruptive. But if the idea emerges from the pattern of connections between individuals there's no one in control. Scoble can't tell me what to twrite in my blog and it doesn't matter whether he links to me or I link to him. And the dynamics in such a network are completely different. This works if you have freedom. This works if nobody tells you how to tag. This creates order and relevance and meaning through diversity, not conformity. Two very different pictures of community.
  • ...9 more annotations...
  • "Well, the most popular form of XML in the world today is RSS, there is no standard
  • The idea here is that the community is defined as the relations between the members where the relations have semantical value, where that semantical value is defined by the relations. And I know it sounds like bootstrapping, but we've been doing that throughout history. People exist in relations to other people, to things, to resources, even to spaces.
  • What has to happen is this mass of posts has to self-organize in some way. Which means there has to be a process of filtering. But filtering that is not just random. And filtering that isn't like spam blocking. Filtering has to be a mechanism of determining what it is we want, because it's a lot easier to determine what we want than what we don't want.
  • The first pass at this I described in a paper a couple of years ago called "The Semantic Social Network" and the idea, very simply, is we actually attach author information to RSS about blog posts. It kills me that this hasn't happened. Because this is a huge source of information. And all you need to do is, in the 'item', in, say, the 'dc:creator' tag, put a link to a FOAF file. And all of a sudden we've connected people with resources, people with each other and therefore, resources with each other. And that gives me a mechanism for finding resources that is not based on taxonomies, is not based on existing knowledge and existing patterns, but is based on my placement within a community of like-minded individuals.
  • Now that semantic social network is just a first pass at this. We want to create these connections on many levels. And so what we want is metadata, not simply created by the author of a post, but created by readers of posts. This is what I call 'third party metadata'. Third party metadata -- we're beginning to see some of this out there in the blogosphere, in a small, limited and usually site-based way, right? Links, references, readings, annotations, classifications, context of use. But it can't be site-based. Because that doesn't create a network. It might as well be random.
  • Now the way this should work, and the way I've proposed for this to work in the educatiuonal community, is that as much of this third party metadata as possible is created through automatic means.
  • And so we get enormously rich descriptions through very simple mechanisms of automatic classification.
  • My contention is that instead of the spike-based power-law-based Instapundit-based network, that when we get something like the semantic social network, and we will get something like the semantic social network, because it's very simple to do, patterns of organization will be created. In the field of neural networks and connectionism they tyem 'clusters', you get a cluster phenomenon where we're not creating communities around a specific word, or specific concept, but the community itself emerges as being created by and defined as that particularly dense set of connections.
  • I've set up a system called Edu_RSS which is a very primitive first pass at this, and the idea here, Edu_RSS is an aggregator, there should be many instances of Edu_RSS, in the ideal world everybody would have something like this on their desktop, and it pulls in the link metadata, but it also pulls in rating metadata, and it doesn't pull it in from the entire world, the way Technorati does or the way Blogdex does, it pulls it in from my community, my network of friends. And if you set up the network in this way you can actually stop worrying about searching, because the network itself becomes the search where you go through layers of linking and so what comes out the other end is stuff that will be of interest to you. And if you're finely grained enough at the output end then you can get a very precise set of inputs. But the thing is, this set of inputs comes from the entire blogosphere of four million people rather than the randomly chosen top one hundred. The community is the network. There is no centralized place that constitutes community, there are only people, and resources, that are distributed, that are all acting on their own behalf and in their own interests - if you ever read Marvin Minsky's "The Society of Mind", it's like that - where the network consists of a set of self-selected relations using a variety of contextual information, that I've defined as third party metadata, to establish meaning, and where this meaning not only defines the community but emerges from the community.
    • Thieme Hennis
       
      true! handig om dit even door te spitten, ook om fundamentele beslissingen over PEERS te onderbouwen.
  •  
    explanation about blogging, network creation, and meaning in the blogosphere
  •  
    interessant: Downes is "anti-tagging", omdat woorden 1-dimensionaal zijn en het netwerk (wat de eigenlijke betekenis van een concept maakt) doorkruist..
Thieme Hennis

http://www.nickgreen.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/GPprog.PDF - 0 views

  •  
    another paper by Gordon Pask about selforganization
  •  
    self-organization
Thieme Hennis

Citizendium Blog » Syndicated Web ratings - an idea whose time has come? - 0 views

  • (c) Moreover, a feed could have meta-data about the person doing the rating, listing facts like education level, age, ethnicity, political views, or whatever a person might feel is relevant.
  • (4) Search engines then use the data aggregated by the registrar(s). Due to the quantity and variety of data published in the aggregated feeds, it becomes possible to weight and filter search results not just on Google-style pagerank algorithms, but also things like: (a) quality according to generally trusted sources; or quality according to your peer group; or quality according to academic and academic-endorsed sources; etc.
  • Moreover, with data included in the feed about the rater, we would be enabled to see, for any given search, what the top rated websites were for our peer group. How teenage girls rate a news article might differ greatly from how 40-year-old men rate them — and this would be useful data for both groups to have.
  •  
    interesting blog post about the need for syndicated web ratings.
  •  
    heel interessant idee, zeer veel raakvlak met Peers IMS.
1 - 7 of 7
Showing 20 items per page