The New York Times Magazine yesterday ran its annual survey of the four zillion most interesting ideas to emerge in the past year. One of the ideas that made the cut was Jaron Lanier’s characterization of the collectivist ideology of one of the main sects of the digital intelligentsia as “Digital Maoism.” Steven Johnson does a nice job of summing up Lanier’s argument and the reactions to it. He points out, for one thing, that some of the most often cited examples of the New Collectivism lack a certain, well, collectivism: “Wikipedia may be not too far from the historical reality of Maoism itself: a system propagandized with the language of collectivism that was, in practice, actually run by a small power elite.” And he ends by putting the so-called hive mind in perspective: “A swarm of connected human minds is a fantastic resource for tracking down software bugs or discovering obscure gems on the Web. But if you want to come up with a good idea, or a sophisticated argument, or a work of art, you’re still better off going solo.”
I love the last quote. I had a similar thought recently (though not as eloquenty stated) as I was looking at http://www.jpgmag.com.
At first blush the idea seems wonderful; let viewers decide what will be in the physical magazine. However, the actuality of it had me wishing for an accomplished editor.
Would a museum curated in a similar fashion ever surprise or challenge?
Scary though and there might be some truth to it…Indeed the participation levels in online communities (remeber the 90-9-1 rule…read more at http://karmaweb.wordpress.com/2006/10/11/participation-inequality-on-the-web/) could very well be taken to mean a core group of elite controlling the discussion.
-Jitendra
When Jaron Lanier’s article originally came out, I thought it was obscene for him to name this phenomenon after the single most murderous ideology of the 20th century. Other than that, I didn’t really follow his argument. May have been over my head.
What is a “swarm of connected human minds?”
(See my small cartoon).
Bye,
Oliver
I too love the last quote. My colleagues in journalism are seeing this firsthand; through e-mail and comments on newspaper web sites, more story ideas and leads are being generated, but you still need a good reporter to gather that string and craft a story and a good editor to ensure it’s accurate and worth reading.
years after cyberspace became historical, the attention put onto Jaron Lanier is still directly proportional to the cluelessnes of the media promoting his ideosyncracies. again, he’s simply wrong: the idea behind wikipedia is not the cultural revolution of Mao but the enlightment of Diderot and d’Alembert. Lanier expresses the doubts of those who took the wrong train. anybody remembers the data helmets of “virtual reality”?