Tag Archives: David Weinberger

A new kind of presence

Posted on by

David Weinberger imagines an exciting technology future:

At the FlyEye site you scan a huge video wall that shows you a feed from every person out in the streets who is sporting a meshed GoPro or Google Glass wearable video camera. Thousands of them. […] Off on the left there’s a protestor holding a sign you can’t quite make out. So, you click on one of the people in the crowd who has a blue dot over her that means she too is wearing a meshed video camera. Now you see through that camera. The protestor’s sign isn’t as interesting as you thought. So you video surf through the crowd, hopping from camera to camera.

FlyEye provides a “Twitch Plays Pokemon” sort of interface that lets the remote crowd ask participating meshed camera-wearers to turn this way or that. You click furiously asking the person with the camera you’re “riding” to look backwards. No luck. So you hop to someone further back. […] The software enables a user to choose which camera to ride, as well as the sorts of services that would make it easier to choose which cameras to surf to. Plus some chat capabilities of some sort.

 

Everything Is Miscellaneous

Posted on by

David Weinberger’s latest book —Everything Is Miscellaneous— is a philosophical look at “the power of the new digital disorder.” A few nuggets:

“Individuals thinking out loud now have weight, and authority and expertise are losing some of their gravity. It’s not whom you report to and who reports to you or how  you filter someone else’s experience. It’s how messily you are connected and how thick with meaning are the links.

It’s not what you know, and it’s not even who you know. It’s how much knowledge you give away. Hoarding knowledge diminishes your power because it diminishes your presence. (p.230)

“A playlist is an important means of self-expression. The motivation is to say, ‘This is who I am, and you can find out who i am by knowing what I love.'” Attributed to Rebecca Tushnet, a professor at Georgetown University Law Center. (p.159)

“Physical limitations on how we have organized information have not only limited our vision, they have also given the people who control the organization of information more power than than those who create the information. Editors are more powerful than reporters, and communication syndicates are  more powerful than editors because they get to decide what to bring to the surface and what to ignore.(p.89)

“Facts are that about which we no longer argue.” (p.214)

“A span of expertise is about as long as a shelf in a library.” (p.205)

“Americans face forward”

Posted on by

“The greatest country in history. We can do so much. We will do so much. This country was, after all, founded to move into the future, not to hold onto the habits and ideas of the past. For most countries, if you ask them what they are, what’s unique and defining about them, they’ll point to their past. Not us. Americans have always pointed to the future. If you want to understand us, look at what we’re going to do. Americans face forward.”

A speech that David Weinberger wrote but never gave.

“Our longing for the Web

Posted on by

“Our longing for the Web is rooted in the deep resentment we feel toward being managed.” — David Weinberger, The Cluetrain Manifesto. I’m not sure why this feels so true but it does. I’m rereading Cluetrain and find it more…relevant than the first time. You’re going to have to wade through more quotes (that I might have posted the first time).

“World of Ends: What the Internet Is and How to Stop Mistaking It for Something Else”

Posted on by

There are mistakes and there are mistakes.

Some mistakes we learn from. For example: Thinking that selling toys for pets on the Web is a great way to get rich. We’re not going to do that again.

Other mistakes we insist on making over and over. For example, thinking that:

…the Web, like television, is a way to hold eyeballs still while advertisers spray them with messages.

…the Net is something that telcos and cable companies should filter, control and otherwise “improve.”

… it’s a bad thing for users to communicate between different kinds of instant messaging systems on the Net.

…the Net suffers from a lack of regulation to protect industries that feel threatened by it.

–Doc Searls and David Weinberger

David Weinberger on Kill Bill

Posted on by

“Tarantino’s love of movies is infectious. But what he loves about them isn’t their literary capabilities, the way they can show us people and events changing each other, and the rest of that important yada. No, QT loves their syntax, their rhetoric. And that’s what Kill Bill is great at: a samurai sword being re-holstered, a nod that launches an attack. It’s like a “That’s Entertainment” that shows not the greatest tap dance sequences in the history of movies but the greatest gestures.”

Corporate blogs

Posted on by

From an article by Hiawatha Bray in the Business Section (The Boston Globe) on the Weblogs Business Strategy conference last week:

“Consider: Every business needs to know what its employees know. Companies are crammed with experts on various topics whose knowledge goes to waste — because nobody knows what they know. Now give these workers an internal corporate blog, and encourage them to use it. Let them natter away on every topic that intrigues them. Harvest and index the results. You’ve mapped your workers’ brains. The company’s hidden experts will cheerfully reveal themselves, and the firm’s institutional memory gets an upgrade.” [By way of JOHO]

Doc Searls, David Weinberger: Net fundamentals.

Posted on by

“When we look at utility poles, we see networks as wires. And we see those wires as parts of systems: The phone system, the electric power system, the cable TV system. When we listen to radio or watch TV, we’re told during every break that networks are sources of programming being beamed through the air or through cables. But the Internet is different. It isn’t wiring. It isn’t a system. And it isn’t a source of programming.”

1. The Internet isn’t complicated
2. The Internet isn’t a thing. It’s an agreement.
3. The Internet is stupid.
4. Adding value to the Internet lowers its value.
5. All the Internet’s value grows on its edges.
6. Money moves to the suburbs.
7. The end of the world? Nah, the world of ends.
8. The Internets three virtues:
– a. No one owns it
– b. Everyone can use it
– c. Anyone can improve it
9. If the Internet is so simple, why have so many been so boneheaded about it?
10. Some mistakes we can stop making already