Comments on: Web 2.0 and Science: Behind the Hype http://www.contentious.com/2005/12/04/web-20-science-behind-hype/ Amy Gahran's news and musings on how we communicate in the online age. Tue, 02 Dec 2008 15:35:11 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5 By: Ben Sprott http://www.contentious.com/2005/12/04/web-20-science-behind-hype/#comment-1215269 Ben Sprott Tue, 04 Mar 2008 05:56:54 +0000 #comment-1215269 The one thing that is deeply on the minds of the kind of people who get ulcers when they think about the inherent lack of structure in internet technology (web pages, hyperlinks, and the infinitely copiable nature of information) is what kind of structures are going to be left over. The old world structures we are used to (quill pens, printing press, broadcast towers) allowed for two important things. First, they allowed for an hierarchy and second they allowed for a capitalism. These should be understood as the same thing, and soon, or there will be no digestive for those suffering from the ulcers. What kind of structure will come out the other end of this intense transformation we are seeing? One powerful way of understanding the transformation can be seen in good linguistic models. Wilfred Hodges book "Building Models by Games" can shed some light on this, but only when taken in the light of game theoretic models of natural language. In short, the pressure of openness which we are seeing, caused by the development of web technologies, is that of a progress towards something called a fixed point. In the same way that there is no way to construct a capitalism over a natural language, and where instead we find fractured communities, we will find the emerging necessity for understanding community as an integral part of the progress of modern technology. The one thing that is deeply on the minds of the kind of people who get ulcers when they think about the inherent lack of structure in internet technology (web pages, hyperlinks, and the infinitely copiable nature of information) is what kind of structures are going to be left over. The old world structures we are used to (quill pens, printing press, broadcast towers) allowed for two important things. First, they allowed for an hierarchy and second they allowed for a capitalism. These should be understood as the same thing, and soon, or there will be no digestive for those suffering from the ulcers. What kind of structure will come out the other end of this intense transformation we are seeing?
One powerful way of understanding the transformation can be seen in good linguistic models. Wilfred Hodges book “Building Models by Games” can shed some light on this, but only when taken in the light of game theoretic models of natural language. In short, the pressure of openness which we are seeing, caused by the development of web technologies, is that of a progress towards something called a fixed point. In the same way that there is no way to construct a capitalism over a natural language, and where instead we find fractured communities, we will find the emerging necessity for understanding community as an integral part of the progress of modern technology.

]]> By: Bill Brantley http://www.contentious.com/2005/12/04/web-20-science-behind-hype/#comment-46200 Bill Brantley Mon, 05 Dec 2005 18:20:46 +0000 #comment-46200 You make some great points about the use of Web 2.0 in science. Too bad they didn't choose to use more than a single quote from your insightful answers. You make some great points about the use of Web 2.0 in science. Too bad they didn’t choose to use more than a single quote from your insightful answers.

]]> By: Krishnan Patel http://www.contentious.com/2005/12/04/web-20-science-behind-hype/#comment-46136 Krishnan Patel Mon, 05 Dec 2005 01:26:45 +0000 #comment-46136 Very good point about discourse driving tech change. Who would have thought that dubya's policies, despite worldwide criticism, would at least encourage commedians, and now it seems, public discourse ;) Very good point about discourse driving tech change.

Who would have thought that dubya’s policies, despite worldwide criticism, would at least encourage commedians, and now it seems, public discourse ;)

]]>