Comments on: Something clever http://rhinocrisy.org/2005/12/something-clever/ Sun, 01 Apr 2012 20:07:06 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Anonymous http://rhinocrisy.org/2005/12/something-clever/comment-page-1/#comment-483 Anonymous Tue, 03 Jan 2006 21:47:02 +0000 http://rhinocrisy.org/?p=532#comment-483 being a reality check-ish person i submit that the "selfless very smart people" are listening intently to other individual voices in the concentric and overlapping groups involved in a particular affinity bunch. i think what we call a labor of love is part of a social process of building better tools, quickly, so that existing blunt-instrument tools (formed in response to mainstream needs) can be replaced without excessive downtime, so to speak.<br/><br/>most people have a hard time relying on untested methods. they won't grab every rope they're handed. mostly this is because for the sake of social integration they don't walk around with a hundred tons of safety equipment on their belts in case they fall. folks who only go on paved roads think folks who jump-and-fall all the time are crazy. also carrying too much of your own equipment slows you down and again you fall out of rhythm with the paved road flow. <br/><br/><a></a><a></a>Posted by<a><b> </b></a>chromo being a reality check-ish person i submit that the “selfless very smart people” are listening intently to other individual voices in the concentric and overlapping groups involved in a particular affinity bunch. i think what we call a labor of love is part of a social process of building better tools, quickly, so that existing blunt-instrument tools (formed in response to mainstream needs) can be replaced without excessive downtime, so to speak.

most people have a hard time relying on untested methods. they won’t grab every rope they’re handed. mostly this is because for the sake of social integration they don’t walk around with a hundred tons of safety equipment on their belts in case they fall. folks who only go on paved roads think folks who jump-and-fall all the time are crazy. also carrying too much of your own equipment slows you down and again you fall out of rhythm with the paved road flow. 

Posted by chromo

]]> By: Anonymous http://rhinocrisy.org/2005/12/something-clever/comment-page-1/#comment-482 Anonymous Sat, 31 Dec 2005 17:00:53 +0000 http://rhinocrisy.org/?p=532#comment-482 Boo! I guess I agree that that there is no hive mind in practice--at least, in my own experience--as it's generally understood. But I also think that sometimes the insiderbulkworkers WANT the cover of crowd anonymity, and I tend to respect their (our) desire to maintain that illusion. <br/><br/>But I do like the check the author history feature on wiki and would have checked it had I not been in such a hurry.  <br/><br/><a></a><a></a>Posted by<a><b> </b></a><a HREF="http://ssrdatta.blogspot.com" REL="nofollow" TITLE="sahelidatta at hotmail dot com">Saheli</a> Boo! I guess I agree that that there is no hive mind in practice–at least, in my own experience–as it’s generally understood. But I also think that sometimes the insiderbulkworkers WANT the cover of crowd anonymity, and I tend to respect their (our) desire to maintain that illusion.

But I do like the check the author history feature on wiki and would have checked it had I not been in such a hurry.  

Posted by Saheli

]]> By: Anonymous http://rhinocrisy.org/2005/12/something-clever/comment-page-1/#comment-481 Anonymous Tue, 27 Dec 2005 00:14:03 +0000 http://rhinocrisy.org/?p=532#comment-481 "There is no hive mind." That is so true. I hate this idea of "the wisdom of crowds" and "hive mind" and all. Having worked a lot in political movements, including anarchistic ones like Critical Mass and Direct Action to Stop the War, I know that the supposed "hive mind" is usually a few selfless very smart people who offer input to a scene without requiring that their nametag hang off everything they do. It might look like a hive mind from the outside, but insiders know which members of the hive are doing the bulk of the work, and which are providing some combination of reality checks, manual labor, and the cover of crowd-anonymity.<br/><br/>Thanks for telling me which person wrote that post. I hope I can someday thank him more directly. <br/><br/><a></a><a></a>Posted by<a><b> </b></a><a HREF="rhinocrisy.blogspot.com" REL="nofollow" TITLE="">hedgehog</a> “There is no hive mind.” That is so true. I hate this idea of “the wisdom of crowds” and “hive mind” and all. Having worked a lot in political movements, including anarchistic ones like Critical Mass and Direct Action to Stop the War, I know that the supposed “hive mind” is usually a few selfless very smart people who offer input to a scene without requiring that their nametag hang off everything they do. It might look like a hive mind from the outside, but insiders know which members of the hive are doing the bulk of the work, and which are providing some combination of reality checks, manual labor, and the cover of crowd-anonymity.

Thanks for telling me which person wrote that post. I hope I can someday thank him more directly. 

Posted by hedgehog

]]> By: Anonymous http://rhinocrisy.org/2005/12/something-clever/comment-page-1/#comment-480 Anonymous Sun, 25 Dec 2005 17:25:26 +0000 http://rhinocrisy.org/?p=532#comment-480 Most concise, well-described text on Wikipedia tends to be the product of a single writer. In this case, the writer was Tim Starling. The hive-mind doesn't exist; most piece-meal editing randomly inserts thoughts wherever the editor wants. <br/><br/><a></a><a></a>Posted by<a><b> </b></a><a HREF="http://rhinocrisy.blogspot.com/" REL="nofollow" TITLE="rednblack at alum dot mit dot edu">saurabh</a> Most concise, well-described text on Wikipedia tends to be the product of a single writer. In this case, the writer was Tim Starling. The hive-mind doesn’t exist; most piece-meal editing randomly inserts thoughts wherever the editor wants. 

Posted by saurabh

]]> By: Anonymous http://rhinocrisy.org/2005/12/something-clever/comment-page-1/#comment-479 Anonymous Sun, 25 Dec 2005 12:07:05 +0000 http://rhinocrisy.org/?p=532#comment-479 That is rather nicely told. The analogy itself is not that original, I think--at least it seems very familiar. (Feynman Lectures? Can't look'em up now.) But it's very concise and well described, which makes me wonder to what extent the hive mind edited and sharpened it stylistically rather than for content.  <br/><br/><a></a><a></a>Posted by<a><b> </b></a><a HREF="http://ssrdatta.blogspot.com" REL="nofollow" TITLE="sahelidatta at hotmail dot com">Saheli</a> That is rather nicely told. The analogy itself is not that original, I think–at least it seems very familiar. (Feynman Lectures? Can’t look’em up now.) But it’s very concise and well described, which makes me wonder to what extent the hive mind edited and sharpened it stylistically rather than for content.  

Posted by Saheli

]]>