From: Jef Allbright (jef@jefallbright.net)
Date: Sat Apr 12 2003 - 13:01:24 MDT
Hal submitted an excellent post on how we might attempt to effectively
manage difficult or complicated discussions.
I've thought for a long long time that Extropians could lead the way in
areas such as the following:
-Collaborative knowledge management,
-Rational and creative methods for defining and solving problems,
-Hyper-visualization of relationships between data,
-Effective, forward-moving discussion of philosophical issues
-Shared editable lists of resources such as books, technical references,
news.
It seems to me the tools are available to get started, but we're not
effectively using them. I'm a little baffled by the inertia, even among
leading-edge technophiles.
Could it be lack of vision? Are those who see and embrace this potential
still too few, even among extropians, to achieve the level of organization
necessary to proceed? Do we lack examples? Xanadu Project began in 1961
but never succeeded. Wikipedia, several collaborative blogs's and
newsletters already exist. Given the preponderance of [*, Intuitive,
Thinking, *] personalities on this list I don't think forward-thinking
vision is lacking.
Lack of time, skills, money? I know personally that time is limited, but I
see a large amount of time and effort expended on this list rehashing topics
already discussed. It would be more effective, improve the signal to noise
greatly, and in my opinion be a lot more fun to contribute to building and
refining a shared knowledge base than to repeatedly debate the same issues.
Such a growing knowledge base would exist separately from the ongoing
discussions of new topics and current events, and would provide an
invaluable reference to be linked into ongoing discussions. A bootstrapping
approach to growing this knowledge base would show an apparently effortless
organic growth over time. To the question of organizing the necessary
skills and minor cost of hosting, this is where the Extropy organization
*should* be able to help.
Social dynamics impeding progress? Could it be that some of us would like
to implement this vision, but we're held back by aspects of current human
nature? Are there those among us who will put hundreds or thousands of
hours into personal web sites or posting to the list, but would not put a
tenth of that time into a similar, but collaborative effort? Some possible
reasons:
- lack of recognition for individual contributions,
- damage to an open system by outsiders,
- concern by high-achievers of regression to the mean,
- lack of individual control of the overall direction of the project,
- resentment by high-contributors of low-contributors who share the system,
- unawareness or lack of appreciation of the synergetic benefits of
cooperative efforts.
All of these possible concerns appear to be readily addressable.
There are many reasons why individuals participate on this list: Sharing of
the leading-edge discoveries and thinking, refinement of our own thinking,
social interaction, the fun of debate and displays of prowess, and more.
All of these could be enhanced with the addition of a collaborative
knowledge base providing additive and synergetic growth and organization
along with a persistent group memory that is easily referenced.
I think it's going to happen sooner or later due to the inexorable advance
of technology, but wouldn't it be fun to *participate*?
- Jef
Hal Finney wrote:
> As Extropians, I hope that we can strive to avoid falling into the
> same tired patterns of debate which can be found in virtually every
> forum on the net. The recent argument about policy towards Iraq is a
> good example of how not to conduct online debates, in my opinion.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Apr 12 2003 - 13:10:37 MDT