Sounds like an agenda driven article. Mike Rippy IMA Photographer mrippy at ima.museum (317)920-2662 ext.191
IMA 4000 Michigan Road Indianapolis, IN, USA 46208-3326 www.ima.museum >>> akeshet at imj.org.il 12/25/06 2:53 AM >>> >From The Filter, a publication of the Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School, December 2006 =================================================================================================================== > > Folksonomy as Symbol > ~David Weinberger > > It's easy to minimize the importance of folksonomies. These bottom-up > taxonomies are just another tool in the kit. Besides, they've been > around for a while, well before Thomas Vander Wal gave them a felicitous > name. For example, at eBay a sellers' preference for 'laptop' over > 'notebook' has emerged all by itself. In fact, isn't language itself the > first folksonomy? Words evolve based on bottom-up usage. So, taxonomies > are nothing new. > > If that's so, then we're led ever more forcefully to ask: Why the fuss? > If folksonomies are old hat, why are we treating them like something > fresh and important? > > Certainly, in part it's because folksonomies are particularly useful > when there are lots of people trying to communicate about a shared set > of resources and when there's no central authority that can stipulate > the accepted vocabulary and canonical taxonomy. The Web is just such an > environment. So, even though there have been folksonomies in the past, > the Web has given them a big, whopping, important problem to solve. But, > there are lots of innovations for dealing with the Web that have not > excited the same degree of enthusiasm. Listmania at Amazon is new and > interesting, but not spurring academic conferences. Ebay's trust system > is important, but is generally being taken as a useful mechanism, not a > change in how we think or how crowds operate. Something about > folksonomies has struck a chord, generating interest beyond their > benefits as navigational tools. Folksonomies seem to have a symbolic > value. > > If a folksonomy is a symbol, what is it a symbol of? > > First, folksonomies stick it to The Man. We don't need no stinkin' > experts to organize ideas and information! There is, of course, > inefficiency built into expert-based taxonomies because they have to > choose one way of ordering, and that one way is necessarily infested > with personal, class, and cultural biases. As Clay Shirky says, > "Metadata is worldview." But beyond the inefficiency, simply having > someone else have the authority to say 'It shall be filed thus' is a > statement of political authority. Even when the experts do a good job*as > they usually do, because they're experts*it is still an implicit > statement that someone else's way of thinking is better than yours. > > In the face of this, folksonomy says not just that we each have our own > way, but that something useful emerges from it. Folksonomies are proof > of the power of emergence. Emergence is a fascinating phenomenon because > it explains complexity through intrinsic simplicity. For example, > termites build complex towers by following rules so simple that they fit > in a termite's brain. But there is also a political side to our interest > in emergence, beyond its explanatory power. Emergence is hope. It says > (or we take it as saying) that left to ourselves, without extrinsic > structuring or regulation or governance, we will be magnificent. This is > beyond the hope implicit in democracy that says a group will be able to > live together if all are given equal power. We won't just live together, > but something far beyond the capabilities of any of us will emerge. > Simply by being together, cathedrals will emerge... > > The rest of Dr. Weinberger's essay can be found here: > <http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/home/home?wid=10&func=viewSubmission&sid=2541> > =================================================================================================================== > > *Talk Back > Tell us what you think * send feedback and news announcements to: > <filter at cyber.law.harvard.edu> > > *Subscription Info > Subscribe or Unsubscribe: > <http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/signup> > > *About Us > The Filter is a publication of the Berkman Center for Internet & Society > at Harvard Law School. > Editor: Rebecca Tabasky > > *Not a Copyright > This work is hereby released into the public domain. Please share it. > To read the public domain dedication, visit: > <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain> > > **** > To change your Berkman Center subscriptions, visit the following url: > <http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/signup> _______________________________________________ You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer Network (http://www.mcn.edu) To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l at mcn.edu To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit: http://toronto.mediatrope.com/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l
