Weinberger and Web 2.0/Web Squared

                There are a number of key topics that are discussed both in Web 2.0 & Web² and in David Weinberger’s Everything is Miscellaneous.  Perhaps the most apparent is the importance of “user” input; in Web 2.0/Web² the idea is labeled “Collective intelligence” (Web 2.0 p. 2 & Web² p. 2), basically a collective effort to create something vaster and more complicated than could be created by small number of individuals.  They also list several organizations that have successfully harnessed the power of user input, among them Amazon and Wikipedia.  Weinberger also touches on this concept saying rather than the “authorities” that it is the “we” that together will shape the new digital disorder.  Like O’Reilly and Battelle, he mentions Amazon, discussing their implementation of customer reviews and their “Listmania” which allows users to create their own booklists (p. 59-61).  Weinberger mentions Wikipedia as well (appropriately, as it is perhaps the most triumphant example of the fruits of collective intelligence), pointing out that the entirety of its amazing collection of knowledge is created and updated by anyone who wishes to (p. 100)*.  This ties in to another shared concept: control, or rather giving up control.  O’Reilly states that Web 2.0 is made up of cooperating data sources and encourages further cooperation, and Weinberger says that users are in control of the organization of data, which allows for more useful ways of sorting and using it (p. 93, 105).

                Another common theme between Web 2.0/Web² and Weinberger is the importance of data.  Web 2.0 calls data the “next Intel Inside” saying that control of data will provide a competitive edge for businesses.  Similarly, Weinberger says that “everything is metadata” in his “four new strategic principles” (p. 104).  The gist of this is that data, or metadata is what drives the internet.  This is the key reason that the web is so amazing; a world of knowledge at our fingertips that can be easily found and reorganized with whatever fragments (metadata) we currently possess.

                Lastly, there is the niche appeal of the internet.  This “long tail” is mentioned in O’Reilly’s Web 2.0, and he encourages people/businesses to “reach out to the entire web” and all of the small niches, rather than just focusing on the center.  Weinberger describes this concept in his new strategic principles as “Filter on the way out, not on the way in.”  He discusses how the change from paper to digital publishing allows for much more information to be put into public view (p. 102-3).  He suggest that rather than having someone to filter out the “slush” that “it’s up to each reader to be filterer” and locate information that may only be interesting to themselves and a few others.  When you have a multitude of niches filled with esoteric information, each person can find knowledge that is of interest to them rather than only what is deemed appropriate by “gatekeepers”. 

                Undoubtedly, I have left out a few other shared themes and ideas but these were the ones that I thought were the most prevalent and important.  (This information filtered by Angela.)

                

* Apply some common sense when partaking of Wikipedia’s bounty though.  After all at one point it had an article stating that sharks can shoot lasers out of their eyes, and less egregious misinformation may remain unnoticed for a while.

Weinberger - Chapters 3 & 4

                In the previous blog post I mentioned my bookshelves as something that I invest time in keeping organized, and described briefly my organizational method.  There are of course many different ways to organize things, books perhaps provide even more possibilities than many other things (say silverware etc.).  I remember that Tatiana said that she keeps her books in alphabetical order by author.  You could also organize them by size, title, publication date, purchase date, or by any number of other criteria.  However, because of the nature of atoms as Weinberger says you do have to choose a single place for physical objects.  So how do you figure out where?  Do our thoughts shape our organization, or does our organization shape our thoughts as Weinberger suggests (70-1).  Perhaps it is a little of both, but if so what does an individual’s organizational preference say about them?

                Well, if someone were to try to gain a better understanding of my personality through my books, they would probably have more luck considering their contents than the order I keep them in.  That said here are a few things that the order that I have created might tell them:

Often the books are grouped by type of cover (paper or hard) and size, ergo physical aesthetics are something I think about.

The majority of my books are kept in my bedroom which might suggest that they are important personal objects that I like to have close at hand.

There are stacks of books in front of other books, and many shelves are stuffed to the top with books.  So, obviously I purchase books even when I have little room for them.  Perhaps I am either a compulsive book shopper or an avid reader… or both.

The lack of alphabetical, or hard and fast genre groupings, along with the fact that many books are not immediately visible would suggest that I'm the sole browser and that I’m not particularly concerned with other people being able to easily locate particular books.

Borrowed books are kept easily visible, suggesting that for me out of sight is out of mind (at least as far as minding due dates goes).

But would an observer be inclined towards these conclusions or are my guesses biased by my perspective?  It’s hard to say, maybe I’ll ask around.

Weinberger - Prologue, Chapters 1 & 2

                In the prologue of Everything is Miscellaneous David Weinberger discusses how and why businesses (particularly Staples) organize their stores in the way they do.  He also mentions the physical limitations inherent in the organization of physical objects, and how this compares to the new order or rather orders that can be used with digital information by touching on the idea of miscellaneous information.  In the first chapter, Weinberger moves on to talk about how we use order in our everyday lives.  In addition he discusses the “three orders of order”; the first being the actual data or object, the second is physical meta-data, a card catalogue is his example, and the third is digital data and meta-data that is unconstrained by physical limitations.  The second chapter covers organizational methods, and focuses largely on alphabetization.  The major theme of this chapter is the arbitrary nature of most of our organizational methods, how and why we came to use them, and the various people who say we should abandon them.

                One thing that I spend my time keeping organized is my book collection.  Books are divided into groups that I consider to be roughly similar, either in subject/genre or writing style.  After that they get separated into author clumps (I don’t bother with alphabetizing) and organized into series order (if any).  I try to separate hardbacks and paperbacks, but author or series trumps this.  Books that I read often are put in the most prominent/easily accessible bookshelves; books that I read less frequently are banished to the bookshelves wedged into the back of my closet.  Cookbooks and school books are usually in their own shelf in the living room.  Borrowed books are kept on a table by the bedroom door; this keeps them visible and prevents them from being absorbed into the rest of the mass.

                This sort of organization works for me because it allows me to keep my books in appropriate areas (cookbooks closer to the kitchen, most read books out in the open, etc.).  It’s also set up this way because I tend to read certain kinds of books when I’m in particular moods and arranging similar books in groups makes it simple for me to browse each type of book.

Web Squared

                In the Web Squared article, O’Reilly and Battelle discuss a lot of ideas that any modern company should give serious consideration.  Since my current professional goals are extremely nebulous, I would like to focus on the idea that I think would have the greatest import for businesses in general.  This is the idea of the “Rise of Real Time”, which suggests that businesses need to be able to react to current trends and feedback in order to be competitive.  While the section focuses largely on Twitter, it also shows how the near instantaneous feedback the internet has made possible can have a dramatic effect on businesses in general.  The quote regarding the shoe sales underscores that the effective utilization of real time feedback can affect success.  The ability to react quickly feedback also ties into the Web 2.0 idea of the “perpetual beta”, where rather than large widely spaced updates, a website undergoes constant incremental changes to better meet the consumer’s needs.  With real time feedback, rather than having to rely on annual or semi-annual reports a company can react to current trends in order to maximize sales, and minimize resource waste.

                The most exiting application that I’ve seen lately is more phone app than internet app.  Nevertheless, I think that it’s really impressive and will be really useful.  This app is the Word Lens app currently available for the iPhone.  This app lets you use your phone’s camera to translate any text from one of the available languages into another instantly.  So if you’re trying to figure out what a menu or a sign written in a foreign language says you can just point your phone at it.  From what the comments say there’s a few problems with this app but if these can be worked out it would be indispensable to a traveler.  Also there’s just something awfully cool about being able to carry around an instant don’t-have-to-fiddle-with-typing-stuff-in translator in your pocket.  Click here for an article with some pictures and a neat video.