i've probably said this before but every time someone cites metcalfe's law and says that networks get more valuable with more connections, i want them to consider that the value of a connection might in fact be negative
-
i've probably said this before but every time someone cites metcalfe's law and says that networks get more valuable with more connections, i want them to consider that the value of a connection might in fact be negative
another thing to consider: connections need a shared context. if you want to connect to everyone, then you are limited to the lowest common denominator of what the most naive node understands
-
i've probably said this before but every time someone cites metcalfe's law and says that networks get more valuable with more connections, i want them to consider that the value of a connection might in fact be negative
another thing to consider: connections need a shared context. if you want to connect to everyone, then you are limited to the lowest common denominator of what the most naive node understands
a somewhat related concern i have is that this "lowest common denominator" approach has over the years reduced the range of human communication and expression to just a series of mostly plain text notes within a character limit and maybe a media attachment. this is a far cry from even a single web page. one of the cool things about the web is that you can and should be able to publish whatever you want. you don't get to do that if the structure is disallowed or not in your control.
-
a somewhat related concern i have is that this "lowest common denominator" approach has over the years reduced the range of human communication and expression to just a series of mostly plain text notes within a character limit and maybe a media attachment. this is a far cry from even a single web page. one of the cool things about the web is that you can and should be able to publish whatever you want. you don't get to do that if the structure is disallowed or not in your control.
when people are allowed to publish arbitrary information on current services, it's not seen as a feature; it's seen as a security exploit. that's a real shame. we've moved away from the idea of people publishing web resources; instead, services publish web resources that are generated based on extremely limited input from people. some software doesn't even recognize the difference between a service and its users; it just assumes that everything on a given domain must represent the service.
-
when people are allowed to publish arbitrary information on current services, it's not seen as a feature; it's seen as a security exploit. that's a real shame. we've moved away from the idea of people publishing web resources; instead, services publish web resources that are generated based on extremely limited input from people. some software doesn't even recognize the difference between a service and its users; it just assumes that everything on a given domain must represent the service.
so ultimately, if i have to weigh the value of a connection, it's not just a question of what i gain by connecting. it's also a question of what i have to give up by connecting. if your view of the world is so fundamentally compromised that i cannot express myself satisfactorily -- if i have to bend over backwards to make you understand just a fraction of what i was trying to communicate in the first place -- then maybe i am in fact ending up worse off overall.
-
so ultimately, if i have to weigh the value of a connection, it's not just a question of what i gain by connecting. it's also a question of what i have to give up by connecting. if your view of the world is so fundamentally compromised that i cannot express myself satisfactorily -- if i have to bend over backwards to make you understand just a fraction of what i was trying to communicate in the first place -- then maybe i am in fact ending up worse off overall.
a lot of people don't realize it, but this is in fact a political question. if you establish what is basically a one-world government for how people communicate, that is not necessarily a good thing. which expressions are allowed, and which ones are disallowed? the consequences are more technical than social, sure, but they are still consequences all the same -- it's just that instead of governing the natural language, they govern the structure. can we agree on a single structure for everything?
