Re: [ba-unrev-talk] Document for Review
Ooh. I'm sacred. (01)
But where does this have anything to do with the document I posted,
or review comments it? (02)
"John J. Deneen" wrote: (03)
> Re:
>
> >I am also
> >> inclined to believe that commercial interests are (will be) against such
> >> granularity in pages carrying advertising.
> >>
> >> But, then again, your immediate concern is not with web-wide level of
> >> co-operative work. However, it might be well, to keep such a future
> >> extension in mind.
> >
>
> Go figure: Ever been a victum of "contagious" products and ideas?
>
> It works like this. First, they find out how the mind of their target
> consumer works by getting at his or her ideas and subconscious thoughts.
> .... (more info below)
>
> - John
>
> * Mind virus could give us shopping bug
>
> Tracy McVeigh
> Observer
>
> Sunday March 26, 2000
>
> "It may prove to be the most successful new selling technique
> the capitalist world has ever known. The 'mind virus' is the
> latest form of consumer brainwashing.
>
> A mix of psychology and Internet technology, the aim is to
> create social epidemics by feeding the right information, or
> virus, into someone's mind. Once implanted, it can make the most
> useless of gadgets seem essential, the most unnecessary
> accessory irresistible. It is a money-spinning dream.
>
> That is the claim of psychologist Paul Marsden, who believes he
> can help businesses to trigger shopping crazes for their products."
> <http://www.brandgenetics.com/archive/Guardian%20Unlimited%20%20Archive%20Search.htm>
>
> *
>
> Mental epidemics
>
> "WANT to change the world? Find out how in Malcolm Gladwell's
> The Tipping Point. He has "the rules" for engineering social
> epidemics. You'll see how to turn an idea, product or practice
> into a virulent mind virus that will sweep through society to
> become the latest craze, fad or fashion."
> <http://www.brandgenetics.com/archive/New%20Scientist%20Mental%20epidemics.htm>
>
> * Genetically Modified Food and Memetically Modified Ideas
>
> ... "In a memetic project somewhat similar to the Human Genome
> Project, evolutionary psychologists have begun mapping the
> cognitive hardwired structure of our minds, and the development
> of associative networks have allowed researchers to map the
> acquired or softwired structure of those minds.
>
> What is interesting about all this is that these advances now
> allow for the possibility of engineering of ideas so completely
> adapted to the structure of our minds that when exposed to them,
> we automatically adopt them, sometimes in spite of ourselves.
> Memeticists are now taking their first tentative steps in using
> this knowledge to engineer and modify cultural information; to
> design fashions, fads, ideas, advertising and brands that fit
> our minds, like a jigsaw piece in a puzzle. The GM mind virus
> may have been a product of blind chance that just happened to
> fit our minds, but the possibility is now with us of consciously
> and deliberately modifying the structure of information to
> render it more palatable, and indeed infectious." ...
>
> ... "Of course, infecting others with our ideas so that they do
> what we want is a time-honoured human preoccupation. Compliance
> professionals, from door to door salespersons to politicians to
> religious zealots have long used the techniques of social
> influence to go about their business. But the difference, and it
> is a big difference, is that memetic engineers are developing a
> theoretically informed comprehensive understanding of how this
> process works that turns manipulation into a science." ...
> <http://www.viralculture.com/gmmm.htm>
>
> * Brand Positioning: Meme’s the Word
>
> "Using a simple but powerful technique of memetic analysis, it
> is shown how marketers can unpack how brands are actually
> positioned in the minds of consumers in terms of their component
> memes, that is, their ‘genes of meaning’. A demonstration of the
> validity and reliability of memetic analysis is given through an
> investigation of how the notion of ‘healthy-living’ is
> positioned in the minds of consumers. The practical utility of
> memetic analysis in brand positioning is discussed, and the
> possibility is raised of using the analytical tool to increase
> profitability by ‘memetically modifying’ brands with true,
> unique and compelling consumer values."
> <http://www.brandgenetics.com/archive/Brand%20Positioning%20-%20Memes%20the%20Word.htm>
>
> * Help advertising evolve: Clone consumer thought patterns
>
> Harnessing the power of evolution
>
> "Of all processes in the universe, evolution is perhaps the most
> awe-inspiring. What’s more, it is beautifully simple: Descent
> (continuity) with modification (change) powered by a simple
> mechanism of natural selection. Evolution and its effects are
> all around us today; emerging, designing, producing species
> adapted to their environment, antibodies adapted to infections,
> and knowledge adapted to the world. Indeed, the very idea of
> evolution is itself a product of evolution, and has been
> described by philosopher Daniel Dennett as simply the best idea
> anyone has ever had. We have found a way of harnessing this
> process to help design advertising campaigns and brands that are
> highly adapted to their target markets."
> <http://www.viralculture.com/admap99.html>
>
> Gary Richmond wrote:
>
> > Eric and Henry,
> >
> > Eric you wrote in response to Henry's comments on your document for
> > review:
> >
> >>Granularity is in there. But I *really* liked your comment about
> >>advertisers' possible objections!
> >>
> > I would also like to reinforce the concluding comment of Henry's,
> > pointing exactly to what
> > I would like to comment on after I return to NYC on Monday. Henry wrote:
> >
> >>But, then again, your immediate concern is not with web-wide level of
> >>co-operative work. However, it might be well, to keep such a future
> >>extension in mind.
> >>
> > These kinds of co-operative/collaborative concerns are what Aldo de
> > Moor and I have maintained
> > would distinguish a Pragmatic Web from a (mere?) Semantic Web. He and
> > I discussed this informally at ICCS
> > 2001 in Palo Alto and, with Mary Keeler, wrote a paper, "Towards a
> > Pragmatice Web," for ICCS 2002..
> >
> > http://infolab.kub.nl/people/ademoor/papers/iccs02.pdf
> >
> > For a brief treatment of the theme of a Pragmatic Web, see this
> > article (to which Aldo recently directed
> > me) by Munidar P. Singh, Editor in Chief of IEEE Internet Computing.
> >
> >http://www.csc.ncsu.edu/faculty/mpsingh/papers/columns/bi-6-3-02.pdf
> >
> > More when I return.
> >
> > Gary
> >
> > PS Eric, thank you for your kind words regarding my loss. Tomorrow
> > begins a long, sad car trip
> > to Greenville, SC.
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>>Eric.
> >>>
> >>>Glad you took it well. I was a bit in a blue mood when I wrote my
> >>>response. So much to be done, so little time left for doing it.
> >>>
> >>>At any rate, a major item in your original post (and in your posts way
> >>>back during the days of the colloquium) is granularity. Granularity in
> >>>all web pages extant is very much desired. I believe that
> >>>paragraph-level granularity is a good, practical goal. I am also
> >>>inclined to believe that commercial interests are (will be) against such
> >>>granularity in pages carrying advertising.
> >>>
> >>>But, then again, your immediate concern is not with web-wide level of
> >>>co-operative work. However, it might be well, to keep such a future
> >>>extension in mind.
> >>>
> >>>Henry
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>On Wed, 2003-01-08 at 16:19, Eric Armstrong wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Hey, Henry.
> >>>>
> >>>>Thanks for the post. I'm trying to get at basic infrastructure questions,
> >>>>though, rather than large design concerns. I got caught up in the vision
> >>>>myself, and list moved towards big-picture things.
> >>>>
> >>>>But mostly I'm trying to enumerate the low-level infrastructure issues
> >>>>that emerge when the rubber hits the road, and someone tries to code
> >>>>something.
> >>>>
> >>>>Actually, one of the things I should have put on that list is time
> >>>>synchronization. When updates are happening simultaneously at remote
> >>>>locations, and the results are shared, "which happened first" becomes important.
> >>>>
> >>>>(Note to Self: Examine the bread crumbs in the design document for other
> >>>>low level issues.)
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Henry K van Eyken wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>Eric.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>You are talking here about stuff dear to my heart, but it is so complex
> >>>>>I cannot just immediately respond in a satisfactory way - especially
> >>>>>because I am overloaded and my mind is getting slower while my body is
> >>>>>screaming to get me away from my desk.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>I would want to tick off the points you raise in a media/educational
> >>>>>setting, which is something I would want Fleabyte to evolve into, but
> >>>>>which I am not likely to ever see.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Media, typically are close to one-way instruments, from emitter to
> >>>>>receiver. Oh yes, readers may write letters to editors, but it is the
> >>>>>editors who select what and how much of each letter received is printed.
> >>>>>In other words, the readers are under editorial control.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Schools to a little better. Students may ask questions, but even those
> >>>>>questions may be ignored or rephrased.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Eventually I shall have to produce an article outlining how Fleabyte
> >>>>>might move from being a webzine toward a collaborative tool. One
> >>>>>question is: who are doing the collaborating? Another: what is the depth
> >>>>>of that collaboration, the commitment involved. These questions ought be
> >>>>>posed in a well-defined context of which I perceive various stages.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Stage one is getting, evaluating, pruning information. We now have
> >>>>>search engines; we lack evaluation engines. And we haven't got
> >>>>>well-defined means of making individuals with their limited mental
> >>>>>capacity feel comfortable with an extensive body of machine-held
> >>>>>information. To make matters more complex, that body is dynamic with
> >>>>>information continually added, removed, altered in a way that any person
> >>>>>who exhibits this kind of a continually changing mind is considered
> >>>>>fickle, unreliable, undependable, and, hence, even unemployable!
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Stage one would involve a moving feast of involved expertise, knowledge
> >>>>>workers with a sense of the future and a sense of how directions in
> >>>>>their field are potentially being deflected by projected developments
> >>>>>elsewhere. (Think of Doug's "frontier outpost" people as discussed
> >>>>>during the colloquium!)
> >>>>>
> >>>>>A next stage would involve "spreading the word" to a critical mass of
> >>>>>decision-makers, which "at bottom" is the electorate, but which need
> >>>>>depend on either experts trusted by their elected representatives or
> >>>>>depend on digitally held expertise - a benign auto pilot.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Following that comes planning for action, the problem of alternatives,
> >>>>>levels of certainty, etc., all of which would lead into appropriate
> >>>>>action.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>I guess I have gone a little beyond the kind of cooperation people
> >>>>>normally think of when contemplating tools for collaboration. Really, we
> >>>>>are here in the domain of dynamic, coevolutionary collaboration. The
> >>>>>kind of stuff Doug is talking about.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Too bad he has not been getting the needed support.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Too bad, Fleabyte is likely to whither on the vine.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>But, by all means, let's keep on dreaming and scheming.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Henry
> >>>>>
> >>>>>The production of the
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>On Mon, 2003-01-06 at 18:10, Eric Armstrong wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>I've just published a document at my web site, entitled
> >>>>>>Technical Impediments to Persistent Collaboration Tools.
> >>>>>>http://www.treelight.com/software/collaboration/Technical_Impediments.html
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>I would appreciate feedback from you guys.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>The document is an attempt to identify the set of necessary
> >>>>>>infrastructure features that, by their absence, make it
> >>>>>>difficult or impossible to develop usable collaboration tools.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Essentially, it's an "infrastructure wish list", and you folks are
> >>>>>>admirably positioned to tell me what's missing from the list.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> > (04)