[PLUG-TALK] Internet's Long Memory

[Russell Senior]

>>>>> "glen" == glen e p ropella <gepr at ropella.net> writes:

russell> There is the sender and the receiver.  I care about both
russell> people and their respective brains, and I care about
russell> intermediary peoples' brains too, as they are often necessary
russell> media in propagating the ideas.  So, in your framework, my
russell> concern isn't necessarily "much more interested" in the
russell> sender.  A sender without a receiver is useless.  And in
russell> fact, there is no guarantee the sender will ever have another
russell> "good idea", although it would be reasonable to assume they
russell> might.  Once they have launched their idea, from the system's
russell> point of view their utility has been at least temporarily
russell> exhausted.

glen> Excellent point!  I sloppily assumed the receiver.  I can
glen> restate my position as: The receiver should be much more
glen> interested in the source of the good idea than the good idea,
glen> itself.

glen> I'll stick to that despite your argument of temporary exhaustion
glen> because it's not _really_ the idea that's good.  "Give a man a
glen> fish and he'll be fed for a day.  Teach a man to fish and he'll
glen> be fed for a lifetime."  Those receivers skilled at keeping
glen> track of senders will experience more good ideas than those who
glen> are unskilled at keeping track.

>From the perspective of the receiver, the important network is the
nearest-neighbor sender, not necessarily the original sender.  As long
as the local sender is kept track of and they continue to transmit,
then the receiver can't tell the difference.  Now, it might help the
receiver to be able to hop over the middle man (or woman) and get
straight to the original (or, at least, further upstream) source, but
it might not.  The intermediary might have communicated the "good
idea" better than the originator.  Having the option of hopping (if
it's discovered the intermediary is not better) could help optimize
the network.

I am not convinced that the network is more important than the things
it transmits.  I see the network as an emergent property of the
potential energy of the "idea" objects in an idea-seeking field.  The
ideas will find a path as long as the seekers are pulling and/or the
havers are pushing.  If I want to experience good ideas and there are
some about that havers want to share, the network will tend to form
itself naturally.  It's the water I really want.  I only want the
shovel and the ditch because they help me get the water.


-- 
Russell Senior         ``I have nine fingers; you have ten.''
seniorr at aracnet.com