[p2p-research] Implications of Alpha

[Ryan Lanham]

Marc,

My own view is that open is a good, but not necessary element of good.  I
use many closed systems that I love.  Do I wish they were open?  Yes.  Will
they be soon?  Not likely.  So, I can live in a world of only open and limit
my options, or I can advocate for open and try to use it where it makes
sense.  Bright line morality may feel good, but it isn't reality.  The world
is a messy place.  Dialogue and collaboration happen, and collaboration
entails give and take.

Maybe we can assume socialists are similar enough to P2P to merit
collaboration (as Herve does) or maybe we can assume that for profit is too
odious to work with as some no doubt do.  For me, I rule nothing out.
Michael Albert ruling out those who do not fight capitalism from his forum
is childish and counter-productive.  I understand trying to control
discourse, but without authentic dialogue and full menagerie of all types of
organizations, the best solutions will not be found.  Morality means
balancing competing interests in my view.

Mistakes are in not reasoning and in not pursuing dreams...not in failing to
follow a certain prescriptive worldview.  I support P2P and advocate for it
as a collaborative ideal--even as a market philosophy--I do not see it as
exclusive, optimal at all times nor do I want it to replace all other forms
of systems even in technology.

Ryan Lanham



On Sat, May 9, 2009 at 7:48 AM, marc fawzi <marc.fawzi at gmail.com> wrote:

> It would be infinitely more useful is he'd open it up as a service
> (software as a service, to be accessed from other Web and P2P client
> applications.
>
> I could think of many uses for its data collection and computational
> capability in decision support systems as well as in any software that
> needs to make decisions based on real world data.
>
> Letting people use it directly, as opposed to having it be a backend
> service for software developed by others, is a huge mistake, IMO.
>
>
> On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 11:20 AM, Ryan Lanham <rlanham1963 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > I've been thinking about Wolfram's Alpha.  The question I'd like to ask
> him
> > is, what will it change.
> >
> > I saw JOHO's (David Weinberger's) interview.  It was fascinating.
> >
> > Here's my 2 cents:  The research paper and the informing blog post may be
> > dead.  Yes, stringing ideas together to make a point is still useful, but
> > now anyone can answer a question properly structured.  So, ideas may
> become
> > more changes of queries.
> >
> > Another separate point, Michel recently sent around an academic Call for
> > Papers for a P2P conference.  Isn't that a bit odd, inherently?  A COP on
> > P2P?
> >
> > Ryan Lanham
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > p2presearch mailing list
> > p2presearch at listcultures.org
> > http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
>
> Marc Fawzi
> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/people/Marc-Fawzi/605919256
> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcfawzi
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20090509/a31244f7/attachment-0001.html>