The one thing I'd agree with you on is that the wikipedia model is not in fact generalizable at all. It remains the n=1 sample proof point of too many arguments.
-
-
I think the future is knowledge being embedded in context-aware information toolchains. Tvtropes points to the future better than wikipedia, though it captures a not-quite-functional knowledge.
0 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
I'm all for that kind of polycentric-narrative post-canonicity local truth ground world. I'd rather be an eager, great citizen of tvtropes than a reluctant, coerced one of the local town hall overrun by NIMBYs.
0 replies 0 retweets 3 likes
My differences with you are mainly re: whether things are good/bad (ie valuative diffs) My differences with Nils are mainly re: how mechanisms work (ie how good/bad choice expansions and constrictions work). Am working on a post on the latter. Content to let former be.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.