Even with the sacred printing press, we got erotic novels 150 years before we got scientific journals.
The whole, 'Is the Internet a good thing or a bad thing'? We're done with that. It's just a thing. How to maximise its civic value, its public good - that's the really big challenge.
A Wikipedia article is a process, not a product.
Behavior is motivation filtered through opportunity.
Curation comes up when people realize that it isnâ€™t just about information seeking, itâ€™s also about synchronizing a community.
The threat [of the U.S. bills SOPA and PIPA] is the inversion of the burden of proof, where we suddenly are all treated like thieves at every moment we're given the freedom to create, to produce or to share.
Wikipedia took the idea of peer review and applied it to volunteers on a global scale, becoming the most important English reference work in less than 10 years. Yet the cumulative time devoted to creating Wikipedia, something like 100 million hours of human thought, is expended by Americans every we
The difference between what all the people can do individually and the global consumption of nonrenewable resources is huge. The tension is... what will it take to get people to act in concert? There isn't any additive solution to the problem. It will be both governmental and social because that's t
What I think is coming instead are much more organic ways of organizing information than our current categorization schemes allow, based on two units - the link, which can point to anything, and the tag, which is a way of attaching labels to links. The strategy of tagging - free-form labeling, witho
I certainly never intended for myself an academic career and, were the academy to suffer, I'd just go do something else. I don't have a commitment to it or to really, frankly, almost any institution that assumes that it has to be stable forever.
The change we are in the middle of isn't minor and it isn't optional.
It's not a revolution if nobody loses
Think about spam filters; if email didnt come from someone that someone you know knows, thats an important signal, and one we could embed in the environment; we just dont. I just want the world to be filtered through my social graph.
Anyone who has his e-mail client notify him anytime an e-mail comes in has already lost.
Wikipedia [...] is the product not of collectivism but of unending argumentation.
We're not good at thinking fast. We are good at feeling fast.
Tools get socially interesting after they're no longer technologically interesting.
The transfer of [...] capabilities from various professional classes to the general public is epochal.
It used to be expensive to make things public and cheap to make them private. Now it's expensive to make things private and cheap to make them public.
I am not somebody who believes everyone is equally talented; talent remains unequally distributed.
There is no larger collective-action problem than the environment. The three biggest lies of the environmental movement is that every little bit helps, you can do your part, and together we can do it.
Operationally, the transactions were fairly trivial.
Curiously, once technology gets boring, the social effects get interesting.
Upgrading one's imagination about what is possible is always a leap of faith.
When you make the claim that something on the Internet is going to be good for democracy, you often [hear], 'Are you talking about the thing with the singing cats?'
Civic participants don't aim to make life better merely for members of the group. They want to improve even the lives of people who never participate...
Carpooling is important for urban density, air pollution and other reasons, but carpooling is not the kind of thing that actually changes the energy equation.
In a profession, members are only partly guided by service to the public.
Collaboration is not an absolute good.
Unlike sharing, where the group is mainly an aggregate of participants, cooperating creates group identity.