A firm is successful when the costs of directing employee effort are lower than the potential gain from directing.
You used to have to own a radio tower or television tower or printing press. Now all you have to have is access to an Internet cafe or a public library, and you can put your thoughts out in public.
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.
Algorithms dont do a good job of detecting their own flaws.
Institutions will try to preserve the problem to which they are the solution
How we put our collective talents to work is a social issue, not solely a personal one.
Wikipedia is forcing people to accept the stone-cold bummer that knowledge is produced and constructed by argument rather than by divine inspiration.
I am not somebody who believes everyone is equally talented; talent remains unequally distributed.
There is a giant gulf between doing something and doing nothing. And someone who makes a lolcat and uploads it - even if only to crack their friends up - has already crossed that chasm to doing something. That's the sea change, and you can see it even with the cute cats.
We demonstrated the exchange of clinical information, by using a critical set of common, open technical standards.
One of the biggest changes in our society is the shift from prevention to reaction...
Upgrading one's imagination about what is possible is always a leap of faith.
Curiously, once technology gets boring, the social effects get interesting.
The waterfall method amounts to a pledge by all parties not to learn anything while doing the actual work.
It is our misfortune, as a historical generation, to live through the largest expansion in expressive capability in human history, a misfortune because abundance breaks more things than scarcity.
Collaboration is not an absolute good.
We're not good at thinking fast. We are good at feeling fast.
I removed 'cyberspace' from my vernacular. The idea, which I grew up with, of going into a place separate from the real world, is something my students just don't recognise.
[C]ollaborative production is simple: no one person can take credit for what gets created, and the project could not come into being without the participation of many.
Prior to the internet, the last technology that had any real effect on the way people sat down and talked together was the table
What you need for a participatory system to work: "a plausible promise, an effective tool, and an acceptable bargain."
Communications tools don't get socially interesting until they get technologically boring.
[T]he ways in which the information we give off about our selves, in photos and e-mails and MySpace pages and all the rest of it, has dramatically increased our social visibility and made it easier for us to find each other but also to be scrutinized in public.
Curation comes up when search stops working,
Tools get socially interesting after they're no longer technologically interesting.
Curation comes up when people realize that it isnâ€™t just about information seeking, itâ€™s also about synchronizing a community.
It is the people who figure out how to work simply in the present, rather than the people who mastered the complexities of the past, who get to say what happens in the future.
One of the best ways to know you're completely wrong, is to behave as if you're complete right.
For most of modern life, our strong talents and desires for group effort have been filtered through relatively rigid institutional structures because of the complexity of managing groups. We haven't had all the groups we've wanted, we've simply had the groups we could afford. The old limits of what
So forget about blogs and bloggers and blogging and focus on this - the cost and difficulty of publishing absolutely anything, by anyone, into a global medium, just got a whole lot lower. And the effects of that increased pool of potential producers is going to be vast.