Nettime mailing list archives

<nettime> Information cannot be free [Reynolds, Google, etc]
josh zeidner on Sat, 18 Aug 2001 16:17:27 +0200 (CEST)

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

<nettime> Information cannot be free [Reynolds, Google, etc]


  I agree with  you.  "Information" cannot be free, it
is entirely on the part of the subject to put it(
data/messages ) in formation.  As Ritchie pointed out,
there are any number of ways at percieving reality(
constructivism ), but the proclimation "information
wants to be free" is one-sided, and fails to see the
whole equation.  It seems to me that it is not
"information" that people want to be free, but rather
the data or messages.  Implying that mediation is the
imperative, a manifesto that has numerous critics(
Baudrillard ).


  The effect of liberating all data would be
equivalent to having every student in a university sit
in on every class while all professors lecture
simultaneously.  The result: noise, entropy,


  The discussion on Google also interests me.  Google
turns the table on the whole noise/information paradox
by introducing a new form of mediation.  Google
formulates data in terms of key-word, purely
lexogrammatic information as opposed to authored
meta-data such as occurs in search engines like yahoo.


  The information sciences will, in the near future
begin to emphasize on natural language processing,
because we have reached the utter limits of digital
information. In order for computers to be more usable
and informative, they must be able to extract more
information out of human languages( through math ). 
As these sciences progress you will begin to see much
complaint from authors, as this science destroys all
value of the written word, turning it into digits.  If
you have seen a modern resume( especially in the IT
field ), you may notice the prevalance of the
"buzzword".  Because the resumes are informulated by
keyword, the keyword takes precedence over style and
readability.  If we begin to informulate ALL data in
this way, even our literature will begin to take on
this characteristic( in a way it already has ).  A
regression or a necessary progression?  I guess it
depends on how you look at it.


  -josh zeidner

> Every author is a censor, every journalist restricts
> what you read, and even
> the most honest of wise men (and/or women) can only
> ever tell you of the
> world as, when and how they have seen it.
> And thank God -- or some other general-purpose deity
> of your personal
> choosing.
> Perhaps I am arguing semantics here. But information
> is useless until one
> has processed it into knowledge.
> Out damned information, be gone. It will take me the
> rest of my life to
> process 1 percent of the information I have already
> been bombarded with and
> I will be washing the rest from my hands forever (I
> overstate to make a
> point  :) and apologies to the Bard.)
> Cheerio,
> Richard Reynolds

Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger

#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net