www.nettime.org
Nettime mailing list archives

Re: <nettime> The State of Networking (with Florian Schneider)
Ian Dickson on Fri, 5 Mar 2004 03:22:35 +0100 (CET)


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

Re: <nettime> The State of Networking (with Florian Schneider)


In message <200403011247.i21Cloi05239 {AT} bbs.thing.net>, 
"auskadi {AT} tvcabo.co.mz" <auskadi {AT} tvcabo.co.mz> writes
>Benjamin Geer wrote:
>
>>
>I am actually tending to wonder whether this is because people feel
>bound to the rules or mantras that the networks where originally founded
>in relation to. Like the Floss rules set out in Freedom 0 Freedom 1 etc
>etc. Decisions on network architectures seem to be bound by principles
>that don't allow space for politics. Everything gets sucked back into
>the rational consesnus and that individual who seeks to disagree appears
>as a loony who doesnt understand the freedoms inherent in the network
>structures. To borrow from the Negrian dictionary  the networks becomes
>"constituted" by the tenents of for example correct Floss philosophy,
>and cease to be "constituent".
>
>I am thinking out loud here on nettime.
>
>Martin
>
>
GroupThink is bad, but effective:-)

Network architectures, to me, is about technology design, and any 
attempt to play politics (rather than psychology) is pointless.

But if you mean the way that people behave in a Network, well then all 
Networks are Groups of people, and as such there is an In Group and Out 
Group structure.

This means that if you are on the In Group and start to object to 
GroupThink you will soon find yourself in a hard place UNLESS you are 
lucky enough to be articulating that which many others are thinking.

GroupThink however serves a valuable purpose, (as with all behaviours, 
to be widespread they must serve a purpose) - it allows people to hand 
responsibility to someone else. Seen at it's most obvious in the Armed 
Forces - where orders are to be followed without question UNLESS they 
step over some very clearly defined boundaries. Without that Groupthink 
attitude it would be impossible to fight a war.

Or hold a tribe together. (And it doesn't take a genius to see the 
survival, advantage in not being alone in the woods at night with the 
Cave Bears and the Sabre Toothed Tigers....)

Cheers
-- 
Ian Dickson
01452 862637

#  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