Archive of UserLand's first discussion group, started October 5, 1998.

Re: OpenCulture.org

Author:Joshua Allen
Posted:9/26/2000; 8:00:04 PM
Topic:OpenCulture.org
Msg #:21764 (In response to 21725)
Prev/Next:21763 / 21765

As usual, Joshua, it's not that I disagree with you. I don't. The only thing I perceive in your discourse is a lack of balance.

I don't disagree with you, either, and I was not trying to say that planning is irrelevant. In fact, I would agree that some of the best protocols and designs are devised by researchers and others who are not necessarily implementors. Implementing and planning can be very different skills.

I hope you did not miss my main point, though. Just because thinking about protocols is necessary does not excuse the explosion of pundits pushing protocols these days. Personally, I think the proliferation of computer geeks pitching protocols to save the poor musicians is a bit insulting. I mean, what are we thinking? The poor besieged musicians were so desperate for salvation from the disruptive technologies that they cried out for help ... and from the distance, BruceS responds to their cries! Now the clouds part and a rainbow peeks through, and computer geeks and musicians sing together backstage in perfect harmony.

Bruce is great; I refer frequently to my autographed copy of his book. And I'm not ranting specifically at street performer protocol. .. Sure, implementation isn't the only important thing about a protocol, but do you really consider some of these protocols as anything more than intellectual navel-gazing? If nobody asked for it, nobody plans on using it, it doesn't significantly advance any science (all these payment protocols have already been hashed a million times, I see nothing new here), then what's the point?

There are responses to this message:

This page was archived on 6/13/2001; 4:56:52 PM.

© Copyright 1998-2001 UserLand Software, Inc.