Comments on: Yet another lesson from the birds and the bees http://mixedink.com/blog/2007/07/yet-another-lesson-from-the-birds-and-the-bees/ online collaboration, the startup process, company news & other stuff Sun, 29 Apr 2012 18:43:39 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Daniel http://mixedink.com/blog/2007/07/yet-another-lesson-from-the-birds-and-the-bees/comment-page-1/#comment-58 Daniel Tue, 14 Aug 2007 10:22:58 +0000 http://www.mixedink.com/blog/?p=10#comment-58 I couldn't understand some parts of this article Yet another lesson from the birds and the bees, but I guess I just need to check some more resources regarding this, because it sounds interesting. I couldn’t understand some parts of this article Yet another lesson from the birds and the bees, but I guess I just need to check some more resources regarding this, because it sounds interesting.

]]> By: vanessa http://mixedink.com/blog/2007/07/yet-another-lesson-from-the-birds-and-the-bees/comment-page-1/#comment-57 vanessa Fri, 27 Jul 2007 03:02:09 +0000 http://www.mixedink.com/blog/?p=10#comment-57 Thanks for your insightful response. I would certainly agree with you that collaboration/ democracy does not always lead to the best results (take slavery as another example of a crowd collectively participating in something terribly wrong). I think Surowiecki's The Wisdom of Crowds helps us think about when crowds are smart and when they aren't. According to him, a smart crowd has a diversity of opinion; independence from other's opinions; decentralization (and the ability to draw on local knowledge); and an aggregation mechanism for private opinions. When these criteria are not met, we often find crowds acting in ways that are definitely not wise -- sometimes even to the detriment of the members of the crowd. That said, I am sure you are right that there are cases where someone goes against the wisdom of the crowd (even when the crowd is wise according to Surowiecki's criteria) to achieve something that the majority cannot even envision. However, I would venture that in most cases a wise crowd will come up with more creative and salient solutions to a problem than any given individual, regardless of that person's intellect. I would agree with you that the rules of the game should be transparent and stable, participants should be equipped to express their opinions, and that barriers to creativity should be eliminated for collaboration to work best. Thanks for your insightful response. I would certainly agree with you that collaboration/ democracy does not always lead to the best results (take slavery as another example of a crowd collectively participating in something terribly wrong). I think Surowiecki’s The Wisdom of Crowds helps us think about when crowds are smart and when they aren’t. According to him, a smart crowd has a diversity of opinion; independence from other’s opinions; decentralization (and the ability to draw on local knowledge); and an aggregation mechanism for private opinions. When these criteria are not met, we often find crowds acting in ways that are definitely not wise — sometimes even to the detriment of the members of the crowd.

That said, I am sure you are right that there are cases where someone goes against the wisdom of the crowd (even when the crowd is wise according to Surowiecki’s criteria) to achieve something that the majority cannot even envision. However, I would venture that in most cases a wise crowd will come up with more creative and salient solutions to a problem than any given individual, regardless of that person’s intellect.

I would agree with you that the rules of the game should be transparent and stable, participants should be equipped to express their opinions, and that barriers to creativity should be eliminated for collaboration to work best.

]]> By: Rex Lee http://mixedink.com/blog/2007/07/yet-another-lesson-from-the-birds-and-the-bees/comment-page-1/#comment-56 Rex Lee Wed, 25 Jul 2007 01:16:21 +0000 http://www.mixedink.com/blog/?p=10#comment-56 Thank-you! I very much enjoyed your post and the Swarm Theory. I am big believer in the power of mass collaboration and democracy but also believe that it's not the best choice for all decisions. Truly disruptive concepts that appear radical often go against the "crowd" (atleast for a period of time) before being adopted. Often it's individuals that keep pushing their vision against popular thinking that allow these radical concepts to eventually break through. The Ipod is a popular example where Steve Jobs "mandated" there will be no "on/off" button even though the majority was against the concept. Mass collaboration seems to work best when the rules/laws or algorithim required to make a decision is well known and stable, when the participants are equipped to make the decisions and when the rules/laws or algorithims do not need to be broken to overcome some new challenge or oppoprtunity. Thank-you! I very much enjoyed your post and the Swarm Theory.

I am big believer in the power of mass collaboration and democracy but also believe that it’s not the best choice for all decisions. Truly disruptive concepts that appear radical often go against the “crowd” (atleast for a period of time) before being adopted. Often it’s individuals that keep pushing their vision against popular thinking that allow these radical concepts to eventually break through. The Ipod is a popular example where Steve Jobs “mandated” there will be no “on/off” button even though the majority was against the concept.

Mass collaboration seems to work best when the rules/laws or algorithim required to make a decision is well known and stable, when the participants are equipped to make the decisions and when the rules/laws or algorithims do not need to be broken to overcome some new challenge or oppoprtunity.

]]>