Mon, 21 Jan 2002 10:12:05 -0800 (PST)
On Mon, 21 Jan 2002, Jeff Bone wrote:
--]I'm hip to Tom's dream on many levels, but it seems to me that without an elite
--]to safeguard the conceptual high ground, progress inevitably grinds down,
--]innovation gets lost in the lowest common denominator, etc.
A lot of innovation has happened INSPITE of the so called geek Elite.
Winamp, napster, gnutella, linux, windows based os's, irc, binary usenet
posting, most of the game techonolgies, mp3.etc etc etc.
Each of those took root or was created inspite of the then prevailing
"elite" line of purity. Heck MP3s were so much hated by audio geeks it was
like a freaking apocylapse to them.
The problem is not in too much its in too few.
Too many ionnovations will fall onto the ground. Withouth the many to try
them out many fall on rock. Only the fabored few of the elite would get
through . Witht he many more new things get tried, get feedback, gorw or
die not becuase of the will of a few but for the trying of the many.
Look around at all the vast array of utilities out there. Many of them are
clones or rehashes of older works, but some add something new,
something maybe only 3% of the users want but those 3% might be a few
thousand people. With the Eliteist as Gauridan of Onnvoation method we
would neverr see that and those few thousnad would have to accetp the
Elite Standard or nothing.
--]often than is claimed, but sometimes --- maybe the geeks do understand what the
--]users need better than the users themselves.
Down this road is justified WIndows, Apple, Liebenstraum, Copyright
Controls, the Moral Majority and many other ideas.
"the common man does not know thier own needs, for that they must
inherently look to the rulers."
Sorry, been there, doenn that, took a history leason and realized its
/"\ [---=== WSMF ----http://wsmf.org---===---]
X ASCII Ribbon Campaign
/ \ Against HTML Mail