Writing: coding and songwriting considered

Have begun to appreciate more some of my own products, where is just about time. Like have been grateful that open source gave me an opportunity to put up a software product--with few worries.

So with open source you have code which is freely seen, and with open source licenses people can download and use legally--if they follow those rules. (Of course may also download and use illegally by violating those rules.) And I've had an open source software product called Class Viewer which is over 15 years old now. And so far this year has downloads from over 90 countries according to web stats at SourceForge where it is hosted.

Is such a new thing. There was no way when I wrote this little app for help with software development and shared, could realize how exactly would have most effect for me as this signature thing which consistently brings global attention. Is an entirely new thing and perspective on power of sharing ideas, like an open source software project. So yeah, is one of those emergent things of the 21st century with the arrival of the web.

But put songwriting in the title of this post as, to me? Songs are open source writing too.

Routinely have found myself now checking song lyrics on the web, glad they're available. As can be a bit tricky. You think you heard one thing, but maybe was something different. OR has been a bit of time since heard a song, and want to quote a lyric correctly.

But those same songs are NOT free, of course. Just because you can get the lyrics, and am sure the music for some copyrighted song, does NOT mean you can start using it commercially yourself.

Now for a divergence. Here is a link to a song am considering might finish. Who knows if I ever will, and occurs to me putting up ideas for a song not even fully written? Could make it easy to STEAL but am not worried for some reason.

As we move further into the age of the web I do think some naive notions have collapsed. Like what if I had code for sale, where code was open? Think no one would pay? Like maybe you'd think no one would pay for a song...ok, you know better there.

What if some legitimate business entity considered using my code, which they could just copy off the web, without paying me? And I found out? Would they remain a legitimate business entity? Nope.

That would be theft. So yeah, there might be people stealing your code, but they're nasty people anyway, who if you knew were so capable, would you want to do business with them anyway, even if they had the money?

I would not.

Am willing to predict that in time, the business relationship and business trust are going to gain a LOT more value. And if you get caught stealing? In the age of the web? That can get known all over the world with a quickness. And you could find yourself having to do business in different circles.

We're not there yet though, but can imagine. And yeah, wouldn't want to do business with ANYONE capable of just stealing code from me, just because they could.

Just like wouldn't want to do business with anyone who would steal a song of mine, if could actually finish one which was a hit. Kind of like that example as of course is kind of outlandish.

But yeah, songwriting does involve some people who write for a paycheck. Am guessing now maybe more with jingles for commercials? But also the world of songwriting is also a much bigger landscape.

So why not same for lots of other kinds of writing? Maybe the future is there.

And you might have coders, who write for a paycheck, but others who own their code which is open and they sell use, or also I guess, coders also who still write some closed code for some buyer.

But yeah, as contemplate being able to be known all over the world with just ONE thing? (Have other global things too though will add.) Where mattered was open? Am so glad is mine, you know? Where yeah, do realize feel like songwriters might just understand.


James Harris

When the planet is your stage

One of my favorite posts a while back was: Who makes me? Can I make you? Nah.

Where we have a much better situation now thanks to the web where you really primarily have to perform, and people all over the planet MAY be interested, based on what YOU deliver.

But how do people all over planet Earth know about any particular person? And that's where promotion of some type is required. Best is word-of-mouth where someone notices something you have and tells someone else, especially excitedly. And that can sweep the globe.

Happened for me with plenty of things, like note have 100+ countries global reach annually from my open source project Class Viewer. All I did was put it up on a site called SourceForge back in 2004. Others did the rest.

But that's just one thing. I like to keep at least three things pulling attention from 50+ countries from at least 3 continents annually, which I do, and more, but that's a baseline I've arbitrarily chosen. And includes this blog which managed 50+ this year.

Yeah am kind of spoiled by attention but humbled by LACK OF MONEY, which is lots about my paranoia of money people, I guess. Am working on it. But the attention draw is the objective reality I experience, proving my ability to interest people like YOU all over our planet. Is cool.

So how can someone like me maybe appear to matter much to promotional reality?

In my opinion you have folks who are under-promoted, often by their agencies or whomever is in charge of their marketing. Where often is country focused. Like organizations who still struggle to grasp how the web has changed things will have a global act, tied up in relentless national based promotion.

Or even worse, you can have a person who can be global who is trapped in city by city promotion because of Old School management.

Someone like me notices, and puts up a tweet, or a pin, or whatever and just like that--that person or group is GLOBAL. And if step up to that plate, whoosh!!!

(Oh yeah notice, no money required and is the best kind of promotion really.)

If they are NOT under-promoted then is just one more fan thing. Which to me is more fun. I prefer when just feel like one more happy fan among MILLIONS versus thinking, wow, I helped someone whose agency is clueless.

Brilliant acts being under-promoted is a modern weird, which I think should go away as we all get more used to modern web reality.

As people learn, you have people get to their level on their own faster and faster and it is all about YOU. Does help to do things to get noticed, of course, showcasing what you do best, and proving you have what it takes to deliver, day after day, or night after night--preferably for years.

Really it's also about you if you are letting some person or organization only promote you in a city or something dinky when you should be promoted in 20+ countries. Or 50+ countries. Or over the entire freaking planet.

You need to have web sense.


James Harris

Contemplating--was wars over distribution?

Like to write that the web solved the information distribution problem. Seems simple enough, as for instance these words will go global--when I post. For now am watching them with interest as they march across the screen. Their reality is local only in the moment, with a transition to globally available but a click away.

But so much was distributed different before, so yes, there were wars, like over how to distribute music and especially popular songs. Wars against innovation that have very much ended, or simply evolved? Yes, I can download much with a buy now, but so much more do I want the opportunity.

But why would anyone stop me?

And what does distribution of information have to do with ride share really?

I think business at best is about producing a socially acceptable product or service and getting to a person or persons who want who repay the favor of the product or service with remuneration.

That is, like you build something cool that people want and they buy it from you.

Or maybe even not cool, but simply useful, but still you need people to actually pay for the thing, for a viable business.

But how do they even know you have it?

There then we get the modern wars over information distribution I think, as I contemplate these ideas and wonder. Am I even close to reality? But how would I know?

And have been focused more lately on the phrase--business trust.

Like I go to some established business and trust that if I can pay, will not only be allowed to buy something I want, but should be treated a certain way, like a good customer. And a customer is someone with the ability to pay, which means person has sufficient money, and should behave, in a socially acceptable way.

Is so much about society. But what is society really? How do we know?

Where quality I think is about lasting, and prefer things that will not only do what I want in the moment, but be there for me down the line. But then I think of food, where is quality with something so ephemeral in a way? I eat it and it is gone. But then again, there are memorable meals when I remember why I will pay more when I can, for better.

Memories can last a lifetime. Quality in life is not about the moment then? But how do we know what will last before it has lasted for us?

Web can have a depth to its information distributed. People can build a history here, there and everywhere that the web reaches and increasingly I do believe reaches a planet.

Yet I can only know so much. Others can know more useful to me, especially about quality of some product or service, but how do I know who I can trust?

Payment intermediaries I like to call those who with expertise can facilitate connecting a person who wants something, who is a good potential customer, with an entity that can provide that something, if yeah, is socially acceptable.

So yeah I think it DOES make sense. Then functionally the web eases the information distribution problem, which means there can be wars with those who were successful in a less efficient process. Where the web can better facilitate business transaction by effectively linking good customers with best business.

Yeah seems simple enough then. Makes sense to me. So then with just a click, goes global.

More information--distributed. But is it knowledge? I like think it was, or what is the point of the effort for me?


James Harris

Some mystery with world reaction

My first major result was in 1996, where I ended up with a route to denial and seized with gusto. Could debate with myself endlessly whether was correct or not, but chose to move on, which was the correct decision. And in 1999 was making myself do karaoke, which was fun. But was preparing myself for lots that did not happen.

And when had yet another major math discovery found my previous paths to denial were removed, so learned new ways to escape.

The world did react in August 2002 and has routinely reacted to things I have discovered, which to me is weird, and much of it was mysterious. Where my blogs have worked through lots, or I should write have worked through much with writing on my blogs but feels the other way.

Some may notice on social media will routinely address the world as is easier for me.

Our species is apparently aware on some higher level of what is going on, and is protecting itself against certain things but in ways that puzzle me. So yes, there are some humans who thought to separate themselves into a higher class. They seized a huge amount of power in major governments around the world and especially in the US. And they knew about climate change, but my assessment is, were more obsessed with creating a neo-feudal reality where YOU would bow before them.

And they failed.

Their systems are crumbling now. Vast manipulations primarily relying on American entertainment industry to convince you that only money should matter. So you would worship or be compelled to worship the wealthiest members of society--even if simply born into wealth.

Even when you knew better, or were told truths that should matter more.

And in the US, they had begun to groom their children for political power, where many Americans already were just accepting it. They had even practiced torture--for those Americans who might resist, and so many Americans so calmly just watched them.

And was amusing to simply watch them react to a celebrity president, in power now, and watch if they cared if he maybe, just might actually destroy the world. A signal to them that they had lost control but greater powers were amused enough to make that ironically known.

Where is disappointing really how accepting so many people are of it all.

Is like our species has already lost so much of its curiosity.

That reality lessens the value of our species in some ways, but maybe is more important for our bigger purpose, I comfort myself with that notion.

We no longer are needed so much by our reality for discovery, clearly. So fewer people care to know. And people like me are now even more rare than before. Discoverers think different.

Especially in my country so many people clearly simply wish to be entertained. So few of them care to know--truth. Fictions try to rule their lives, and they happily comply, living out meaningless existences, only to leave the planet eventually with what achieved?

Maybe they at least leave children who maybe someday will learn how to work to be greater, and pursue meaning in their lives.

The world does not care though as has bigger plans. But most people do not even want to know what is being decided for their fate, and the fate of their children and grandchildren.

Ok.

Well at least they will not be bowing before oligarchs in the US who put themselves up as a neo-royalty. Even though some of you still try, to bow, before them. We watch you too.

Who are we? We are the people who are aware, in a world that is aware as well, with so much playing out for a future that is on its way, like it or not.

You will be ruled, but by what?

Will best knowledge available rule your behavior? Where your free will means really you rule yourself? We are defined, by what we DO.

Or will you be ruled by others carefully feeding you information so you are a tool for their wants? Maybe even if they are artificial intelligences?

Most humans on our planet do not even seem to care to know. But how can they? How can you? Know?

Maybe is better that way even though I think our world will be vastly improved by authorities emerging with full power now.

What you know WILL matter for how you live. And if you choose ignorance, you will find your life may be ok, anyway, by the forces that then choose better for you.

For those who choose knowledge for the good of our species, I cheer you. Your destiny is one to be earned.

On our planet now there are billions of humans, who make up a world that knows more collectively than ever before, and maybe has less and less concern with what we each want.

Knowledge though, is a power in our time unlike before when truths can rip through the world with fury, or salve the wounds, and help all of us to better.

How will you choose?

Your world will know. Web will tell.


James Harris

Talking fair advantage

There can be a HUGE problem with arbitrary lines in a society, where I like to define things.

And will admit have many times noticed situations where are competitive, when some person, usually a guy will SUDDENLY talk race, as is clear he has no advantage.

Which is one thing, but if you have been taught that you have race as a fair advantage, and are losing otherwise so think you can psych out another person by bringing it up? Then can be something where you may feel comfortable.

Where I would look at such a person, at times, suddenly smug. He thinks he has won something, and is sad, as is without merit.

Would find myself mentally shaking my head, thinking to myself, yet another one.

Life lessons for such people can be harsh. Where with me, of course remain polite, but no, not useful as a psych-out. But it does help for me that I have encountered it routinely enough, am not surprised by it. Just disappointed.

And is actually pseudo-class as if say, are in the United Kingdom, and someone notes he is a member of the English nobility, guess what? Is a legitimate class position recognized by society.

But here in the US, there is no such class system at all, not even in decline as is there. So that person? Who thinks he can rely on race to overcome his shortcomings? His belief in fair advantage was probably taught to him, by his parents or community, in a nation that does NOT recognize it.

Which yeah can lead to violence.

Few people realize that actual class does involve violence, as failure to acknowledge social rules is not exactly a good way to get ahead in society. And like to bring up the United Kingdom as one of the most famous where no, am confident class is NO LONGER violently enforced, but it was, in the past.

In Old England--insult the king, could lose your head.

Here in the US, you have people with that attitude and they can go on killing sprees. Which has been big in the news last few years. Where it does help to recognize the problem of pseudo-class and pseudo-nobility who can run rampant in a society when not checked.

Merit rules are just better.

So how did the US get this problem? Well that story have talked much! Where honesty is best. Besides it is an interesting story. People who somehow get taught they are innately superior who just go down in flames when forced to actually compete on merit.

Yet there are others who support them, and believe in things that are not true. And to them? Race is fair advantage.

Web disrupts in a very basic way: facts tell.

Is MUCH harder to simply lie about success in our times. Like in the past not only were arbitrary race rules used for some to steal the accomplishments of others, but also they were as has also been more publicly clear, often brutal to women. So yeah, you'd have guys quite comfortable with lack of ability who would claim credit and rewards of success, for things actually done by others.

The web makes that harder to do.

Web enables merit rules with facts shared. Which is a great thing actually.


James Harris

Advanced communication perspective

Recently began talking social media as just a phrase for advanced communication tools, more akin to the telephone than television, as yeah, people CAN respond to you, you know? And communication on social media at its best is a conversation.

That simple concept had me promptly thinking about over a hundred years ago when telephones arrived. And imagine, someone back then wondering what was the point of talking into some gadget when you could just walk over and chat with your neighbors like a sensible person? As imagine something hypothetical maybe was said or thought in the past as similar in my mind to puzzling over why some people in our times wish to share pictures of their food.

And started typing this post and making sure to verify what I was confident was correct about telephones and arrival time was surprised was earlier than I remembered. A Google search gave the answer of 1876 as when Alexander Graham Bell called his assistant Thomas Watson. Yeah I know the story, but forgot the date.

Well quickly reminded with web authority, which is phrase I use to talk about the information we get that easily with web search being the primary way have in mind now. Where others use phrase differently am sure. But I defined authority functionally as authority relative to one entity is when some other entity has information needed.

Then easily web authority is when the web has some information I need, like knowing when the telephone arrived.

And social media is a back-and-forth conversation potentially which is far more advanced than technology gave in the past, which to me is more definitive when trying to understand. Is SO useful, so to me is a functionality that helps explains.

Where television was more broadcast, though yeah there were attempts at getting feedback, here and there. And even shows that rely on it, like voting, for singing competition-type shows.

Which leads me to thinking that the web in its absorption of television will change television, ever more rapidly until is nothing like it was in the past, and the conversation will rule there as well.

Which is how you quickly move with some basic ideas to big prediction, and talk a space in a way which I think of as meta. So in defining meta space around social media with this post, am labeling it in that way which you can see below.

James Harris

Musing on copyright, work and appreciation

Often look for simple explanation from extremes, like in looking to understand copyright in the modern age, pondered the Mona Lisa. One of the most famous paintings in the world has one of the most shared images in the world--without diminishing its value.

And how often does Leonardo da Vinci get his attribution? Making sure to do so here, as his famous painting is definitely a great legacy to our world. And will use as a stepping stone into a simple explanation, with musings, on copyright in age of the web.

Valued effort should be rewarded. Great effort should be rewarded greatly, but isn't necessarily.

His painting destined to be considered the world's greatest in our times, or close if some wish to argue, was not so valued in Leonardo's life. In fact he carried the Mona Lisa around for years, fiddling with it. Which to me is a reason to not feel like I shouldn't have the right to endlessly change things I create, as to me he was the master who showed a way.

Of course if someone came to you with a picture of the Mona Lisa claiming credit, who would believe such a person? So proper attribution back to source is key. And in the web is easier. Creator can have a webpage with that information, or others can. Like Leonardo da Vinci can rest easy. No one will gain credit for his work. Some put up work trying to GIVE him credit instead, which can cause endless debate there.

We should want to reward effort. Yet even if someone slaps the Mona Lisa, say on a t-shirt, is it a problem? Image is in the public domain. Yet I don't know if that is enough to actually sell much, just having the Mona Lisa on a t-shirt. (Will ponder that angle further though.)

To me, short of it is: effort of the original should be recognized. Person who did the work should profit, or if cannot, or does not want--others should not as if they did the work.

But who would pay a premium to a person who did not do anything other than copy, if they knew?

Knowledge is key I think. And also copying is EASY in our times. In the past was not. So kind of think copying will have less and less value in the minds of most as we mature into the web age.

People in my experience DO tend to appreciate best efforts and feel like reward should go where is due.


James Harris

Web depth

Information flows easily on the web which has greatly solved the information distribution problem, which also pushes a need to verify that information in many ways, including authenticity. And thankfully, ease of information flow does also over time enable ways to check authenticity including on depth of history, as well as authority.

Like became fascinated recently with how long have been doing my blogs like this one, with a history maintained by others, as Blogger provides that service along with my ability to present like with this post. And is easy to check so just did for this post and see I got started April 2005, and was just talking some generic things around my open source project.

That depth to information certainly helps in figuring things out as noticed with myself when coming across someone new, would automatically search for it from that person, as can quickly get a feel for someone. Without it? Am more guessing or wondering how much to trust what is presented.

Is MUCH more a big deal when need information, and wonder on what authority something is being presented. History helps, as you can look back over time. Without it? Yup, more guessing. And web search is a subject have talked a LOT as part of web authority, where information one needs is found through it.

But web search has often faced criticism, as to how rankings can maybe be gamed, or when people are upset at how certain things can trend high, when should not. While with myself, admit do not JUST depend on web search ranking, but also check authority and authenticity by other means.

Like there are situations where will go to a government website regardless of where find it ranking in search as looking for it, if expect government has one covering the needed area. Though in my experience they DO usually rank highly. And notice, those government websites tend to have a LOT of web depth, including histories that develop over time. Governments unlike humans are less likely to be endlessly creating and deleting web sites, one would think.

Web depth to me is increasingly important as we watch the web become more stable.

And web depth gives a benefit to sites like Blogger or others where you get a stability which can be lacking with the people who use the service. Am mentioning them as using their service here, but could loop through a list of web companies where I feel safe in clicking on links because of them as the portal to that information, even when I may question the source thereafter.

Like here certain things you know because am on Blogger, but still you can have to do effort to check information I share on a post.

We are increasingly needing to be able to check authority in our times. And will offer a free idea, as years ago suggested on social media where follow them to my alma mater Vanderbilt University that they give some kind of web badge which would authenticate that a person actually graduated from there. Will admit am not sure how one would do it, especially to prevent fraudsters, but badges of some kind are a subject in social media.

Maybe even would be nice if social media companies might band together to create some kind of non-profit repository of such information. Which could be the source for links, to do things like, have a badge showing whatever is needed.

Regardless a history of efforts can tell a LOT about what a person actually knows, even if there isn't that additional verification which am thinking will arrive in time. Is just so much information can gather quickly just looking over a history, which is very hard to hide. Which I think is great.

As information flows freely around the web will admit am gratified that my own strategy of picking places and building forward from there, has a benefit can describe. Like here, over a decade of information available with posts! That at least those in checking me can see quite a bit if they wish, which is a depth that takes time.


James Harris

My surprise on authority

Asking questions fascinates me, and can find am surprised at answers. Where recently wondered to myself, what is authority?

However, rest of it is, wanted what I call a functional answer, as before thought I knew what it was. But with a functional definition the pressure is different and the answer was more compact than I expected--even though knew functional answers usually are--and came to me more quickly than I expected.

I concluded that functionally authority relative to one entity is when some other entity has information needed.

Like with medical authority, a person can need the knowledge of a medical practitioner which in my country is usually a doctor, who has been thoroughly trained in the needed knowledge. That is so important, it is legally enforced that to claim medical knowledge needed by others a person has to have proof.

Find myself reaching for examples, as worked to understand. It just seems so short, and wondered how could include political or police authority, and realized those are based on knowledge needed as well. Like a lawyer must have extensive knowledge of the law, and a police officer must have the required knowledge to make a legal arrest, while a judge must have needed knowledge as well to adjudicate.

All have needed knowledge relative to a defendant who is under their authority.

Oh yeah, but what about political authority? Reality is, knowing how to convince people to elect you can get you places where people can question if you have the needed knowledge.

Functionally, at least in my country for most positions considered political, getting elected requires knowing how to get elected, which to me shows maybe found limits or maybe just don't want to think about much for this post.

Practically that functional approach helped me out immensely, as yes I have ideas, but realized had appealed to establishment authority, as I should in the past. When surprised at the response, like with my math ideas, concluded appropriately I should question my results, and reconsider their value.

Which is the short version, not talking about so much else emotional! Let's just say I wasn't exactly happy with certain things and expressed myself, but for a long time was focused on getting establishment authority to recognize certain things I'd found or found out. Now over two decades later for one thing, and well over a decade with several others, do like my process.

Often I'd simply dismiss. Which to me is a good idea if you think you have valuable ideas! Try to just dismiss and walk away if the establishment does not concur.

Reality is that humanity has learned much over thousands of years, and even in recent fields, dedicated efforts to learn over decades among a group of establishment experts is vastly more likely to be correct than the musings of one particular person, especially one who lacks that training!

Good news with correct and valuable information is that it does not care what we think of it. Like proof that someone committed a crime? Is not necessarily liked, especially not by that person.

However, what people pay attention to? Can make a HUGE difference as to whether or not proof is evaluated, whatever the area.

And the web simplified my life there in certain ways. Yeah have an evolved perspective, where it DOES help when have spent years trying to process attention which web enabled.

I could put information on the web, and check to see if drew attention, which is not proof in and of itself but can be indications of authority, which again functionally I now see as knowledge needed.

Web authority then draws on the power of the vast number of human connections that make up the web, and as the years have gone by have grown to appreciate how shifts how authority operates.

In our times, political authorities talk to constituencies through the web, which is neutral in and of itself, as some for good, and others for things I'd personally say are wrong. Even medical authority can find the web is important for distributing medical information. Where of course you need to have reputable sources.

And web authority is so much about the source for that information.

Reality is that much of web authority by my functional definition, is in connecting a person with needed knowledge that is correct. Cool.

Oh yeah, was asking myself some questions--now answered. Is my process, you know?

Writing a blog post focuses the mind certain ways, and making it public? Then I edit and refine, feeling the pressure of that attention, which for me?

Is usually global.


James Harris

Thoughts on web sense and authority

A concept have been pondering recently is a sense of the web, which makes sense to me to call web sense. And seems reasonable to me that web sense is your sense of audience for what you put public--present and future.

Where audience can be a fluid concept on the web. For instance I have routinely noted on my blogs including this one when a post I wrote years ago can suddenly gain LOTS more interest. Reality is that new people may come across this blog routinely and can find something written long ago is relevant to them.

And also I will push out links at times across other areas of the web, including social media if feel is relevant. Like recently did that with a post musing on how we know.

Having a sense of future audience does seem to apply a certain amount of pressure though, as is not as simple as not putting up something embarrassing. Especially if you put up a LOT of content across a lot of web things, which I like to do, as I like to write.

Where other thing still ponder is web authority, where found myself functionally defining authority on my blog Seriously Commercial which is supposed to be where I, yeah try to be commercial. And I simply start with authority relative to one entity is when some other entity has information needed. Then go on for about three pages--if you wish read entire post there.

On here I guess that should support my prior musing on web authority and now have an evolved perspective. I feel that eventually web authority will encompass all others and called it a meta authority.

And also is more than a year since decided I was a meta innovator, and feel more comfortable with that and feel it is efficient as a label. Where emphasize that meta just means self-reference, and is way shorter than saying something like, self-referential innovator. That meta may get used other ways besides self-reference is just one of those things. And the post I'm linking to which is my base post for describing myself as a meta innovator is dated May 29, 2016, so yeah recently passed one year anniversary.

These things are all related, as your web sense is necessary for your audience. And it matters to people with what authority you put up things, while often they research you through web authority, like when use web search.

And as a meta innovator I like to see the big picture of innovation wherever it interests me, and of course the web is one of the most active innovation zones imaginable.

So it helps me to keep up with my meta perspective, which I think explains this post, as ask myself things routinely, and brings me to the end of it.


James Harris

Brilliance of web authority

Readily admit was brought up under authoritarian systems, which always leaves me wondering what authority holds sway over me lately. And having escaped a puritanical religion, did a few years but not too many in the US Army leaving with an honorable discharge, and chased recognition from mainstream authorities in various fields, am now gratified with what I call web authority.

And thankfully I do NOT think that web authority is an authoritarian system. I think it can free people instead. Yet will still strike a somewhat cautionary tone with an easy example.

Like for this post wanted a cool example, which is just basic search which to me is STILL so unbelievably AMAZING and am a fan of a show. Here's a search to an episode I think is kind of scary, but cool--web search: stargate people disappear

As I can't know what happens when others do that search will note I get the episode I wanted, where will link to what I get here, and that boggles my mind.

If you don't get episode "Revisions" of Stargate Atlantis, then for whatever reason the web decided to show you something different, where who knows why. I will note I used Google to search, but you still may get something different.

But for me? That works so well with just about any television show, or movie, where, oh, so that episode is about a world where people are hooked into a web, and the computer systems starts doing terrible things to maintain the balance of their world which they think is a utopia, when it's not.

Our world though? We have no delusions about its utopic qualities.

What we do have are powerful systems that are very good at getting people the information they want, when they want it, where web search can seem mystical to me, even though I know it's not. It's based on very solid principles, is not mystical, and is so much better than what was before.

It also removes my interest in lots of other authority. It's like when the Wikipedia arrived, and old establishment went after the Wikipedia, only to discover the Wikipedia is the best encyclopedia on the planet, which was determined by rigorous testing. Best source for info? I just searched: wikipedia accuracy

And an article, yup, on the Wikipedia, where link to it here tells you all kinds of things about its accuracy, which you may or may not know as to how good it is. Including links to external sources if you really need that to be sure.

Web authority is driven by the interest of people all over the world.

I like web authority. With my own ideas it tells me when something I have interests others, without that meaning it is correct, but at least I know it's interesting to others, somehow, where the details? Do I really need to know the details?

I DO wonder. Don't lose sleep over it though.

Used to hang out at the public library a LOT, so have done my share of research for information there, and it was ok, for the time. What we have today though truly is as good as anything in science fiction that I like. It can feel at times like the web can read your mind.

Which I find comforting. To me? The web is like the best friend I never knew could exist. And now it does! But um, web? Please always just be my good friend, and never the take over the world and um, but I digress.

Public libraries are still great places to visit! Please support your local public library. Of course these days usually you can, yup, get on the web there, if needed. But lots of other reasons to go.

Web authority will I think be the final say eventually, as other types of authority of course are ON the web, so it is the meta authority as I get to use one of my favorite words. The web is not only a great authority on lots of things, it is even an authority on web authority itself.

Like with this post. You saw that coming, right? You ARE on the web here.


James Harris