A roundup of some of the more thought-provoking articles from the week:
— x —
Boaty McBoatface and the False Promise of Democracy – by Uri Friedman, for The Atlantic
For the record: Boaty McBoatface is a brilliant name.
The UK Coast Guard decided to try out this thing called “social engagement” by opening up the naming of its new vessel to the community at large. It would let the public nominate and vote on potential names. What could go wrong?
Well, what could go wrong is that the Science Minister didn’t like the winner. Boaty McBoatface won by a huge margin, as it should have. But that entry has been disqualified. Why? Because the name is not “serious enough”.
The US Republican Party should take note: apparently you don’t have to abide by the rules of democracy if the people’s choice is not “serious enough”. Just sayin’.
“What happened to disapproving of what you name your boat, but defending to the death your right to name it? Is democracy a lie?”
A good article, which points out that the futility of democracy does not end with a ship.
“By voting, you can play some role in electing your member of Congress. But you have far less control over which policies that member supports once in office, let alone which policies the government as a whole pursues. Similarly, you can cast a ballot for Boaty McBoatface and help shoot the name to the top of an online poll. But you’re pretty powerless when it comes to what the science minister does with that information.”
— x —
— x —
Silicon Valley’s unicorn fantasy is collapsing in on itself – by Alison Griswald for Quartz
I include an article about an article, which I normally don’t like to do, but in this case you’ll thank me – the original article, by tech investor Bill Gurley, is reaaaaally long. The Quartz summary is more readable, in my attention-deficit opinion, and highlights the scarily relevant points.
It goes a bit beyond the now-usual “the bubble is bursting” commentary to talk about how Silicon Valley hubris is bringing the roof down on their own heads. On the one hand, it’s a pity, as so many young dreams will be washed away. On the other hand, you would think we’d learn from past mistakes, no? According to Bill, the four main factors in the VCs’ and founders’ own way are:
– emotional biases (the overwhelming desire to be a paper billionaire),
– greedy VCs with more ambition than ethics (who get unrealistic guarantees in the contract, which deters further funding),
– inscrutable financials (greater transparency in the numbers would lead to better decisions and less blind hype) and
– too much money looking for a high return.
“The pressures of lofty paper valuations, massive burn rates (and the subsequent need for more cash), and unprecedented low levels of IPOs and M&A, have created a complex and unique circumstance which many Unicorn CEOs and investors are ill-prepared to navigate.”
— x —
I love this floor:
Made with poured resin, by Peter Zimmerman. Via Designboom.
— x —
What books can learn from the Web / What the Web can learn from books – by Hugh McGuire, via Medium
Here we have an interesting look at the difference between books and the web. “Boundedness” on the one hand. “Unboundedness” on the other. Is there a way to bring them together?
The Web is the most efficient technology we have for creating and distributing information …
And if …
The web is the most efficient technology for organizing connections between bits of information …
And if …
The Web is an open platform on which we can build new tools and services …
And, further, if …
Books represent the (arguably) the most important single nodes of information from human minds …
Why doesn’t the content inside of books live on the Open Web — where it can more easily be found, shared, read, and built upon?”
We have unlimited information on the Internet, which allows us to build connections, to adapt and to innovate. A book’s reassuring limitations concentrate our attention but at the same time block the creativity of immediate interaction. Online books, without the physical heft, offer the same restrictions.
“So we moved from paper books to digital books, but rather than embracing digital fully, we instead built a system that tries to mimic the limitations of paper. In fact the ebook system we have built in many ways imposed new restrictions: on ownership (since you don’t own your ebooks, you license them from wherever you bought them), and use (you can’t easily lend your ebooks, or give them away; you might be able to highlight and take notes on your books — but there isn’t anything useful we can do with those notes).”
So is there a way that books can retain their advantages, set in the beginning of printing-press time, while joining the connectivity revolution?
“Books can learn from the web how to be bounded and unbounded at once: to keep the circumscribed, portable integrity of discrete content; but to open that content to the platform of the Web. To open the reading experience to being built upon… But I think there is power in the notion of a book, its thingness, and the Web can perhaps learn how to encapsulate, in the way a book does, a discrete thing, a bounded set of ideas.”
— x —
A brief roundup (you’re probably grateful, right?), but it’s been a crazily busy week. Glad it’s Friday. You too, I hope!