Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id GAA08546 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Fri, 26 Apr 2002 06:29:09 +0100 From: "Lawrence DeBivort" <debivort@umd5.umd.edu> To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: RE: memetics-digest V1 #1023 Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 01:24:20 -0400 Message-ID: <NEBBKOADILIOKGDJLPMAOECBCPAA.debivort@umd5.umd.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700 In-Reply-To: <B8EE2DE3.17B%srdrew_1@hotmail.com> Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
Greetings, Steve,
If I follow the metaphor accurately, I think it is possible to open the box
without letting an out-of-control capability leap out and follow its own
head in spreading beyond. Thus, I think, tools may be available to those who
develop them for themselves, without the tools being replicated or
disseminated.
But this has an enormous downside: we don't get the progress we could had we
open technical discussions, nor do we see the tools disseminated to others
who might accomplish good with them.
I wrestle with these questions quite a bit, as it is one of the stated
objectives of my organization to develop and disseminate tools (meaning
management and cognitive tools) as widely as possible. I have a personal
position on this that I am maintaining for now, which I explain from time to
time on this list for what it is worth, but it provides no long-term
solution. Of course, people have wrestled with this issue throughout
history, I imagine. Generally, the stuff that works gets out. And then we
have a few counter-examples, that leave us wondering at what benefits to
humankind have been 'protected' only to be lost when their 'owners' died,
e.g. Tesla.
I would be very interested in your own ruminations on this.
Best regards,
Lawrence
> -----Original Message-----
> From: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk [mailto:fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk]On Behalf
> Of Steve Drew
> Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2002 5:18 PM
> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> Subject: RE: memetics-digest V1 #1023
>
>
> Hi Lawrence
>
> > Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 09:57:57 -0400
> > From: "Lawrence DeBivort" <debivort@umd5.umd.edu>
> > Subject: RE: memetics-digest V1 #1023
> >
> >> Steve Drew:
> >> I think [advertisers] have learned the 'cruder' techniques such as the
> > 'sex sells'
> >> example you mentioned. I don't think it is because they are
> that good, but
> >> that they stick to ones that have been useful in the past. The
> >> problem they
> >> face is that everyone's responses are different, and IMO they have not
> >> developed enough ideas on how to overcome this yet, but if
> they do then I
> >> agree that things could get rough.
> >
> >
> > And that is one of the reasons we should be wary of turning
> memetics into a
> > technology and releasing it publicly. I consider this list a
> public forum.
> >
> > Lawrence
>
> It is indeed. Unfortunately Pandora is still around, and so are the people
> who would open the box, including me and thee?
>
> Regards
> Steve
>
>
> ===============================================================
> This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
> Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
> For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
> see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
===============================================================
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Apr 26 2002 - 06:40:41 BST