Wednesday, September 16, 2009

On the "New Economy" of Quality Information

We run the risk of becoming too intellectualized, ie. Structuralism versus Post-Structuralism. I fear we will repress our innovation to disregard concepts that have abstract meaning, and look to empty materialism and “false nouns” to fill the void.

Business will inherently be linked to the evolution of language. We need to make knowledge accessible, not insulated from meaning. There are decisions that can not be decomposed into “true/false” / “on/off” / “0/1″, but we as language users will relate concepts as our own mind translates the symbiotic cultural conventions and re-write previously held tradition.

I think we need to collaborate in small multi-disciplinary teams, set definite function requirements, and iteratively create “utterances” that flatten a concept in context of the current development cycle. Fix and Fail, Fix and Fail. Waste is a byproduct of innovation, but innovation applied can be leveraged to provide future value, not as a market insight to borrow against, but as an obvious evolution of a knowledge area. Quality will tell the story of human evolution. Quality of Life and Quality of Information are inextricable.

The more organization and efficiency a workplace assumes, the more practices will be related to concepts of Communism and Fascism. They represent extreme ideologies. Culture is a balance, humanity is a balance, thought is balance. It only takes a few pages of Nicholas Nassim Taleb to realize we are arrogant assumptuous animals through ignorance and cognitive dissonance will turn foreign concepts into pariah.

Godwin’s law will precipitate Benford’s law of controversy and we will circuitously improve concepts by unconsciously popularizing then unpopularizing a subject. The subject remains benefited, but the poet is lost in translation.

(Adapted from a comment @

Ryan Gensel

No comments: