You are here
Announcements
Recent blog posts
- Male Sex Trade Worker
- Communities resisting UK company's open pit coal mine
- THE ANARCHIC PLANET
- The Future Is Anarchy
- The Implosion Of Capitalism And The Nation-State
- Anarchy as the true reality
- Globalization of Anarchism (Anti-Capital)
- Making Music as Social Action: The Non-Profit Paradigm
- May the year 2007 be the beginning of the end of capitalism?
- The Future is Ours Anarchic
Other New Links
December 6, 2002 - 11:04am -- hydrarchist
"Computer-Mediated Communication
and Group Decision Making: A Meta-Analysis"
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=MImg&_imagekey=B6WP2-4575RSG-9-...
di=6978&_orig=browse&_coverDate=01%2F31%2F2002&_sk=999129998&wchp=dGLbVtb-lS
zBk&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_userid=10&md5=be97a96f5c2f6b5a4954113a4c4b3
e72&ie=f.pdf
http://www.noisebetweenstations.com/personal/weblogs/tinderbox/thekitch/...
http://levin.blogspot.com/2002_10_01_levin_archive.html#85573287
(found via david weinberger's blog)
Hubert Dreyfus has been writing a lot of the theoretical underpinnings of the subject since the 1970's in AI criticism, from the point of view of phenomenological philosophy.
From the perspective of social software: since human experts don't make decisions like expert systems theoretically (Dreyfus) or practically (the linked book), what kind of software would be helpful for a *group* of experts making a decision, based on expert intuition rather than rational decision methods? This question seems to be rather unexplored.
For example, what happens if two intuitions conflict? One would think that falling back to rational decision methods is the only alternative then. But if you think of e.g. a football team as a group of experts making instantaneous decisions, there is clearly a case for "group intuition" and software for supporting it.
Petri
"Computer-Mediated Communication and Group Decision Making: A Meta-Analysis"
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=MImg&_imagekey=B6WP2-4575RSG-9-... di=6978&_orig=browse&_coverDate=01%2F31%2F2002&_sk=999129998&wchp=dGLbVtb-lS zBk&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_userid=10&md5=be97a96f5c2f6b5a4954113a4c4b3 e72&ie=f.pdf
http://www.noisebetweenstations.com/personal/weblogs/tinderbox/thekitch/...
http://levin.blogspot.com/2002_10_01_levin_archive.html#85573287 (found via david weinberger's blog)
Hubert Dreyfus has been writing a lot of the theoretical underpinnings of the subject since the 1970's in AI criticism, from the point of view of phenomenological philosophy.
From the perspective of social software: since human experts don't make decisions like expert systems theoretically (Dreyfus) or practically (the linked book), what kind of software would be helpful for a *group* of experts making a decision, based on expert intuition rather than rational decision methods? This question seems to be rather unexplored.
For example, what happens if two intuitions conflict? One would think that falling back to rational decision methods is the only alternative then. But if you think of e.g. a football team as a group of experts making instantaneous decisions, there is clearly a case for "group intuition" and software for supporting it.
Petri