(3)
The Singularity is in Near Jeopardy.
If nothing else this book has taught me that I don't necessarily have to agree with a book in order for it to be qualified as a "good book." In one sitting, I got through nearly 100 pages. So it only took a few days to exhaust the rest of it. The ideas are interesting and maybe even undeniable. We are indeed entering the era where massification means something completely different than what it once did. Users and Consumers -- in mass -- are literally taking the helm of ideation, creation and in some cases distribution. People I know who bought and read this book are now advocating that novelists, screenwriters, filmmakers etc. make their stories "open" for re-writing by the connected public. Those among my friends who fully support and participate in the notion of co-creation admit that it is a way to compensate for a lack of talent (writing a book and editing/tweaking what has already been written are two totally different things). 10 or 100 or 1000 moderately talented people might just equal 1 genius.
Of course, my other friends who I see as being exceptionally talented will have no part in this. And I can't blame them. They've already experienced an excess of moderately talented people decimating their work -- in the corporate board room. The singular vision vanishes, and not always for the better, when there are too many hacks hacking away at a defenseless idea.
Interestingly, the authors propose that corporations take that same process (which already exists in the boardroom) and open it up to an even larger population. This is a good formula for making something popular, I suppose. It also guarantees loyalty since people will have a sense of ownership of something they had a hand in creating. But whether this formula will result in true innovation is something this book responds with an affirming "yes", but leaves me suspicious of the response. The most convincing examples were in the areas of science and technology, where we do tend to find scattered geniuses all over the world. But the creative examples that were presented weren't quite convincing. Especially the brief anecdote of the movie "Snakes on a Plane" which had tremendous buzz that fizzled out after opening weekend sales. The movie, despite the input from the masses, ended up being weak. The novelty of the Wiki-Culture, as far as I can see, is popularity through participation. I support that. I just hope co-creatorship doesn't wipe out the platform of those singular women and men visionaries who can do fine all on their own.
(4)
Pretty Good, But Has Limitations
As I gleaned it, the central thesis of this book is that information technology is increasingly enabling interaction and collaboration of people around the world in new ways, thus providing both a quantitative intensification and qualitative leap in globalization. This will surely be a force for change in the future. From a positive standpoint, this change may include increases in many good things, such as participation of people who would otherwise be left out, knowledge growth, creativity and innovation, productivity and cost-effectiveness, quality of products and services (including closer tailoring to consumer needs and wants), humanitarian contributions, etc.
All of this is pretty self-evident to anyone who spends a significant amount of time on the web, so I don't have a problem with the central thesis. But I do think the book suffers from some problems:
1. There's a great deal of repetition in the book. Too much time is also spent on the many case studies, yet none of them is probed in truly penetrating depth. This makes the book too long, yet also often somewhat superficial.
2. The approach is highly technocratic, as though we all now (or will soon) live in a pure cyberworld. The result is that human nature, values, goals, etc. are downplayed to the extent that book's analysis is very incomplete. And even the implications of our living in a physical world are excessively downplayed.
3. Tying into the above point, the picture painted by the authors may turn out to be too utopian. Yes, IT-enabled human networking may be a powerful force for good, but it also has the potential to create profound instability for individuals, families, and societies, not to mention dangerously aiding the efforts of "bad guys."
4. More generally, the authors issue forecasts as though they have a crystal ball. If they had more humility, they would recognize that forecasting is notoriously difficult, and they would openly acknowledge uncertainties and risks (they need to read The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable). One view is that human existence on this planet is a grand experiment, with no one able to know for sure how it will turn out. If so, factors like IT-enabled networking only add to that uncertainty and risk.
5. The book emphasizes business applications, especially related to larger businesses, so I think the scope is somewhat narrow. This reduces the book's appeal for the general reader.
Despite these criticisms, the book is surely onto something important, and is easy to read, so I do recommend it. It should at least stimulate the reader's imagination and highlight the need to prepare for change. Just keep in mind the book's limitations and take the authors' pronouncements with a grain of salt.
I also recommend Infotopia: How Many Minds Produce Knowledge, which covers similar subject matter, has greater scholarly rigor, and is more concise.
