Harris is well intentioned, perhaps, but those principles are non sequiturs. Preferential attachment creates winner-takes-all outcomes. aka Power law distribut

Harris is well intentioned, perhaps, but those principles are non sequiturs. Preferential attachment creates winner-takes-all outcomes. aka Power law distribution of attention. It's something like a law of nature. The stuff Harris lists are second order effects, at best. Twitter and others did two things: First, they reduced transaction costs. Discovery, foraging, communication. All the costs fell thru the floor. Every one, including me, thought this was a great idea, and expected great outcomes. Not until Clay Shirky do I even recall a concern or criticism about this. Second, recommenders accelerated winner-takes-all. Given the high stakes and shortened shelf lifes, gaming the system became all out war. @jack wrote: > centralizing discovery and identity into corporations really damaged the internet. The only part right here is forfeiting a core pillar of civil society -- authenicity (identity) -- to a paper clip maximizing corporation that has no regard for or responsibility to that society. We let the fox guard the hen house.