Editors + Content Creators = Quality?

http://sparksheet.com/return-of-the-editor-why-human-filters-are-the-future-of-the-web/

This article is interesting and makes a good point. The same point that is being made in academic circles, that peer review and editorial selection is the only way to separate the wheat from the chaff.  Without peer review and examination by the community, it becomes increasingly difficult to stay relevant and in touch, let along maintain "accepted" standards of presentation and language.

The contrary argument that always gets trotted out is that this prevents "new" or radical ideas as they tend to be suppressed (overtly or covertly) by "established" ideas.  While I think this is a danger, its true in any system that contains "vested interests" or "assumptions".  Revolutionary change (great strides) is difficult for any system that is geared toward  evolutionary (many small steps) change.  This is more a factor of the mechanism of the system than the desire or intent of any one person within the system.

So what about algorithmic quality filters? Do they allow or reject revolutionary content?  My guess would be ... it depends! An algorithm is a reflection of the programer(s) who created it. This usually means that it carries all their assumptions and flaws.  More simply put, is the algorithm essentially a black list or white list model.  Algorithms that are smart enough to do semantic analysis are just not yet feasible on the large scale, but hopefully they will be making an entrance soon and go some way to solving this type of problem.

Hypertext literature inutero

http://entertainment.salon.com/2011/10/04/return_of_hypertext/singleton/

This is an interesting post on the problems with hypertext as a narrative form.  I don't think it holds many answers, but it does summaries some of the problems (loosely).  I don't think much has changed since I tried to teach people about it half a decade ago. Its still not clear what the form and rules are, if there are going to be genre conventions and what readers expectations will be/are.  So the fundamentals are still wildly in flux, even though there are existing works. 

I agree with the authors point that its a challenging and complex beast to create... not because its intrinsically hard but mainly because no one knows what it should look like.  Once we have conventions, it will be possible to either follow them or violate them, but everyone will know what they are....

Must get back to this one day....

Post book apocalyse

http://booktwo.org/notebook/the-new-value-of-text/

This is a good abstraction of the problems in the publishing industry.  (and in many transforming industries) The failure to understand their monopoly.  What value do you add to the product that you are selling.  How do you do something that no one else does?  What is the true value of that element and what is the actual recoverable value.... Book publishers are weighed down with dead tree artifacts, presses, staff, warehouses and distribution chains that they are either unwilling or unable to discard.  The things they are discarding are the important bits like editors and designers.... Doh!.

Personal printers made commercial printing irrelevant a long time ago.  Its really only been a question of quality that has allowed them to linger on.  Once you can print and bind a book on the desktop with one click of a mouse... they are toast.
Even if you can do it at a kiosk in the mall... it becomes an on-demand service rather than a specialist industry.  This will be the last gasp of physical publishing.  But the art of preparing the text for publication, designing the final polished product will still be a value step in the chain between author(s) and readers.  Adding context, keeping the text up to date and maintaining the contextual information's currency, relevance and history will all require people and systems.  Publishing.. minus paper, presses and trucks.  Distribution will still be a big job, advertising, selling etc... it will all still happen.  Legals, copyright, ownership etc... all still there.  Authors, editors and designers will still do exactly the same jobs... probably more.  There are multiple formats to deliver the book in, there are tradeoffs and decisions to be made. There are channels to publish into that have never existed before. 

A book is still unmatched by even a carefully curated website.  They are different.  A book promises completeness and polish. A snapshot of knowledge, story, whatever, that marks an identifiable waypoint in the flow of information and life.  We can compare and discuss the waypoint, we can refer to it. It has stability and finality.  Good or bad. It marks a tiny place in history around which all copies, abridgements, variations and edits will forever orbit. 

Serious Games Conference

http://www.vs-games.org/

Interesting looking mob. 

Secret art of the tutorial

http://www.victusspiritus.com/2011/07/05/the-secret-art-of-the-tutorial/

Wisdom for writing tutorials.

Behavior Research Methods

Journal to publish some of my methods papers in.

http://www.psychonomic.org/brmonline.html

http://www.springer.com/psychology/cognitive+psychology/journal/13428#