Mendez post
collective intelligence seems to take a logic linear approach that does not deviate from normaative appraoches to how intelligence and how power are used in the past and what they might be in the future. Levy does make reasonable deductions. Rozensweig's arguments in favor of open source history as garnered my attention. I have always marveled. at Wikipedia. And I have heard a talk from one of it founders (Jimmy Wales) of Wikidepia on TED Talks. Without a doubt, there are "challenges of expressing individuality" When is something truly individual. (I suppose if one is located away in the mountains with NO HUMAN CONTACT). I suppose in the context of collective spaces as the web, individuality is a relative term. It truly depends on what context one is writing (or speaking) in.
White's arguments about "how online spaces create subjects" is a huge topic. Where to begin. I suppose any subject matter has subjectivity. In other words, creation of subject is an "always" topic. It is a topic that if one chooses to see it will be there; and if one does not wish to study it, it is not there.
Have many questions. One of the things is what's what.
As we tackle today's posting: I found these two you-tube videos. What I found interesting is how one video is short to the point in representing what Digital Humanities is represented. The other a lecture from Northwestern University talks scholarly about Digital Humanities.
