The Internet & the
Future of Organized Knowledge: Part III of III Luciano
Floridi |
The Info-Structure --
The info-structure would consist of
centers making coordinated efforts to fulfill the following five
tasks:
Reprinted with permission from the electronic
journal
TidBITS, #283. Email
info@tidbits.com for more
information.
To comment on this title or this review, send mail to cm@umanitoba.ca.
Copyright © 1998 the Manitoba Library Association.
Reproduction for personal use is permitted only if this copyright notice
is maintained. Any other reproduction is prohibited without
permission.
Published by
TABLE OF CONTENTS FOR THIS ISSUE - JULY 28, 1995.
AUTHORS |
TITLES |
MEDIA REVIEWS |
BACK ISSUES |
SEARCH |
ORDER |
CMARCHIVE |
HOME [Note: we thank Professor Floridi mailto:floridi@vax.ox.ac.uk for kind permission to
reprint this material, which is a shortened version of a paper he gave at a
UNESCO Conference in Paris, March 14-17, 1995. Parts I & II were
published in the previous two issues of Canadian
Materials.]
Part Three: The Problems
(1) The Devaluation of The Book --
We have already entered the
stage where digital information is preferred over non-digital, not
because of its quality, but simply because it is available online.
However, the more resources that undergo the conversion, the less
serious this problem will become.
(2) The Devaluation of Information Processes --
The Internet
helps to satisfy an ever-growing demand for information. In this
process, the use value of information has increased steadily, in
parallel with the complexity of the system, but its exchange
value has been subject to a radical modification. Because of the
great and rapid availability of data, the Internet has caused a
devaluation of some intellectual enterprises -- such as
compilations, collections of images, bibliographical volumes and
so forth -- whose original high value depended mainly on the
correspondingly high degree of inaccessibility that afflicted
information in the book era.(3) Failure to Acknowledge New Scholarly Enterprise --
So far,
Academe has been slow in recognizing that new forms of scholarly
activity have appeared, like moderating a discussion list, keeping
an online bibliography constantly updated, or publishing a paper
in an electronic journal. The sooner such activities are properly
recognized and evaluated, the easier it will become for
individuals to dedicate more time and effort to the digital
encyclopedia, and the more the encyclopedia will improve.(4) Too Much Knowledge to Access --
A fundamental imbalance --
between the extraordinary breadth of the system and the limited
amount of knowledge that can be accessed by an individual mind at
any one time -- arises because the quantity of information
potentially available on Internet has increased beyond control,
whereas the technology whereby the network actually allows us to
retrieve our data has improved much more slowly. The result is
that we are once again far from being capable of taking full
advantage of the full extent of our digital encyclopedia.(5) Too Much Accessible Knowledge to Manage --
This is the
problem of "infoglut," as BYTE has called it. Throughout past
history there was always a shortage of data, which led to a
voracious attitude towards information. Today, we face the
opposite risk of being overwhelmed by an unrestrained, and
sometimes superfluous, profusion of data. No longer is "the more
the better." If knowledge is food for then mind, then for the
individual mind to survive in an intellectual environment where
exposure to the Human Encyclopedia is greater than ever before,
for the first time in the history of thought we desperately need
to learn how to balance our diet.(6) The Threat to Paper --
Some libraries are destroying their
card catalogues after having replaced them with OPACs (online
public access catalogs). This is as unacceptable as would have
been the practice of destroying medieval manuscripts after an
editio princeps was printed during the Renaissance. We need to
preserve the sources of information after the digitalization in
order to keep our memory alive. The development of a digital
encyclopedia should not represent a parricide.(7) Some Knowledge Exists Only Digitally --
Because for large
sectors of the new encyclopedia there will be no paper epiphany,
access to the network will have to be universally granted in order
to avoid the rise of a new technological elite.(8) The New Illiteracy --
Information Technology is the new
language of organized knowledge. Therefore elements of that
language must become part of the minimal literacy of any human
being, if free access to information is to remain a universal
right.
(9) The Internet as Rubbish Heap --
Because the Internet is a
free space where anybody can post anything, organized knowledge
could easily get corrupted, lost in a sea of junk data. In the
book age, the relation between writer and reader was and is still
clear and mediated by cultural and economic filters -- e.g., you
won't get published if what you say isn't somehow "true." For all
their faults, such filters do provide some positive selection. On
the Internet, the relation between producer and consumer of
information is direct, so nothing protects the latter from corrupt
information.(10) Decentralization Means Fragmentation --
By converting the
Encyclopedia into an electronic space, we risk transforming the
new body of knowledge into a disjointed monster, rather than an
efficient and flexible system. The Internet has developed in a
chaotic (if dynamic) way, and today suffers from a regrettable
lack of global organization, uniformity, and strategic planning.
While we entrust ever more vast regions of the Human Encyclopedia
to the global network, we are also leaving the Internet itself in
a thoroughly anarchic state. Efforts at coordination are left to
occasional initiatives by commendable individuals, or to important
volunteer organizations, but this is insufficient to guarantee
that in a few decades organized knowledge will not be lost in a
labyrinth of millions of virtual repositories, while energies and
funds have been wasted in overlapping projects.
I'm not advocating the creation of some international bureau for
the management of the Internet, a sort of digital Big Brother. Nor
have I any wish to see national organisms take control of our new
electronic frontier. Such projects, besides being impossible to
realize, would be contrary to fundamental rights of freedom of
communication, of thought, and of information. Far from it, I
believe in the complete liberty and refreshing anarchy of the
network.
The Manitoba Library Association
ISSN 1201-9364