picture from roy ascott’s facebook page

the 2.0 and widely distributed is, for me at least, a sign that it’s meant to be connected to the web 2.0 ideas.

BUT: taking the whole thing conceptually from the distributed authorship of version 1.0 to level 2.0 would require a bit more than what we’re actually planning, in my opinion. for example, distributed authorship would require that one can correct the parts of the other contributors, which might truly be dangerous (wikipedia being an example that works at times, but in the end seems to be dominated by those people who have the time to un-correct their entries or have enough influence in the community) , but could be used to add a third dimension to the text: not only would the text be on the screen/sheet in 2D, but have a temporal evolution that affects the text as a whole instead of just adding to the end as it is now. the folding would happen in the fourth dimension …

of course, that would require much more effort, so maybe our remediation is the right thing to do …

comments and thoughts appreciated.

Advertisements