Stigmergy is a class of behaviour in which collective activity is coordinated through the individuals’ response to and modification of their local environment—one agent’s modification becomes another’s cue .

Jan 2005 Map of the Internet
Originally uploaded by matthewjetthall

CONCLUSION (V2.0)

So, I have discovered a word (stigmergy) that has helped me find a bunch of research into the similarities between the experiences I have had on the ‘Read/Write Web’ and other interesting phenomena – ant behaviour, swarm intelligence, neural networks, cell dynamics, post scarcity economics and self organization. Response to and organization of the environment is key to the concept of stigmergy – being able to modify (write to) the internet is the new big deal underpinning ‘Web2.0’.

The tracks we leave on the internet with our seemingly random acts of blogging, RSS subscription, podcasting, flickr uploads, twitter tweets etc are remarkably similar to the pheromone trails laid down by wandering ants, the tracks in wild grass that grew into pathways and eventually roadways or the staggering array of neural connections in our brains that strengthen, weaken, form and decay over time.

By examining conditions for ephemeralization we can see friction reduce toward ‘tipping points’ or inversions that we can only understand by adopting radically different thought patterns or frameworks of understanding. For example the impact of the open source movement on software development, the post scarcity abundance of online media distribution and the approaching digital education revolution (and I don’t mean Aussie politicians handing out $ for laptops).

Fang – Mike Seyfang

technorati tags:seyfang, mikeseyfang

Stigmergy is a class of behaviour in which collective activity is coordinated through the individuals’ response to and modification of their local environment—one agent’s modification becomes another’s cue .

Just over three years ago I decided to leave a very comfortable 25year career in ICT to embark on an experiment in self directed learning, toward the new frontiers of biotech, nanotech and materials science. Next week, I hope to start work in a significant new role that promises to open the door to all three. The only visible navigation point on my compass has been the phrase uttered by my good buddy Daniel McPherson early in 2005 ‘You need to understand podcasts, which are related to blogs via RSS – you will know when you know Obi-wan’.

Maybe I’m being over nostalgic because this time of year is the anniversary of my nasty accident, the start of my new ‘career’(s), that pesky daylight savings issue Daniel and I pioneered some research into in our days at Microsoft. or.. Maybe I’ve just found a label (thanks Gerry) for the final piece of the puzzle that helps me understand the strong feelings of ‘intuition’ encountered while meandering around the read/write web with my podcasts, blogs, tweets and other goodies from the ‘Web2.0’ lexicon.

See if you can see any patterns in this bunch of phrases:

[Random snippets taken deliberately out of context from a bunch of papers found via scientificcommons.org – in an attempt to create an arial perspective]
Special mention – this paper

• network effects, abundance …
• stigmergy, ephemeralization
• in ephemeralization things that used to be scarce become abundant
• agents, artefacts, environment/medium, shared activity
• hebbian reinforcement
• apoptosis or cell suicide
• foraging theory (there’s some lovely filth down here)
• swarm-intelligent robotics, biological inspirations of swarm intelligence
• This global connectivity increases the interactions between agents
• The Internet is a near ideal medium for stigmergic interaction
• Self organization – the coordinated movements in a school of fish, chevron-shaped flight formation of geese to cohesive movements in aggregation of slime mould
• no direct communication between individuals – we `communicate’ indirectly, via the environment (twitter)
• Ant teamwork suggests models for computing faster and organizing better
• real time visualisations of mass collaborative activities
• cooperative foraging through mass recruitment

Need to tidy up the ideas in this CONCLUSION.
To me, being able to (leave tracks) ‘write’ on the (medium) internet with almost zero friction is the most profound piece of the ‘platform’. It’s like we are all writing tiny bits of the world’s knowledge and information on scraps of paper and throwing them on the floor – the messier the better – like a haystack. The connections I make with other people via RSS is equivalent to the synaptic networks in my (our Global?) brain – making millions of quirky magnets that pull ‘needles’ from the haystack (of tiny pieces of paper).

CONCLUSION (V2.0)

So, I have discovered a word (stigmergy) that has helped me find a bunch of research into the similarities between the experiences I have had on the ‘Read/Write Web’ and other interesting phenomena – ant behaviour, swarm intelligence, neural networks, cell dynamics, post scarcity economics and self organization. Response to and organization of the environment is key to the concept of stigmergy – being able to modify (write to) the internet is the new big deal underpinning ‘Web2.0’.

The tracks we leave on the internet with our seemingly random acts of blogging, RSS subscription, podcasting, flickr uploads, twitter tweets etc are remarkably similar to the pheromone trails laid down by wandering ants, the tracks in wild grass that grew into pathways and eventually roadways or the staggering array of neural connections in our brains that strengthen, weaken, form and decay over time.

By examining conditions for ephemeralization we can see friction reduce toward ‘tipping points’ or inversions that we can only understand by adopting radically different thought patterns or frameworks of understanding. For example the impact of the open source movement on software development, the post scarcity abundance of online media distribution and the approaching digital education revolution (and I don’t mean Aussie politicians handing out $ for laptops).

Fang – Mike Seyfang

I want to see what new types of wealth can be created by trans-disciplinary discourse (co-operation) as described by Rheingold

Having recently heard Howard Rheingold’s talk on co-operation for the second time, I picked up on something I missed first time around. The phrase ‘a little more co-operation’ has been bouncing round my brain as I think about the place of the *Read/Write Web in the world of scientific research.

As an active participant on the Read/Write Web, I can see great potential for improving the way scientific research will evolve to address some really big issues. It seems clear to me that evolution is speeding up and will continue to do so, with or without my help. The Read/Write Web is providing us with some early model tools of co-operation, I intend to become skilled in their use and to apply those skills in some emerging field of research (hopefully nanotech, biotech or materials science). Rheingold does an excellent job of articulating stuff I have experienced in that talk – using anthropological instruments such as the prisoner’s dillema and the tragedy of the commons as a guide. He goes on to describe early attempts at creating new wealth through co-operation from industry and philanthropy.

I think that I am figuring out a place to start

I think ‘a little more co-operation’ is key to figuring out a way forward in the near term. I used to think that if I could only help a researcher to publish small pieces of work frequently to the Read/Write Web (I call this ‘researching out loud’) that things would improve rapidly in line with my own experience of innovation over the past few years. Looking at the diagram below, one might think of moving the ‘slider‘ (think of a sliding volume control on an amplifier) just slightly to the right (in favour of more co-operation).

However, words like patent, trademark and litigation soon appear in conversation, pouring cold water on any enthusiasm. In order to begin innovating using the potential of the Read/Write Web for scientific research, we need to separate out pure research from the commercialisation of product. This separation allows us to hold a more healthy tension between ‘litigation and co-operation’. It would be very smart to be an early adopter when it comes to increasing co-operation in areas of pure research, carefully disentangling the creative types from a mess of secrecy and unhealthy competition. When it comes to the practical aspects of bringing a commerical product to market competition is the name of the game and only the fittest will (and should) survive.

My current plan is to get involved with areas of research projects that are able to be made very public that can be discussed freely and find ways to build networks of interested parties through simple tools like weblogs and podcasts in the first instance. That is to facilitate new media activities in the top right quadrant of the diagram above.

Wish me luck!

Seyfang – ‘A little less litigation, a little more co-operation please’

*Read/Write Web:
The term I will use when referring to ‘Web2.0, New Media, Digital Literacies, Social Networking etc.’ that is to say anything from blogs and podcasts -> MySpace and YouTube -> ReMix culture.

Fang – Mike Seyfang

technorati tags:seyfang, mikeseyfang