Join our brains to create a strategy or a re-evolution based on the fair, global and collaborative contribution of individuals. Not a democracy from the bottom, but a common democracy.
But what is collective intelligence? Can it be actually a solution?
L’Intelligence collective. Pour une anthropologie du cyberespace, soin 1994. Pierre Levy titled his book about the collective intelligence. He described a future, now present, in which knowledge was fed and shared with the speed and accessibility of the computer networks. In the collective intelligence was also theorized a renewal of the social tie, based on sharing knowledge.
The Internet thought has hence developed in a collective way and with the digital technologies development, we were able to organize more or less good individual knowledge in a collective structure. Two distant people can know things complimentary, thanks to technology we can share our knowledge and cooperate.
This is the real revolution happened with Internet.
Technology can make a large amount of intelligence can choose to share and collaborate working in unison. There are many examples of collective intelligence, and if we had to propose a showreel to the world, we will sure have works of which be proud.
First of all the Linux operating system, born in 1991 and available for free, now recognized as a reliable and powerful operating system that runs on a quarter of the world's servers. This open source operating system has been developed thanks to the volunteer work of many programmers around the world, organized across the network in real virtual teams (Linux User Groups) which, using the social networking tools, have shared efforts to develop the operating system features.
In a second slide Arduino, the microprocessor for sale online created by Massimo Banzi, which is the Italian version of open source hardware: you can use it, modify and sell it publishing on the net the electronic diagrams, the research and development activities and other product specifications. In the best tradition of the Creative Commons, the only limit is that all derivative developments must carry compulsorily, if published on the web, the brand Arduino and use the same Creative Commons license used for the original software.
Another example is Wikipedia, the most famous free use encyclopedia accessible from the Web, developed by a multitude of volunteers, using a software called wiki (in Hawaiian, "fast") to write the articles in cooperation.
The number of participants is the key variable in order to obtain good results: a sufficiently high number ensures a high level of attention that preserves from errors, omissions, acts of vandalism or sabotage. Unfortunately recently Wikipedia, as an example for our showreel, hasn’t so much shown, attracting to itself discordant opinions and criticism towards work.
But we know that in a free environment many things can go wrong, the Wikipedia potential is guaranteed by a mechanism of sharing and consensus (or rather on a wide sharing by users, it’s exactly collective intelligence) which should assure on average a good final product. It is indicative the fact that some knowledge and information mistakes are sometimes emphasized in our Country (Italy). A prime example is our intention to incite mass of slogans in the more traditional channels, talking about Italian talents who go abroad, about the positive thought that Italy has an intrinsic talent and an incredible human potential (it’s true) having a free information, but if you look up the word "Funambol" in Italy, compared to other Wikpedia in the world, you will find out very different information.
Funambol is a company created by a very talented Italian named Fabrizio Capobianco, whom when he was 23 he understood that a young man who spoke about Internet had no future, he decided to go to the United States to establish his start-up. Funambol brought the Cloud concept in the U.S.A. long before the genius of Steve Jobs.
How is it possible that in the Italian Wikipedia page the Funambol entry is: "Perhaps you are looking for funamboli (tightrope walkers)?" and in the French version one instead: "Funambol est une entreprise américaine qui acquiert des revenus grâce à son modèle d'entreprise (business model) qui repose sur une licence double qui comprend une version commerciale du logiciel du même nom et une version Open-source du logiciel de synchronisation mobile basé sur le cœur du projet Funambol."
And even in the English version of Wikipedia there's an author page:
Fabrizio Capobianco (born December 2, 1970) is an Italian serial entrepreneur based in Silicon Valley. He is the founder and CEO of the sports social network TOK.tv and he also serves as President and Chairman of Funambol, a white-label “personal cloud” provider.
The fault lies is by Wikipedia or with the fact that volunteers are running out?
Collective intelligence is in this case the clear and mathematical number 1:10:89, or rather on the basis of 100 people, 1 "creates content", 10 interact and 89 people simply read what others have created; in the case instead of the online communities, is still living the numerical axiom highlighted by Nielsen 90-9-1 rule: every 100 visitors, 90 simply read, 9 rarely take part and just 1 contributes.
Collective intelligence implies a knowledge democratization outside of traditional hierarchical structures, typical of a more traditional and academic organization of knowledge and especially the collective intelligence doesn’t know crisis of attention and can deploy its potential only when individuals may have an efficient and inexpensive way to coordinate each others.
The sharing of knowledge and tools can bring a big generational change in mentality towards the development of some kind of collective intelligence linked to the system of flexible Creative Commons rights. The Creative Commons can be used freely and for free, it’s a simple and clear way to signal that the reproduction, the distribution and the circulation of the own work is explicitly allowed. The Creative Commons aims to fix a more flexible licenses spectrum in compliance with the developers and with the final users.
Surely it’s one of the attempts upon which we must invest, the future doesn’t look bright, I would like to say that I'm an idealist and not a scaremonger, but it’s inevitable not to notice the slow extinction which we are causing to ourselves. We need a change in philosophy and in approaching to problems and to others.
Forming a company that contains individuals, that defines who we are and that is open to discussion and mutual enrichment. Our showreel will then be primarily useful and socially pro-active. As a solution we can still point to something easier.