DISQUS

fredwilson One person's gossip is another person's news

mastermark Interesting logic. You think learning and value can only be products of rules, discipline and authority? And we're engaging in this discussion here, so that... separates us.

I'm not in awe of the flood, Amanda, as you well know. But I don't think it's particularly worrying, either.

Mark 'Rizzn' Hopkins Amanda, perhaps if you read the responses, you might find things you agreed with or found interesting. I might be wrong here, since I don't have a camera trained on you, but from your responses, you don't really appear to be responding to anything in particular except restating your opinion with various barbs meant to insult the very premises of not just folks' positions in writing, but positions in life.

The only thing intending to cause separation here is you. Unfortunately (for you, I guess), you're failing, as every bit of commentary and back and forth serves to create more loyalty as well as attention and community. There's a conversation happening, and even you are interested in seeing how it turns out.

You keep coming back and contributing. That's the definition of bringing people together. You're being brought back to this community in an attempt to engage the rest of us (albeit in a somewhat hostile manner).

fredwilson why does something have to be physical and tangible to have value?

Mark 'Rizzn' Hopkins To say that the casino doesn't make anything valuable is in itself shortsighted, Amanda. It makes entertainment, which by looking at the US economy, is one of the most important chunks of the whole mess. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but aren't you in Marketing and Communications? Point to me what hard and concrete thing you create of value to your customers. Can you hold it in your hand? Is it real? Does that make it less valuable? No.

Money, as in currency, is worthless. Why do you think Bill Gates spent the first half of his life amassing his wealth and pledged to spend the second half giving it away? Because after a certain point, unless you're gold plating your commodes, you just can't spend it all in a way that adds value. Given he has a conscience (contrary to my Linux-using friends' popularly held beliefs), he decided that the best way to improve his quality of living would be to improve the world through charitable giving.

Speaking more directly to your criticisms of the Web 2.0's efforts to 'deprofessionalize business,' it makes the world more of a meritocracy. You put in the work and you have the ability, you get ahead - the market deems you more valuable. If you sit on your duff and your high-falutin' degree and collect a check, you get left behind.

Moreover, it de-centralizes business. In terms of efficiency of the organization, smaller focused companies rule the day. You don't need a team of thousands to put something in the hands of every man woman and child anymore. You can simply assemble a team of two, five, or ten and create something valuable enough that it will sustain itself as a business and the proprietors of that business in perpetuity. The interactive nature of virtual goods and service creation means that what you invent doesn't always mean what ends up in the hands of the consumer - and that's fine, because the engagement is the loyalty is the product is the value.

In short, the de-centralization,removal of hierarchy, and dis-incentives to elitism serves to broaden each of our slices of the pie by use of the free market without implementation of socialist policies of punishing achievement and rewarding slack. It functions philosophically on the same tenants that built the Internet itself and has served to make it the powerhouse it is.

gregorylent this should be a separate, and deep, conversation ... values win in the end because they are based on the way nature works, and the way consciousness works ... when foolishness prevails, suffering grows ... in india it is called dharma, and with that concept it is easy to see the ridiculousness of much of modern american life ..... economists might say it is not sustainable, and that is the least of it

zburt if you wanted your questions answered, you would write a legible post.

top executives no longer dictate value. unless you deem them to all have exquisite taste..

Amanda Chapel Now how 'bout answering my questions.

fredwilson Amanda

Who are you? Are you a real person?

dick costolo I don't really get the line "as the web2 evangelists work hard to de-professionalize business....". What we are seeing is the removal or reduction of friction from value chains. That doesn't reduce value, that facilitates the creation of value. You can say this de-formalizes value chains, but who cares, because why would this lead, ipso facto, to the production of crap? Ebay removed the friction of geography in the economy of used goods. That created enormous new value. Who cares if ebay "de-professionalized the sale of physical goods and de-formalized the value chain". Everybody's comments here are the result of the reduction of friction of being a 'publisher'. Your very comments here contribute to the thesis that participatory content CAN be more valuable than high friction, high-cost, broadcast content. There is NO QUESTION that participatism increases the ratio of noise to signal; however, it also increases the likelihood that important content will see the light of day, and there will be enormous value created by the companies that understand how to separate the wheat from the chaff.

Finally, since there's no law that say Paramount pictures has to let me edit scene 4 in all their summer movies, the market will decide what percent of the market professional and formally produced content will have over more socially produced content. So, what's the trouble?

mathewi Thanks, Amanda -- or whatever your name is. Not exactly sure what your
point is, but I appreciate the concern nonetheless.