Vasilis Kostakis is working on his thesis, “Laser Theory and Peer to Peer: Redefinition of the Society in the Information Age,” in public at a blog. Lots of big ideas there.

Nick Carr writes a long disagreement with the book, based on my statement that the track is the “natural unit” of music. (Nick does not comment on anything beyond that sentence on page 9.)

Nick is correct. Tracks are clearly not “natural.” The book overall is an argument against there being a natural units and a natural organization of them. I meant the “natural” to be lightly ironic in this case. And he is of course also right that there is value in how albums arrange tracks so that the whole is more than the parts. [Added a few hours later:] But, in the third order of order, we can get not only the Beatles’ way of arranging their White Album, we can also get George Martin’s remix, how Ringo wanted it played , the revelatory way some unknown kid in Akron mixes it up with the Beach Boys, and the original order minus that one song we can’t stand (AKA “Revolution #9”). The miscellaneous isn’t about there being no order. It is about the potential for many, many orders.

So, I don’t agree with the characterization of the argument of the book he derives from this one phrase. I’m disappointed that Nick found this sentence to be a “stopper.”

Here’s one way biological species can be messy. In a ring species, adjacent populations can interbreed, but not all can interbreed with all. In fact, as you walk around the ring, each population can interbreed, until you come back to the beginning where the last species can’t breed with the first. (Thanks to Udi Oron for the pointer.)

Since we’re all getting tired of hearing Wikipedia used as an example of this or that — although I’m sure you’ll find the discussion of Wikipedia in Everything Is Miscellaneous to be minty fresh! — here’s a reminder that before the estimable Wikipedia, we were making knowledge social using humbler forms.

Knowledge has always been social, even though our metaphysics has led us to say that knowledge is a type of belief, and thus is a mental state, and thus is something inside a head. If the belief is true and justified, then the mental state gets stamped with a big, official K, preferably in some gothic-teutonic font. If not, it gets marked with a red X and your soul loses 2 points (4 if it is an essay question). Something like that.

When Wikipedia works, however, (and I think it works remarkably well remarkably often), the knowledge it contains results from a social process. Expert opinion gets rendered expert-er and more neutral by being negotiated in public.

But forget Wikipedia for the moment. Think about the mailing lists you’ve been on for years. Some of them are just for fun, but others are our best source of information, knowledge and opinion about topics that matter to us. Over time, experts emerge on the list. Their posts are listened to, but also usefully challenged and extended. The mailing list as a whole is a better source than any of the individuals on it. Mailing lists embody social knowledge — knowledge that arises through conversation and that thus is not contained in any single head. Social knowledge is among, not in.

And not just at Wikipedia.

[Tags: knowledge epistemology wikipedia listserv]

Google has posted the video of my talk there.

The odd Page 99 site asks authors to post about what’s on page 99 of their  book. I have done so.

The weird thing is that the very same day I wrote the post, Shelley’s review of my book appeared, taking me to task for what I say on – wait for it -page 99.

Maybe things aren’t as miscellaneous as they seem. (Alternative explanation: We are not wired with a good sense of probability, so coincidences strike us as meaningful.)

Misc. Podcast interview: Arianna Huffington

The latest in my series of Everything Is Miscellaneous interviews, sponsored by the Harvard Berkman Center and Wired, has been posted. I talk with Arianna Huffington about whether the Huffington Post is what the news is going to look like as reporting itself enters the swirl of the miscellaneous. (Along the way I learn not to use the word “revenge” even in a light way with Ms. Huffington.) (Disclosure: I sometimes write for HuffingtonPost; I don’t get paid for it.) [Tags: arianna_huffington huffingtonpost podcast media newspaper politics revenge]

Rob Paterson has a terrific review and consideration, focusing on the book’s themes of power and meaning…which are indeed at the heart of the book. (Also, he writes, “I tried to put it down but had to get up and read it until I had finished,” which makes me inordinately happy.)

See you at a talk and book signing at Kepler’s Books, 1010 El Camino Real, in Menlo Park, CA tonight (Tuesday) at 7:30?

Here it is an iPod compatible download. (Try renaming it to .mp4 if your player thinks it can’t play it.)