I like the topic of the article, however I would suggest that the output of mass collaboration is “emergent” (as in “you don’t really know what or how things will develop”) as opposed to “synergistic” or “additive” as suggested by the author.
In other words, Wikipedia is indeed a a mass collaboration effort, but it is a compendium of information rather than a single, well-defined, top-down masterwork. There are rules, and then something emerges.
Another example is scientific progress. All of the biologists in the world do not work on solving a single problem. Instead, they compete and contribute according to scientific disciplines by solving individual problems and their results become part of the collective progress in biology. There is no one “conductor” making this happen.
I could be that the solution to major societal problems will most likely come from this kind of mass collaboration. Set rules, incentivize engagement and then see emergent changes. But it’s just a thought.
In other words, Wikipedia is indeed a a mass collaboration effort, but it is a compendium of information rather than a single, well-defined, top-down masterwork. There are rules, and then something emerges.
Another example is scientific progress. All of the biologists in the world do not work on solving a single problem. Instead, they compete and contribute according to scientific disciplines by solving individual problems and their results become part of the collective progress in biology. There is no one “conductor” making this happen.
I could be that the solution to major societal problems will most likely come from this kind of mass collaboration. Set rules, incentivize engagement and then see emergent changes. But it’s just a thought.