Re: virus: Re:sociological change
Tue, 14 Jan 1997 11:58:11 -0600 (CST)

On Sun, 29 Dec 1996, Alex Williams wrote:


> > Of course certain things behave the way you expect them to and you can
> > create a model that explains a lot. But much of the memeverse doesn't.
> > Otherwise you would not be surprised by things that familiar people do--
> > you would not have a difference of opinion with a complete stranger. You
> > would not find a surprise friendship in someone you might not have
> > considered being friends with....
> I'm /not/ often surprised by things familliar people do, if I were
> they wouldn't be familliar. You needn't invoke flawed models to
> account for that, incomplete information with which to fill the model
> is an equal culprit in the thing. Much of the memeverse /depends/ on
> `good enough' modeling; you can interpret my writing `good enough' to
> model what I mean to impart, you can make a `good enough' model of
> your friend's weekend to know whether you should call him and ask him
> if he wants to see a movie, you can make a `good enough' model of your
> room in the dark to find the door with only a barked shin not a broken
> leg.
> Perfection is unnecessary and largely undesired.

Straighten out your definition of perfection!!!!

Imperfectly-defined "perfection" is DEFINITELY unnecessary and undesired.

/ Towards the conversion of data into information....
/ Kenneth Boyd