It shows the dynamics of producing in groups versus individuals. Who said the future was easy? Let’s see if I can clear it up in a next post or so..
At least not when the crowd is acting as a single entity. Clearly there IS wisdom in the many as long as you don’t “poison” the crowd by forcing them to agree (voting doesn’t mean agreeing). According to Surowiecki, even just sharing too much of your own specialized knowledge with others in the group is enough to taint the wisdom and dumb-down the group.
It’s the sharp edges, gaps, and differences in individual knowledge that make the wisdom of crowds work, yet the trendy (and misinterpreted) vision of Web 2.0 is just the opposite–get us all collborating and communicating and conversing all together as one big happy collborating, communicating, conversing thing until our individual differences become superficial.