First, the Google smarter/dumber debate raises really great questions about the nature of what constitutes knowledge, and how we assess such a thing. Google, Wikipedia, etc. are really great for providing information, empirical data, which in a bygone era did in fact count as knowledge (I’m thinking here of traditionalist approaches to the study of History, in which thousands of students had to memorise the names and dates of historical figures, composers, politicians, etc. and regurgitate these on exams). One of the great things about the advent of the web, where such ephemera are easily accessed, is that we have been freed from the confines of statistically-based knowledge and have greater opportunities to think about meaning and context (whether we DO that is a different issue). Personally, I am elated that in the music history classroom I don’t have to bore my students or myself with the recitation of birthdates, death dates, record release dates, etc. because the students can easily find this information online, and choose to memorise it or not. What really matters here, and what we can discuss without the formality of rote learning, is what and how the music means, what the circumstances of its production and consumption can tell us.

The notion of memory, surveillance, and reputation is, I think, a much more important and vexing problem. I am pleased with the way in which the NYT was able to sketch out the nuances of the issue, particularly around the notion of forgiving. The crucial factor here is the issue of persistance - this is what makes the web both so useful, and so potentially frightening. It’s useful because an ever expanding archive of information and interaction are invaluable for efficient research; it’s frightening because there is an incredible wager of trust here that the archive will not be used for nefarious purposes, intended or not.

I think that the issue is presicely not about “forgetting” though. As the author noted, the concept of forgiveness is much more central - the idiotic things that people have done in their pasts are not “forgotten” by the people who experienced them, but are, rather, selectively edited, accepted, or indeed forgiven. Of course, the problem emerges when the sphere of people who have knowledge of these deeds becomes much larger and more anonymous. Which is where the idea of a wider appreciation for the role of forgiveness is particularly appealing, and perhaps possible. I think the key will be for people to learn that everyone does silly things now and again, and that like us, deserve to be forgiven.

Perhaps more complex though is how potentially non-regrettable, legitimate acts of dissent, research, etc. that might rub against mainstream thinking figure in this scenario. Forgiveness really isn’t the issue: why should I desire forgiveness for something I don’t regret saying or doing? In this case there is the necessity for acceptance of views that might not adhere to the zeitgeist of a particular historical moment. This is where I think legal solutions will fall short. I can imagine a scenario in which, given the expansion of libel with a specific focus on social networking, that legitimate dissent will undergo the chilling effect of lawsuits claiming damages.

Finally, the rise of Facebook and microblogging have also paralleled the rise of mindless office and and administrative jobs in which a growing number of people under the age of 35 find themselves. While it’s not surprising that an employer would react by firing an employee who reveals her boredom at work, perhaps we really need to be asking: what has created the conditions for this young woman (and many like her) to be so dissatisfied and underwhelmed by her job that she feels it appropriate and necessary to indicate her boredom? And furthermore, what structural and social factors are impacting the widespread desire to share information about ourselves: is there a widespread sense that we can no longer connect outside of social networks? Perhaps our time for participating in the social is so threatened by the banality of office work that the only recourse we have is to the Internet?

This is a tough one.

” Hello Your Name,Um i must say i do like your simple style of living with a new friend and believe i emback every little question you’ ve been asking me and as a matter of fact i do like to be asked a lot of question.. Coming back on your question…