“Attention blindness is the fundamental structuring principle of the brain, and I believe that it presents us with a tremendous opportunity. My take is different from that of many neuroscientists: Where they perceive the shortcomings of the individual, I sense opportunity for collaboration… Because focus means selection… it leaves us with blind spots, and we need methods for working around them. Fortunately, given the interactive nature of most of our lives in the digital age, we have the tools to harness our different forms of attention and take advantage of them” (Davidson 3).
“We need a strategy for working in tandem – a method I call “collaboration by difference”… If we can trust our partner to focus in one direction, we can keep our attention in another, and together we can have more options than we ever imagined before” (Davidson 20).
“…collaboration by difference is the open-source and open-access principle upon which the Internet and the World Wide Web were originally created and by which they continued to be governed. It is based on the idea that productive collaboration requires not just a lot of participation by many different kinds of people but a form of collaboration that is as open, unstructured, and flexible as possible, in its design, principles, and motivation… this form of crowdsourced collaboration is based on the idea that if you allow people to contribute in as many different ways as they want, offering points of view as distinctive as possible, the whole outcome is more innovative, stronger, better, and more ambitious than if you start with a goal or mission and then structure each contribution as a deliberate step toward fulfillment of that goal” (Davidson 192).
Amy Friedlander (2009) explains, “collaboration is a social as well as an intellectual process and can be difficult for many reasons, some of them having to do with institutional and disciplinary cultures, language and terminology, mental models about the research process, trust, appropriate credit, and a sensible allocation of tasks” (6).
Chapter 15: Positive Intellectual Rights and Information Exchanges
A Historical Prologue p. 288-289
"It is only in the 1980s that it became apparent that two powerful and contradictory processes had been set into motion. The first process is the creation of a new realm of free creation and exchange of information, with extremely low transaction costs, and a huge multiplicity and diversity of contributors."
"However, in parallel, the second process saw huge industries being reshaped (pharmaceuticals, agro-food, centralized media) or born (proprietary packaged software). These industries have become highly dependent on the ability to gain property or control usage of information and knowledge entities."
"The system of intellectual property has developed into a huge machine, largely out of control, and ever more aggressive as it fails to stop the floodwater of information from breaking through the barriers it tries to erect."
“Although ‘authorship and ownership’ make up only one of the ethical dimensions of online experiences, academic institutions often focus on these particular issues, which attach to the concept of academic honesty and its negative corollary: plagiarism” (DeVoss, Eidman-Aadahl, and Hicks 78)
“The focus on the single author and his or her solitary genius is, in academia, of the utmost importance… However, much digital writing is done… collaboratively, across time and space as well as across documents, and with what Lawrence Lessig has called ‘remixing’ as a key practice for invention and composing – this, writing by appropriation: taking bits, pieces, and ideas and compiling and remixing them in new and innovative ways” (DeVoss, Eidman-Aadahl, and Hicks 80).
“…various forms of cultural, social, and economic values are collectively produced by users en mass, via their consumption, evaluation, and entrepreneurial activities. Consumer co-creation is fundamental to YouTube’s [and most new media platforms] value proposition as well as to its disruptive influence on established media business models… For YouTube [and most new media platforms], participatory culture is not a gimmick or a sideshow; it is absolutely core business” (Burgess and Green 5 – 6).
“…because web architecture now provides a sophisticated participatory medium that is widely used for purposes of sharing, it can support multiple modes of learning...” (Lankshear and Knobel 216)
“…there is no such thing as a private language. Rather, language – and hence mind, and hence ‘I’, and hence ‘knowledge’ – is public: in the ways that Gee (1992) speaks of ‘the social mind’. With Freire (1974/2007: 124), it shares the view that ‘it is the “we think” which establishes the “I think” and not the contrary. It is within and through shared practice that meanings – significance – ideas, categories, evidence, tools, tests, techniques, and all the other things that constitute knowledge come into being” (Lankshear and Knobel 218).
“Collaboration refers to partnerships of various sizes and durations that bring individuals together around teaching, research, or scholarly projects; intellectual problems; or questions of shared interest, with the objective of producing an end product, such as a new pedagogical approach, a digital archive, or some other deliverable. Such collaborations may involve formal methods as well as informal approaches, such as play or “tinkering”’ (McGrath 2)