Clive Thompson is researching for a Wired article on Radical transparency, and what better way to do it than post a note on his blog asking for input, or, as he puts it tapping the hivemind:
Normally, I don't post about magazine assignments I'm working on --
because the editors want to keep it secret. But now I'm researching a
piece for Wired magazine, and the editors have actually asked me
to talk about it openly. That's because the subject of the piece is
"Radical Transparency". And, in fact, I'd like your input in writing it.
The piece was originally triggered by a few postings on the blog of Wired editor-in-chief Chris Anderson, and
the thesis is simple: In today's ultranetworked online world, you can
accomplish more by being insanely open about everything you're doing.
Indeed, in many cases it's a superbad idea to operate in highly secret
mode -- because secrets get leaked anyway, looking like a paranoid
freak is a bad thing, and most importantly, you're missing out on
opportunities to harness the deeply creative power of an open world.
Interestingly, much of the discussion refers to scientific process, which seems to tie in nicely with Kaleidoscope's notion of an open research community.
The thing about openness, is to know where it works, where it doesn't and how to tell the two apart. Its just like its absolutely great to be radically transparent with your spouse, but not always a great idea with your mother in law. But then, Clive means radical. Open to all. Again, sometimes, for some things, its great. As the LA times realized, it doesn't work so well for writing editorials. Then again, maybe it could - if you carefully designed the right technology and the right social practices to use it.