flynn23 wrote:
] Which brings me to an ultimate conclusion: what if you really
] can have anything you want, anytime, anywhere? What if you
] really could have every song, movie, book, performance -
] instantly at your fingertips, all the time? Would that be
] better or worse than not having that capability? For my entire
] life, I have wished for this ability, but when I really think
] about it - sometimes it was the lack of exposure; the lack of
] acessability - that made something truly valuable. Sometimes
] it was having to imagine(!) what something would've
] sounded/looked/felt like that helped me to create things for
] myself. Maybe that's better?

inignoct wrote:
] ... we are heading for a world in which the base of common
] knowledge will be far, far greater than ever before, because
] it's so easy to see and hear new things...
] ... sitting down with my ipod
] and a glass of scotch and just listening to a record would
] seem like a waste of time to many, but to me, the focus is
] part of the experience. [emphasis added]

The base of common knowledge will be enormous, but it will be "common" only in the sense that it is accessible by all. A person's individual experiences could become ideosyncratic and shared more closely with a self-selected group of friends than with some vase undifferentiated mass. A work or experience would be valuable to an individual not because it is scarce or expensive, but because one has invested personal effort in finding and appreciating it.

The result could just as easily be the balkanization of mass culture rather than the homogenization and trivilization of culture. That would be a more intersting world than one where everyone had the same shared experiences.

RE: Social discrimination by iTunes playlist | Wired News