
Mass amateurization - pabs3
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_amateurization
======
ipython
I have to confess, the first time I heard about Wikipedia I was skeptical that
such a thing could thrive. However this article pits institutions against the
idea of “mass amateurization” when in fact I think the major reason Wikipedia
_has_ succeeded is because of institutions and process put in place to keep
the community moderated and in check.

For more information listen to the excellent podcast episode of “how I built
this” featuring jimmy wales. [0]

[0] [https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/national-public-
radio/how-i...](https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/national-public-radio/how-i-
built-this/e/53468668)

~~~
thristian
I don't think "mass amateurization" and "institutions" are opposed.
Traditionally you needed major institutional support to set up, say, a TV
channel; today you can get a YouTube channel for free. If you start a YouTube
channel and it gets successful you can certainly set up institutions and
processes to keep it successful, but those things aren't necessary to get
started.

~~~
simonh
And of course Youtube itself is an institution. There was an article here
about a library built in Minecraft by volunteers to bypass censorship, but
Microsoft is an institution. As you say these are not opposed, they are just
different relationships between creators and distributors.

------
d-d
Random guys on YouTube have saved me at least a dozen trips to the car repair
shop; but there's all that noise I gotta sift through. Good luck and Godspeed
sorting through all the quackery if you ever come down with a rare health
issue. There are so many junior-whatevers that flat out shouldn't be putting
out content for anyone anywhere; much less the internet.

It's a double edged sword.

~~~
toyg
Maybe some topics should simply be legislated away as incompatible with
“youtubery”: health and history, imho. Forbidding those would remove 90% of
the problematic content (quacks, antivaxx, holocaust deniers, truthers etc).

Health has specific laws to deal with digital storage, it’s not inconceivable
to admit that it needs extra protection on social platforms too.

~~~
HeyLaughingBoy
_simply be legislated away_

This is one of the most dangerous phrases I've read in a long time.

~~~
toyg
Germany and Italy have had bans on specific material since 1946 and the sky
has not fallen. I understand the concern, but the ban doesn’t need to cover
all media, only the ones that are extremely accessible. A bit like pornography
is forbidden on mainstream tv during the day, but you can still buy it freely
elsewhere at all times.

~~~
HeyLaughingBoy
It's not about the specifics about your comment. It's a concern based on using
the words "simply" and "legislated" in the same sentence.

I'm of the belief that legislation is not something to be entered into lightly
and should generally be considered a last resort if better solutions don't
exist.

~~~
toyg
I do not disagree! My “simply” was just indicating a resigned acceptance that
there isn’t a technological solution, so we might as well reach for good ol’
fashioned political instruments - with all the complexity those entail.

------
zxcmx
Interesting that open source software is not discussed, it seems like one of
the most radically successful embodiments of this.

~~~
amelius
Lots of open source is paid for, or at least the developers have real jobs as
developers, and therefore they shouldn't be called amateurs.

~~~
Nasrudith
It arguably still counts as amateurized though not because of the participants
but because it does away with the hierarchy and credibility. Nobody really
cares if the software writer is a Harvard or MIT professor in full academic
dress or it was written in their mom's basement by a guy not wearing pants.

------
matheusmoreira
Some activities lend themselves well to amateurization. It's hard to imagine a
world where people need a professional license to write computer programs or
publish articles. Not all professions are this accessible though. Perhaps
amateurization is correlated with benign consequences for being wrong. We
don't see amateur engineers, doctors, lawyers...

~~~
radu_floricica
I think you got the professions backwards :) You just can't be an "amateur
programmer" \- it takes a lot of effort to get to the point where you're
employable in the field. Probably something like a year of sustained work.
Sure, you can learn light scripting in a week, but learning curve gets a lot
steeper at some point.

On the other hand, it's relatively easy to learn a slice of health care or law
enough to be able to give advice. As for engineering... try combinations
including the word "redneck" on youtube search and enjoy yourself.

~~~
superhuzza
Of course you can be an amateur programmer, amateur means you're practicing
something but not in a professional manner (i.e. unpaid).

A huge number of the people who program things like their raspberry pi or open
source projects are amateur programmers. Or all the students and dabblers.

Same goes for engineering in general, if you spend any amount of time in a
rural area you'll stumble on some amateur engineering genius.

------
profmonocle
This is my favorite thing to come from the Internet. A lot of my entertainment
comes from YouTube channels or podcasts whose audiences are way too small for
them to be viable on TV or radio.

------
mlthoughts2018
This kind of reminds me of Joel Spolsky’s business principle “commoditize your
complement.”

It’s a benefit to a hosting & streaming platform, like YouTube, if the content
is amateur, commodity and mass produced, since they dominate the complement
(the infrastructure to host, serve and administer traffic to it).

It’s great for automakers if roads are cheap and ubiquitous.

~~~
ImaCake
It occurs to me that there is a whole supply chain of these companies for
youtubers and podcasters. Firstly, the content creator uses one (or many) of a
selection of traditional and web-based tools to produce content not possible
three decades ago, then youtube, or a syndication service, gets your content
in the right places, there it is discovered by users, the content creator is
then rewarded with ad revenue, subscribers through patreon, or through sales
of merch through yet another platform.

Even as someone who mostly consumes this kind of content rather than creating
it, I feel I benefit massively from this complex of buisnesses and tools. The
web is a vibrant and encouraging place so long as you look past some of its
worst festering piles of madness.

------
rijoja
Wouldn't an amateur by definition be unpaid meaning that an Airbnb host really
has nothing to do on this list.

People seem to misstake being an amateur with being subpar which would be far
from the truth.

Famous tennis player Björn Borg won 5 Wimbledon as an amateur for example
since being paid at that time would've been forbidden.

~~~
michaelt
In common use, the way 'professional' is used seems to vary heavily.

Is someone who makes a hundred bucks a month streaming on Twitch a
professional gamer? What about someone starting their own architecture
business, which is currently unprofitable? Is the shop assistant who does all
the cake decoration a professional cake decorator, despite having many other
duties? Do state regulation and professional bodies come into it, and if so
what happens in jobs without professional bodies? Is an accountant who works 2
days a week and is a stay-at-home parent 3 days a week different from a dancer
who works 4 months a year as a dancer, and 8 months a year as a shop
assistant?

------
themodelplumber
I wonder if Mass Amateurization (Swype fail, tap tap tap) has furthered the
obsolescence of terms like "citizen science," (the term may no longer be as
special as it once was, since it happens all the time thanks to
Amateurization) or made those terms more relevant (can we somehow improve on
Amateurization with an eye to the strengths of existing citizen science
community institutions?). Either way, one of its strengths seems to be helping
science & tech when institutions may otherwise lack resources:

> There is no institutional hierarchy in mass amateurization. There is only an
> informal group of collaborators working to solve a problem. Due to mass
> amateurization, amateurs are able to collaborate without the interference
> from the inherent obstacles associated with institutions. These obstacles
> include the costs that an institution incurs while educating, training,
> directing, coaching, advising, and organizing its members.

------
Damogran6
When everybody can do the thing, the thing becomes less valuable...Case in
point: We watch RV content on Youtube. There's a half dozen publishers with
truly compelling content, and 100 more with polished video, trying to self-
support their RV hobby through Youtube.

Likewise, the amount of music on Youtube is boundless, because everyone with a
Mac has a sound studio, for free. makeing the amount of revenue each person is
potentially worth...less.

This isn't good or bad, it just is. There's 10,000 people making Hundreds
instead of 10 or 100 people making millions.

------
jonathanstrange
This term is new to me, and I find it funny that basically the same phenomenon
was called "crowd wisdom" ten years ago.

~~~
Nasrudith
I thought crowd wisdom had more of an "exploratory value" to it in that the
discovered obviously knew about it first but the discoverer was the one who
got credited.

