The impersonal internet runs Kialo-like debates and builds complex wikis where data and arguments matter more than the pseudonymized person behind them. A hybrid of expert and blogger is generally seen as a failed specialization.
Persistence and collaborative writing will finish writing the common stuff faster and mean that only scholars will be left to work on this stuff.
I imagined it more like tagging every joke into a general humor database with categories and context, obsidian-like meme maps, wikis for non-professional subtopics like video games and sports, “ask (type of people)” without personal answers, but with a fractal structure, representative of the percentage of different opinions of (type of people), and so on.
Even if physicists explain physics more accurately, mere mortals might add another case of misunderstanding about physics, which would spark new discussion and warn others against this misconception, or the question might be about the best metaphors or visuals for understanding physics, which requires the opinion of ordinary people.
Persistence and collaborative writing will finish writing the common stuff faster and mean that only scholars will be left to work on this stuff.
I doubt you can write down all the common stuff.
I imagined it more like tagging every joke into a general humor database with categories and context, obsidian-like meme maps, wikis for non-professional subtopics like video games and sports, “ask (type of people)” without personal answers, but with a fractal structure, representative of the percentage of different opinions of (type of people), and so on.
Even if physicists explain physics more accurately, mere mortals might add another case of misunderstanding about physics, which would spark new discussion and warn others against this misconception, or the question might be about the best metaphors or visuals for understanding physics, which requires the opinion of ordinary people.