[Slightly less insane version of an earlier post]
Start from the principle that data are trivial. They don't mean anything on their own. Even as complex sets. They need to be parsed. To be valued, filtered, extrapolated, translated, visualised.
Some other starting points:
The world is full of data and they are non-specific.
To each person a particular set of data has different values.
To each person most datasets are trivial.
Datasets can be fiscal, emotional, political, artistic...
Values can be tangible or intangible.
Media channels are multiplying.
Streams are infinite and mutable.
Identity is fragmenting & converging.
Data is physical, meta, and imaginary.
The individual has no choice but to filter and prioritise.
In other words: how do we choose what to watch?
I don't care about Iran's nuclear secrets.
I do care about Lady Gaga's shoes.
Most people don't care about the Google Book Agreement
But Michael Jackson's death was equivalent to a DoS attack on Google News.
I do care that it's raining, but not if it's not raining here.
Which of these is the most "valuable"? How do we filter and unconsciously make that decision? How does anyone prioritise and value one dataset over another?
Can society assign value when overwhelmed with information? What happens tomorrow when every channel is saturated contextually, in real-time - like a simulated bout of schizophrenia?
Are we going to be all right?