When I bought this book I thought I would read it, absorb the knowledge within and then pass it on to someone else instead, I am keeping this to revisit for inspiration.

I think basically everything he says is correct. Especially of note is his brief discussion of why we cannot despair in light of our situation. Despair, I think, is largely what lies under the massive disillusionment and apathy among normal folk, especially the young.

Kind of unbelievable that a book this contradictory, poorly-written, and nearly incoherent didn't disqualify the author from attaining the type of occupation he spent the entire book denigrating completely.

"The great promise of the internet - to open up dialogue, break down cultural barriers, promote democracy, and unleash innovation and creativity - is yet another utopian dream. The internet is only accelerating our division into antagonistic clans, where we are sucked into virtual tribal groups that chant the same slogans and hate the same enemies. The web, like the cable news outlets, forms anonymous crowds to vent collective rage, intolerance, and bigotry. These virtual slums do not seek communication or dialogue. They speak in the new absurdist language. They do not enrich our culture. They create a herd mentality in which those who express empathy for some perceived "enemy" - whether left or right - are denounced by their fellow travelers for their impurity.

...If you want a crowd to be wise, the key is to reduce the communication flow between the members so they do not influence each other, so they are truly independent and have separate sample points. It brings up an interesting paradox. The starting point for online crowd enthusiasts is that connection is good and everyone should be connected. But when they talk about what makes a crowd smart, they say people should not be talking to each other. They should be isolated. There is a contradiction there. What makes a crowd smart is the type of question you ask. If you ask a group of informed people to choose a single numeric value such as the weight of an ox, and they all have some reason to have a theory that is not entirely crazy, they will center on the answer. You can get something useful. This phenomenon is what accounts for price-fitting in capitalism. This is how markets can function. If you ask them to create anything, if you ask them to do something constructive or synthetic or engage in compound reasoning, then they will fail. Then you get something dull or an averaging-out. One danger of the crowd is violence, when is when they turn into a mob. The other is dullness or mundaneness, when you design by committee."