Folksonomy is defined as- “a user-generated system of classifying and organizing online content into different categories by the use of metadata such as electronic tags.” In Monday’s class, we stated that Folksonomic went under the Commons Knowledge category, (along with open source which can be edited by creators and readers/ democratized/ crowd-driven/ collaborative). Conversely, taxonomy, which is defined as, the branch of science concerned with classification, especially of organisms; systematics, falls under the Copyright category. The copyright category also includes (closed source/ curated/ expert-driven/ producer vs. consumer, and individual). Immediately, we can see the dissimilarities between the two categories. Commons, which is a shared space, in class we gave the example of the quad, is fundamentally based on humans resolving conflict. Intellectual commons, we stated, is Wikipedia. Via Wikipedia, we share a lot of intellect with each other. In today’s age of the Digital Natives, we now share pictures with each other. Commons Knowledge can be both powerful and harmful for two main reasons. Powerful, in the sense that, one can be apart of the conversation. Being able to edit and put your spin on information is powerful, and is an example of the freedoms we have as United States citizens. However, just as aavila1019 said in the previous blog, the information listed may not always be correct which can be harmful for those trying to educate themselves. With copyright, you are getting expert, and exact information. There is a vast amount of money within the world of copyright. Additionally, we touched on the printing press, the term draconian, and express-written consent playing major roles within copyright. There is much debate and controversy over all of the terms previously listed. Controversy includes the stealing of music from artists from illegal websites.
Folksonomy has nothing to do with Folk music.