What’s the basis for this claim? Is the history of the company so opaque or can we actually dig for how these entrepreneurs were thinking as they experimented with a tool whose power they surely didn’t understand fully at first, either as a tool of commerce or democratization.

This video is processing – it'll appear automatically when it's done.

What is this?

The Genius annotation is the work of the Genius Editorial project. Our editors and contributors collaborate to create the most interesting and informative explanation of any line of text. It’s also a work in progress, so leave a suggestion if this or any annotation is missing something.

To learn more about participating in the Genius Editorial project, check out the contributor guidelines.

Loading...

The operative metaphors throughout this track juxtapose strength (sharp teeth) and weakness (broken jaw), perfect images for aging rockers like Sleater-Kinney. The whole album is shot through with such images of aging especially in “Bury Our Friends.”

This video is processing – it'll appear automatically when it's done.

In total agreement here, but it’s a bold statement. Seems like “terrorism” would be a more topical and popular claim.

This video is processing – it'll appear automatically when it's done.

The next POTUS will quip: “Annotate it on Genius, [chosen individual representative of federal policy].”

This video is processing – it'll appear automatically when it's done.

Wow! Thanks, Aaron!!

This video is processing – it'll appear automatically when it's done.

Fair point, though it comes off rather like a child forced to make an apology. I didn’t realize NYTimes “updates” and “corrections” were allowed to have such personality!

For the record: because an error was found in the underlying text, the text was corrected and the annotation deleted. The ecosystem of knowledge production on Genius isn built to accommodate and encourage such corrections.

The annotation to the erroneous text was deleted as well. But note that it was always in fact marked as “unreviewed” meaning that a user had created it but a second user with editorial powers had not corrected it. Indeed it is critical for any savvy navigator of the web to note such sign posts of moderation. And it is even more critical that citizens of the web take it upon themselves to correct such mistakes by downvoting the explanation or noting the error in the transcription.

I’m not sure the history of this error, though, would be that interesting, at least not to those looking, as the author originally was, for more information about the story itself.

This video is processing – it'll appear automatically when it's done.

Is it the inherent nature of the internet to “shed the past”? Isn’t it more powerfully known as an archiving tool? For example, I can find all previous blog posts by Steitfeld for Bits online, but haven’t saved all issues of the New York Times over the past few years myself nor do I want to go to the library to look them up on microfiche:

(Indeed, as a blog, some of his posts might never have made it to print either.)

This video is processing – it'll appear automatically when it's done.

Cute–As I Lay DYING is a Faulkner novel. But to characterize the transcription oversight below as a “lie”–the Internet or Genius or Wikipedia is lying–is to deeply misunderstand the nature of crowd-sourced knowledge production.

This video is processing – it'll appear automatically when it's done.

Still think this is a pretty compelling quote/idea. Come on, show me some love:

This video is processing – it'll appear automatically when it's done.