you choose
Which is a better term for a binary thinker:
(a) bin-head
(b) bit-head
| Permalink | technorati
« mandated telescreen upheld | Main | CBS on "controversial" »
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://lessig.org/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1156
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference you choose:
» Binary thinker definition? from KnowProSE
Lawrence Lessig Umm... could I have more than two choices, please? :P... [Read More]
Comments (70)
Bit-head. A bin-head would be a head you throw stuff in.
Bin-head is ambiguous and more offensive, as it could mean (rubbish) bin-head. I like this and I might use bin-head, but perhaps I wouldn't use it if I still hoped that my opponent would be persuaded. I'm not sure if bit-head is any better on this count.
platonist? zoroastrian? binary thinking is older than bits.
my vote: bit-head
If forced to choose between the two, I'd go with bit. But I don't really like either choice. Bit-head could be a compliment, analogous to gear-head. Bin has so many other meaning, the use as a short for of "binary" was not the first thing that came to mind.
I'd prefer "binary-head" to "bin-head" , and "extremist" to either. "Absolutist" if you don't want the emotional tinge that "extremist" has.
I'd say bit-head. Bin-head makes me think of some kind of bureaurat (think IRS paper-shuffler).
I choose bin head. I like to use the term "bit twiddling" in a positive way. So if i want to change someone's thinking about something I'll say "They just need a few bits twiddled". I would never twiddle a bin.
"Binary thinker, n. Someone who presents only two options." It's a self-referential poll!
How about "Bivalent cognizer?" Or even "Binary thinker?"
Bin-head sound to me like bin-hex, the old Mac standard for transferring binary data as ascii text. So it brings to mind someone who can do complex bitmasking, encoding, and compression in his head. That is, it brings "binary data" to mind, which is not the "Just two options" connotation you're looking for.
Bit-head associates for me pinhead. Zippy the Bithead has interesting comedic possibilities.
How about 10head pronounced ten-head but with obvious ambiguity to tin-head
Of those two choices, bit-head.
I like the term Bit-Jockey myself though, from the SF novel, 'Footfall', where they had Atom Jockeys moving atomic bombs around for an Orion-style rocket.
#include "dilbert/stupidity.h"
"Bin" doesn't look like it's short for "binary." It looks like it's slang for a place to store refuse. When I've heard you use that term, the first thing I think is "Someone with a head full of garbage." I vote "bit-head" all the way.
I like binker.
Aristotelian-head ? (Someone who applies the Aristotelian excluded middle inappropriately)
bin-head.
Personally I like to call them Santa's Elves. Most people don't seem to find the connection though (they spend all their time at the poles).
The mere fact that you're looking for a label to demonize your opponents is evidence that you yourself are engaging in exactly the practice that you criticize. Why not seek to understand the views of both extremists and moderates?
You need to decide whether you want to be someone who brings people together or someone who increases polarization and accentuates differences. There's nothing inherentlly wrong with either stance, but right now you're trying to have it both ways.
Why do we need a short form? "Binary thinker" seems to do just fine? - It's moderatly short and easy enough to pronounce, and the meaning is transparent. IMO resorting to slang-like terms like "bin-head/bit-head" somewhat takes the edge off the intended meaning. They sound maybe a little too cheap. At least that's one way to look at it. ;-)
"Binary thinker" invites conversation. "Bit head", and "bin head" feel like dismissive slurs.
Why does Larry Lessig need us to think up terms for democratic presidential candidates to use in their campaigns?
"Here Internet: Invent This For Me!" - Larry Lessig
How about just using some older term, like: "Fool!"
I'm surprised that nobody's suggested "bitwit."
Or even "duofirma sapiens" - Latin for base-two thinking.
(c) None of the above, I don't approve of binary polls. :)
But you're right to go with this idea, especially in the field of IP, where anything that is not-property gets demonized as COMMUNISM.
bino-head? I think the folks on slashdot already have a definition of bit-head?
bit-head flows better
"bit-head" is already used as a term for software guys who write low-level code, so it's less than optimum in that regard.
How about "boolian"? It obviously derives from the word boolean, but boolian could be restricted to use in anthropic contexts.
The altered spelling serves to disambiguate it from the common programming/logic term.
-djs
bithead
If you use bin-head or bit-head there is a very good chance someone who does not communicate with geeks on a regular bases will not understand. And a good part of those who do not understand will not ask for an explanation for fear of being un-cool. To be sure of more people understanding your point without explanation; use the longer less flowing binary thinker. Far better to be clear than hip In My Humble Opinion.
bin-head
i've been calling a good friend of mine a "binary extremist" for almost a decade now due to his penchant for reducing any and all situations to 2 opposing options.
bit-head, but then I'm a software developer. So maybe bin-head makes more sense to people who aren't in the computer industry.
As some others have said bit-head seems to mean more like someone who can think and do work with low-level code.
I'd go with binary thinker.
"bit-head" gives associations to the bits in "Tron". I'll have to go with that. I also thing it sounds better, but I've got English as my secondary language, so don't trust me in issues like that.
Bin is English English for "trash can" so it won't convey your meaning to those who use English English. It's a simple ad-hominem for that audience, myself included, and is likely to cost the user respect.
Bit-head is already used with a different meaning and using it would be a good way to arouse the ire of lots of computer programmers.
Bit Head
Manichean.
Ummm......I hate to break this to all of you but doesn't using the selected term (let's use bin-head) imply that the user of the term is a "non-binhead" - and therefore a binary thinker him/herself (dividing the world into bin-heads and non-bin-heads?)
The very term indicts its user.
This is the similar type of issue that indicts moral relativists who believe that all ideas are equal, except of course those ideas which put forth the idea that some ideas are better than others.
Gored by the horns of your own dilemma.
I gotta side with TonyC: bitwit.
"bin-head" sounds like it refers to the unix /bin directory to me. "bit-head" sounds like a compliment. Of the two, "bin-head" is better, but neither one is good. Bitwit, now--that's funny.
I love "bitwit"!
b
bit player?
I always though "bipartisan" was the best description of this phenomenon, as it pretends to be open, accessible, and even-handed without actually managing to be.
not bit-head. polar person?
Ah, the irony of having two choices for the description of someone who reduces everything to two choices. Neither term works for me.
I think both terms are easily misinterpreted, as other posters have mentioned. Neither term is likely to resonate with people who aren't already fluent in techno-jargon.
I'd suggest "bifurcators." If something more colloquial is desired, "black-or-white thinkers" on the first reference, and "gray-impaired" on subsequent references.
Most people I've met express some form or variation of dualism, at least occasionally. What's the big deal?
If you must have a quick zinger of a term, I like Tony's bitwit. But I agree with several folks that any zinger is of essence too distilled, too in-crowd exclusive, and won't convey the fullness of the idea you're trying to get across. You don't want it to just sound like a fancy word for idiot, you want something that will concisely convey contempt for an either/or thought process.
Though, a good geek joke would be to call them The Binars, after the race of aliens on a Star Trek episode who communicated in binary...
If someone had not been told the definitions to these terms, they would be likely to interepret "bit-head" to mean some sort of technology-person. "bin-head" would be met with confusion, and a desire to figure out what it meant. As such, "bin-head" is definitely better.
professor lessig, for someone who writes about technology issues, this question reflects a rather primitive understanding of communications technology.
receivers which view a source of information, or argument, as solely binary are known to communications engineers as “hard decision” receivers. such machines are unable to consider nuances in received messages and they arrogantly make categorical decisions about the source information without consideration the environment in which these signals are received.
hard decision receivers are as prone to make errors in what they think they receive as to get it right. the high bit error rate of such receivers renders them unsuitable for use receiving complex modulations in low signal to interference environments.
one of the vast improvements in receiver technology has been the development of receivers which rely on soft information. in soft decision making, each binary decision taken by the receiver is accompanied by a metric indicating the level of confidence associated with the decision which is made. accumulating soft information over time enables a soft decision receiver to modify its models - to change its point of view where appropriate - which results in better forward decisions and a more accurate receiver.
trying to characterize your opponents as bit-heads, or bin-heads, suggests that you wish to view your opponents from the perspective of a hard decision machine. from a purely engineering perspective, we three mice think that this is an unsuitable choice for this high noise environment. with such a receiver, the only signals you are likely to receive are the ones which are often repeated by your disciples, or those which are yelled very loudly by your supporters.
of course, soft decision making requires an ability for critical self-doubt, but unless one's processing power is limited this should not be a problem.
Better:
A Neither-Norian.
Bit-head is already in use as a compliment and I doubt bin-head would work without explanation.
Bit-wit is great but it verges on insult. Are you looking for a neutral term?
Other ideas:
- toggle, toggler
group of people who flip thinking mode together: toggle party
- bit -- of course then it's an Abbott and Costello routine. "That guy sees no middle ground, he's a bit." "A bit what?"
Let me make my vote public: bithead
I've always liked Marvin Misky's name for this kind of thinking: a "Dumbell Theory." Nice because it both gives the idea of two sides with nothing in the middle and that only dumbells have such theories.
If you don't limit yourself to binary you could consider hex nut.
Given the choices, I guess I'd have to be a "bit-head". (As a programmer, I know how to flip bits; converting binary to decimal, octal, or hex invokes just a bit more overhead...I suppose I'd be ambivalent if I could vote in Perl.)
But if it were on a public ballot, I'd quickly write in and vote for a "hex-head" if their stance on the issues I considered relevant fell in line with my opinion.
It's a significant indicator that our political process needs reform when I hear people talking about electing "the better of two evils".
--J.
Boolean thinker, because it's TRUE and does not sound FALSE.
My vote, in ASCII:
001010000110000100101001001000000110001001101001011011100010110101101000011001010110000101100100
A black-and-whiter?
"bin-head" is non-obvious.
"bit-head" is darn close to something I've been called as a compliment.
Having registered to vote, I chose neither of the above.
"bitwit" is my write-in choice.
Although in theory I should be concerned about the irony in this situation, there are clear positive benefits to influencing the language of the debate. Failure to do so simply leaves the field clear to be tilted by your opposition.
If you're looking for a term to describe someone whose thinking is weighed down by their inability to see issues in a form other than binary, perhaps the proper term would be "bin-laden".
Bithead
Bit-Head.
Bin-head sounds derogatory.
Bitwit get's my vote, but why were there only two choices?
Is LL is Bitwit?
heh.
"platonist? zoroastrian? binary thinking is older than bits." -aph
Quoted for the truth.
choose either one, either way you have a 01 out of 10 chance of being right.
bit-head "bin" is ambiguous, while "bit" is well understood as the contraction for binary digit
I second bitwit.
Bin-head is much cooler... its from Neal Stevenson's
1992 sci-fi classic Snow Crash.
"Bit-head" sounds easy for me.
To discrive the way of thinking, we use "binary" in General.
When we (Japanese) talk about computor,
"Binary" sounds like a term for file type (binary or ASCII text...)
when "Bit" sounds like a term for measuring CPU size.
So, I vote for "Bit-head" as a metaphor for a Brain like a old fashoned computor.
I've always preferred "twit" myself. Most people who think this way (zero-sum) are twits of some kind.
To quote no one you know: "There are two types of people: Those that divide people into two types, and those who don't."
Well above here, Steve asked, "bino-head? I think the folks on slashdot already have a definition of bit-head?"
Thus I will put in a good word for bino (rhymes with wino).
I like bin-hexed
Let me make my vote public