This gets off the ground much too slowly. Three sentences, sixty-four words in, and I'm nowhere near an idea of yours yet.

Yet beyond the immediate implications of information sharing is the possibility for something greater. The ability to connect people and ideas from across the world introduces the possibility of deeper collaboration through distributed intelligence Such is the principle behind the Global Brain, the belief that the web can serve as a collective intelligence, linking distant populaces into a cohesive network of ideas, resulting in a sum that is far greater than its parts. Much of the discussion surrounding the idea of the Global Brain has been grounded in highly theoretical discussions about the utopian consequences of the net as a collective consciousness, essentially serving as a sentient representation of all those connected to it. Yet, beyond the theoretical exploration of the Global Brain is a more simplistic and practical assessment of the potential power of the net. The upshot of this mass assimilation of ideas through the net would be the ability to create an innovative, well informed, and interconnected global society with constant inflow and integration of new information at a rapid pace, resulting in collectivity in thought and actions through information symmetry, rather than through an idea grounded in net self-sentience.

All of this means, "The Net a creates a superorganism by endowing us all with an extraskeletal nervous system, linking all humanity. Right now, there's no consciousness in the network as opposed to the human brains it connects." It's true, but not a very interesting point, the Web itself being less than eight thousand days old. When, like writing, it has become a few thousand years old, where do you imagine humanity will be keeping its consciousness?

The difficulty here is the collapse of scale, from the largest phenomena the Net can embrace over the long term, to a grab-bag of near term phenomena and issues. How humanity will behave, evolving in a hyperconnected superorganism, is a most profound unknown it will probably take centuries to understand. But whether the network is constructed for or against the control of the individual by the technology of the network is the first great issue, decisive of the path on which we so path-dependently travel. You don't describe that issue with any clarity. It would have been helpful, in a way that discussion about the fate of the Semantic Web or the particular triumph that is Wikipedia (or the particular catastrophe that is Facebook) are not.