From Sharing at Work: Improve Participation by Simplifying Sharing - Let’s take a look at “7 seconds to knowledge share” on John Tropea’s “Library Clips” blog. John takes a characteristically detailed look at an ephemeral seven-second window between the time a worker learns or does something valuable and the time they move on to their next task.

Your points:

1. I think this is what networking is all about, you form a trust circle and reciprocate the give and take, as Snowden says once you have interdendencies, then knowledge sharing becomes a need more than a want.
It also brings up the old ROI thing that Gia Lyons succinctly talks about http://giatalks.com/blog/individual-measurements-in-a-social-world-adoption-obstacle/#comment-81

2. I think you are refering to web 2.0 functionality being present not only as standalone tools, but as features of existing tools, and where people live like email

3. What I like about 2.0 type transparency of working is that as Ross Mayfield says is that the complexity is left up to us rather than rigid tools and processes. The tools have to be a servant to human nature, not the other way around.
http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2008/01/29/km-20-catalyzing-voluntary-participation/
http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2008/02/25/the-value-of-networked-free-form-publishing/

In fact I can’t wait till it gets mainstream so we can move away from the novelity of the tools and realise that it’s all about a new way of working that the tools enable.
http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/03/18/clay_shirky_at_the_rsa_on_organising_without_organisations.html

I like how you describe traditional KM as a wall rather than a fabric. I agree, that it needs to be embedded in how you work and networked as a layer rather than the big oracle box.

So it’s not about solutions, it’s about working more effectively, in which solutions or uses will follow, rather than being the focus.

1. Absolutely, the cost (economic burden) on the individual is too high (e.g. no appropriate exchange for the investment) — Closure: people invest in things that return value. Those things that return value automatically draw investments of time. This has not been a focus of solutions: natural draw, natural economic exchange.

2. Absolutely meet the individual where they already are. But who’s doing that? Where are people? They’re inside of specific tools, or not. There can’t be one solution, there have to be many.

3. We’re putting this into a context — a context where we have people who take their jobs too literally, because they can’t think for themselves. To whit this guy “ensure workers adhere to processes”. Processes do not define work. Processes are snapshots of work. If people aren’t following processes, maybe the processes are broken, not the people.

We still have a lot of people who believe that KM is the toolbox of hammers. It’s not — it’s the Flickr of work. It’s just a collection of stuff that can be useful and is accessible to be used however, whereever and whenever someone can make use of it.

Like every other enterprise software, solutions are created as if they are the center of the universe rather than creating a mashup layer over the actual work. 2.0 is the Net. KM is not a fabric, it’s a wall.