220 Matching Annotations
  1. May 2019
    1. when I finally sit down to write a chapter, I’m just building bridges between those islands, and not venturing out into an empty, uncharted sea.

      Oh I like this.

    1. What has become distinctive now is the extreme rapidity of searching one’s own marginalia, as well the ability to see how others read.

      Being able to see the artifacts left as a result of how others read. Reading itself mostly being a black box, and Hypothes.is not changing that.

    1. This is a bit reminiscent of Community Canvas

    2. By now it should be clear that dialogue mapping is a technique that promotes collaboration

      Constitutes, operationalizes collaboration.

    3. indicates how they might connect up with the rest of the discussion – but connection is neither required nor always desirable.

      This is another set of validation. Man, this is what I want to be reading about right now.

    4. Conklin refers to the last move – challenging the context of a discussion – as “grenade throwing.”

      Bahahahhhahahhahaaa. Reasonably so. I'd prefer something a bit less violent--may rug pulling?

    5. Once on the map, it is no longer associated with any person – it is objectified as an element of the larger discussion.

      Map as de-personalizing influence--individual comments as corresponding to already-out-there ideas in the conceptual space.

    6. In an organisation, these moves have a certain stigma attached to them: anyone making arguments for or against an idea might be seen as being opinionated or egotistical.

      Peter Elbow's Believing and Doubting games are good for side-stepping some of this dynamic, I'd guess.

    7. Challenging the context of the entire discussion.

      This is my go-to these days re: education...

    8. Conklin identifies seven types of questions:

      Always up for a good classification.

    9. A side benefit of interrruption is that it slows downs the dialogue.

      Interesting (though not, at least to me, surprising) to note a slow-down seen as an improvement/innovation. Especially in contrast to so much of Engelbart's goals for making various subprocesses faster/more efficient.

    10. Conklin emphasises that it is OK to do so as long as it is done in the service of listening. Another important point is that when capturing a point made by someone, the technographer will need to summarise or interpret the point. The interpretation must be checked with the speaker.  Hence validation – and the  interruption it may entail – is not just OK, it is absolutely essential.

      Reflective listening

    11. guess at the intended meaning

      Some overlap with Nonviolent Communication here, I'm sure. It seems possible that the mapping enters the frame of social complexity itself--what happens when someone disagrees (does not validate what's written) in a way that signals emotional charge? I can think of a number of answers, but all of them call up the kind of complexity the method is designed to address. (Maybe this isn't a problem? Probably creates the potential to deal with that tension head-on?)

    12. n real-time, on a shared display which  is  visible to all participants.

      Connecting to the Licklider bit about the wall-screen. Find it in the document by ctrl-f'ing "Computer-Posted Wall Display"

    13. skilled facilitator

      They'd better be. This sounds difficult as hell.

    14. the man who coined the term wicked problem.

      I don't like the term. It sounds tech-y trendy.

    15. (Issue Based Information System)

      Sounds Engelbartian. Is that a thing I can say?

    16. fragmentation

      This word strikes me as not quite the right one. I'm tempted to want to substitute it for positionality--something less charged with the implication of brokenness. Because brokenness implies there's something to be fixed here, and though there's the possibility that people in these meetings might come to "agreement," that agreement doesn't in any way mean their varied and diverse perspectives have collapsed into some sort of monolith. All that agreement is still coming from soooooo many different places.

    17. the traditional, process driven world is partially  blind to the non-technical aspects of complexity.

      Oh man--it sure is.

    1. how would our education system change to take advantage of this new external symbol-manipulation capability of students and teachers (and administrators)?

      How indeed?

      Obligatory Sean Michael Morris paraphrase here:

      "Critical Digital Pedagogy isn't the pedagogy of technology, it's the pedagogy of the Digital Age."

    2. assess

      I think they're underestimating the complexity of assessment for progress. In this section, they mention the ease of it, with regard to the straightforward question of how long it took a programmer to create something that "worked" but that narrow goal sits in an expansive range of goals--and has potentially jagged effects across the network. I keep thinking about current ecological crises--aided and abetted to a huge degree in today's world by digital technologies. To the extent that we can attribute some of that effect to a cause related to greater effectiveness and efficiency due to tool improvements analogous to (or actually described by) this article, can we call it progress? But even down out of the clouds, the whole point of synergic (emergent) improvements is that they're complex and unpredictable. It doesn't seem like much of a stretch that the same complexity that causes the lack of foresight also clouds our judgment in assessing effects.

    3. a quick and rough scaffolding than a carefully engineered structure

      Seems like an interesting guiding principle for designing educational/classroom experiences.

    4. we would recommend turning loose a group of four to six people (or a number of such groups) to develop means that augment their own programming capability

      Seems to imply autonomy--being "loose."

    5. industrial engineering (e.g., motion and time study)

      I was thinking about Frederick Winslow Taylor a bit above.

    6. and later it is easy to merge their contributions

      Is it?

    7. data

      Metadata?

    8. There are, of course, the explicit computer processes which we use, and which our philosophy requires the augmented man to be able to design and build for himself.

      I worry that there are important ways that in having computing skills skip over many of the basic stepping stones present for pioneers from, for example, this time period, we lose a sense of continuity and understanding for much of why things were built the way they were.

    9. He maintained that about ten percent of the little steps we took all day accounted for ninety percent of the progress toward the goals we claimed to pursue -- that is, that ninety percent of our actions and thoughts were coupled to our net progress in only a very feeble way.

      Zipf again.

    10. From what we've been through so far, you might expect it to be like that. What I did, though, was to treat the matter as a process that I was going to execute the process of giving you a lecture demonstration.

      I think there are an increasing number of instances where poor formatting for the document (I think, in this case, a missing comma) is negatively affecting readability/fluency for me.

    11. perhaps you know about 'teaching machines?'

      This is ominous.

    12. If he is interested in only one type of appended substructure, he can request that only the cues associated with that type be displayed.

      Get with it, Hypothes.is! We need more granularity.

    13. It is a lot like using zones of variable magnification as you scan the structure

      My primary experience with this is the Apple application bar at the bottom of the screen. I mean, I don't have that feature enabled (I think I did in the past), but I believe my mom does.

    14. Joe picked out one of your sentences, and pushed the rest of the text a few lines up and down from it to isolate it.

      This is a feature of the graphic presentation of text that doesn't seem to be in wide use, unlike so many of the others discussed here.

    15. So far the structure that you have built with your symbols looks just like what you might build with pencil-and-paper techniques

      Cue hyperlinks?

    16. You are quite elated by this freedom to juggle the record of your thoughts

      Yes, and. With so radically reduced barriers to re-working text, I think we enter a realm where Peter Elbow's thoughts on separating generative processes from critical processes becomes incredibly important. The narrative here is that you (the person witnessing the demonstration) didn't make use of the tools to their best effect during the composition process (where tools include the re-working tools of copy/paste/delete/cut, etc.). Those tools, however, may induce a kind of analysis paralysis. Which isn't to say other parts of the tools (like a keyboard for symbol input as opposed to pencil on paper) aren't huge improvements even without the editing stuff.

    17. He's a nice enough guy, but he sure gets preachy.

      I've been this preachy.

    18. I want you to notice first how hard it is for a person to realize how really unquestioning he is about the way he does things.

      Easy to underestimate this.

    19. 3. Single-Frame Manipulation

      Pretty crazy to see just how much of this particular section turned into a reality. If I had to guess, I'd say that wasn't an accident.

    20. only here the proofreader is always looking at clean text as if it had been instantaneously retyped after each designation had been made.

      It occurs to me that a particular stance to typo-correction is only made possible by a technological apparatus that makes the effort of correction minimal--otherwise, it would be much more understandable for people to leave errors stand.

    21. The text would all still look as neat as if freshly retyped.

      People my age and younger (and probably a bit older)--who have never typed a paper on anything other than a computer might be at risk for underestimating how much of an improvement this is.

    22. Joe could reinstate it instantaneously with one stroke of his left hand.

      Undo/Redo. Though, for most of us it's two strokes.

    23. light pen

      Cursor analog.

    24. He claimed that he could comfortably rattle off about 180 words a minute -- faster than he could comfortably talk.

      I was wondering about this before got here. I'm pretty confident in my ability to type around 80 wpm, but 180 is... a different story.

      I think there's a mirror for this in the Spritz reading app.

    25. Some of these signals were used as abbreviations for entire words. It seems that, for instance, the 150 most commonly used words in a natural language made up about half of any normal text in that language.

      Zipfian composition?

    26. At any later time (until he chose to discard that particular abbreviation from his working vocabulary) the typing of the abbreviation term would call forth automatically the "printing" on the display of the entire object string.

      I know this is a capability that exists in (probably?) any word processor in wide use, but I haven't ever made use of the feature. Auto-fill and auto-complete, however, is a different matter. Tagging each of these annotations, all I have to input is #a, and I'm off to the races.

    27. Synonyms or antonyms could just as easily be brought forth. This also seemed sort of trivially obvious, and Joe seemed to know that you would feel so. "It turns out that this simple capability makes it feasible to do some pretty rough tasks in the upper levels of the capability hierarchy -- where precise use of special terms really pays off, where the human just couldn't be that precise by depending upon his unaided memory for definitions and 'standards,' and where using dictionary and reference-book lookup in the normal fashion would be so distracting and time-consuming that the task execution would break down.

      Yessssssss. I'm here for this.

    28. that is, assemble a bunch of symbols before your eyes in order to portray something which you have in mind.

      I think the composition process often doesn't have the thing that ends up being written in mind--writing, including writing on paper or a screen--is generative (and in different ways).

    29. 1. Background

      I think this section is an excellent rhetorical choice.

    30. (human scale of large and simple)

      I appreciate this qualification.

    31. It is plain that even if the equipment (artifacts) appeared on the market tomorrow, a good deal of empirical research would be needed to develop a methodology that would capitalize upon the artifact process capabilities.

      Seems like we haven't done it yet--not that I'm aware of, in a mass-consciousness way.

    32. the value of some sort of copying device

      lolol

    33. Right off the bat I noticed that there were two distinct groups -- some ideas were about what the memo ought to accomplish, what time period it should cover, when it should be finished, what level and style of presentation should be used, etc., and some ideas were about the subject of the memo.

      Reflection on writing processes seems like a significant area to study for this kind of thing.

    34. It's not unreasonable to assume that establishing a link would take about three seconds, and tracing a link to the next card about three to five seconds.

      Ease is important--to free time for other things, but also because at a certain point, a slow process encounters a motivational barrier.

    35. needle sorting

      What's this?

    36. An Existing Note and File System

      Reading this, it seems super strange that in all my education, nobody discussed filing systems--especially digital filing systems. I was just in a public discussion on Twitter, and it took me way longer than I think it should have for me to find a resource I was looking for in my local documents folder--which enabled me to do a quick internet search to get a link to the original source my document adapted. Having recently completed a Master's in Teaching, it seems like a useful topic--how to organize collected resources in a file system. But not ever addressed.

    37. An example of this general sort of thing was given by Bush where he points out that the file index can be called to view at the push of a button, which implicitly provides greater capability to work within more sophisticated and complex indexing systems

      Interesting to think of paywalls in the context of this instantaneous calling up of hyperlinked text. We have the links--but not the accessibility. In this way, a political system that supports profit-motive driven artificial scarcity becomes an important part of the whole system.

    38. in a way that makes them maximally available and useful to the needs of the human's mental-structure development

      Perhaps not redacted files--not maximally.

    39. His excursion may be more enjoyable if he can reacquire the privilege of forgetting the manifold things he does not need to have immediately at hand, with some assurance that he can find them again if they prove important.

      Curious, like the comfort bit way above.

    40. There is a new profession of trail blazers, those who find delight in the task of establishing useful trails through the enormous mass of the common record.

      Maybe once we get that UBI?

    41. Wholly new forms of encyclopedias will appear, ready-made with a mesh of associative trails running through them, ready to be dropped into the memex and there amplified.

      Wikis.

    42. numerous

      Though this is of course contingent on the physical processes of the mechanism, I wonder what constrains the upper limit of hyperlinks (gonna call them that) for this sort of machine.

    43. of a desk

      If we'd gone this way, I wonder how much time it would have taken for someone to make it into a standing desk?

    44. at random

      Not really at random, is it?

    45. and something is bound to come of it.

      Sure is.

    46. Anything that might have so general an effect upon our mental actions as is implied here, is certainly a candidate for ultimate consideration in the continuing development of our intellectual effectiveness.

      This seems responsive to much of what I've been pointing to in many of my annotations.

    47. Existing means of composing and working with symbol structures penalize disorderly processes very heavily, and it is part of the real promise in the automated H-LAM/T systems of tomorrow that the human can have the freedom and power of disorderly processes.

      ?

    48. Also, the kind of generous flexibility that would be truly helpful calls for added symbol structuring just to keep track of the trials, branches, and reasoning thereto that are involved in the development of the subject structure; our present symbol-manipulation means would very soon bog down completely among the complexities that are involved in being more than just a little bit flexible.

      Limits of working memory?

    49. and by indirect imitation.

      Professors without pedagogical training.

    50. If by some magical process the production workers could still know just what to do and when to do it even though the superstructure of contractors was removed from above them, no one would know the difference.

      This could be where stigmergy could come in.

    51. This situation is typical for any of us engaged in reasonably demanding types of professional pursuits, and yet we have never received explicit training in optimum ways of carrying out any but a very few of the roles at a very few of the levels.

      Dare I say, still true.

    52. At a still higher level of capability, the executive capabilities must have a degree of power that unaided mental capabilities cannot provide. In such a case, one might make a list of steps and check each item off as it is executed.
    53. enables
    54. insofar as their actual physical construction is concerned.

      Historically, it seems like there are complex interactions between process structuring and physical structuring. For example, the difference in methods between additive manufacturing (e.g. 3D printing) and subtractive manufacturing (e.g. a lathe). My guess is that there are different affordances in tool capabilities associated with the different processes (resulting in different physical structuring), or differences in the price of manufacturing (resulting in emergent properties as availability scales), but I'm also curious about how different processes might come up against ecological concerns. Intelligence augmentation assumes the presence of an intelligence to augment, which I don't think we can assume anymore given various kinds of existential threats.

    55. toward a certain over-all professional goal

      Goal hierarchies (subject to my same criticism of that term above, though perhaps in a different way) come into the question here. Brings up Perceptual Control Theory on the subject of the interactions between different levels of goals.

    56. Essentially everything that goes on within the H-LAM/T system and that is of direct interest here involves the manipulation of concept and symbol structures in service to the mental structure.

      Disagree. There's a huge direct interest in the motivational context that of adopting the methodology itself--and I think it's only partially tied to the mental structure. Furthermore, I think it's worth dividing mental structure into cognitive--which is represented here--and affective structures. Motivational seems to involve both. It also involves a behavioral context outside the individual with regard to need provisioning and thwarts.

    57. interna1

      Did this pass through ocular character recognition software?

    58. What the computer actually stores need be none of our concern

      Machine readable vs. human readable.

    59. if the concept is given an explicit "handle" in the form of a representative symbol.

      Acronyms.

    60. we see the near-future course of the research toward augmenting the human's intellect as depending entirely upon empirical findings (past and future) for the development of better means to serve the development and use of mental structuring in the human.

      Are we still in the near future?

    61. (a) development of a garden

      Provisioning for basic needs. See SDT and Basic Psychological Needs Theory, for example.

    62. at that time

      Constantly shifting? Is a snapshot a useful unit of analysis? Is it possible to analyze?

    63. We feel reasonably safe in assuming that learning involves some kind of meaningful organization within the brain, and that whatever is so organized or structured represents the operating model of the individual's universe to the mental mechanisms that derive his behavior.

      At this point, they don't care whether it's a black box! Stuff comes out of it, so something's happening in there!

    64. (or whatever it is that is organized within the human mind)

      Metaphors We Live By: Basic orientational metaphor--minds are containers.

    65. "symbol structuring"

      Another (less humorous, more directly relevant) link. (Second segment--on Mr. Bliss.)

    66. of the basic physical processes

      Link.

    67. hierarchical

      Seems like we could choose a better word here too. Determinant? Dependencies? Hierarchical calls up authority, which isn't really what's happening.

    68. or the use of special drugs.

      Was I on to something with Thufir Hawat? The Spice must flow...

    69. Many of the branching paths in the decomposition of a given higher-order capability will terminate in the same basic capability, since a given basic capability will often be used within many different higher-order capabilities.

      And/Or as basic thinking functions present in writing--see Habits of the Creative Mind by Richard Miller and Ann Jurecic. (Was this book always this expensive?)

    70. As you proceed down through the hierarchy, you will begin to encounter capabilities that cannot be usefully changed, and these will make up your inventory of basic capabilities.

      If this is limited by human imagination, is it tentative because imagination is augmentable?

    71. capability

      For some reason my intuition is that the word affordance is better here.

    72. and a thorough job of redesigning the system calls for making an inventory of the basic capabilities available.

      Man, I'm such a situationist. I'm hesitant about locating capabilities as intrinsic/internal to any of these systems (as opposed to emergent properties arising out of the intersection of system and context.

    73. Also, the effort in doing calculations and writing down extensive and carefully reasoned argument would dampen individual experimentation with sophisticated new concepts,

      Maybe. Or maybe it would result in a more mentalist situation, with those operations more self-contained in the explicit-human part of the system. Thufir Hawat, anybody?

    74. in an environment where the combination of artifact materials and muscle strengths were so scaled that the neatest scribing tool (equivalent to a pencil, possible had a shape and mass as manageable as a brick

      Different values for g?

    75. If we want to hurry the writing, we have to make it larger.

      Which has resource usage implications--if you have to write larger, you're going to need more paper. And I wonder what effect more frequent page turning would have on reading fluency.

      This thought process of mine seems like a nice example of how quickly these things might get complex. Definitely a chaos-theory level of combinatorial cluster** here--and quickly. It's not a slow divergence, I'm imagining.

    76. Actually, it turned out to be simpler to invert the problem and consider a change that would reduce our capability for external symbol manipulation.

      Like Nick Bostrom in The Reversal Test.

    77. The direct effect of the external-symbol-manipulation means upon language would produce an indirect effect upon the way of thinking via the Whorfian-hypothesis linkage.

      This is hard for me to wrap my brain around. I want it to climb down a few rungs on the ladder of abstraction before climbing back up.

    78. Under such evolutionary conditions, it would seem unlikely that the language we now use provides the best possible service to our minds in pursuing comprehension and solving problems.

      Agree. This is part of why I think some of the thought-technologies from Evoke (one of my employers) were so useful--they adapted language for use in a very specific way.

    79. If this is true, and if language is (as it seems to be) a part of a self organizing system, then it seems probable that the state of a language at a given time strongly affects its own evolution to a succeeding state.

      Contingency. See Kevin Kelly's What Technology Wants.

    80. lower

      Down Is Bad metaphor

    81. It is upon their capabilities that the ultimate capability of the system will depend.

      Nope nope nope. It will also depend on the nature of the problem they're being trained toward (on).

      Apparently I'm feeling a little snarky? Mostly I just want to throw my hand up and say, "Your analysis is great, and Imma let you speak, but it's still way more complicated."

    82. Two-Domain System

      But are they?

    83. native

      William Gibson style? I'm not sure it doesn't. Plus, the word "native" is wiley like a coyote.

    84. This term seems directly applicable here, where we could say that synergism is our most likely candidate for representing the actual source of intelligence.

      Disagree strongly. I'd say synergism is the reason that intelligence is a black box situation--since the inputs pass through a complex (as opposed to complicated) system, they're not legible to us, but just because the inputs are rendered illegible doesn't mean the box that obscures them is itself the cause.

    85. derived ultimately from the characteristics of individual nerve cells

      Disagree with this too. Would nerve cells, grown in culture, have anything like the intelligence described here?

    86. Many of the external composing and manipulating (modifying, rearranging) processes serve such characteristically "human" activities as playing with forms and relationships to ask what develops, cut- and-try multiple-pass development of an idea, or listing items to reflect on and then rearranging and extending them as thoughts develop.

      This is a stumbling block for me. I've re-read it a couple times and I'm still confused.

    87. To redesign a structure, we must learn as much as we can of what is known about the basic materials and components as they are utilized within the structure

      Chesterton's Fence.

    88. The realization that any potential change in language, artifact, or methodology has importance only relative to its use within a process' and that a new process capability appearing anywhere within that hierarchy can make practical a new consideration of latent change possibilities in many other parts of the hierarchy -- possibilities in either language, artifacts, or methodology -- brings out the strong interrelationship of these three augmentation means.

      This seems to be a core element here.

    89. throughout the entire capability hierarchy (calling for a system approach).

      I think this harkens back to my blog post about the augmentation of collective emotional intelligence.

    90. If it is a complex memo

      I think you're underestimating the ease by which we arrive at a "complex" memo--my intuition is that the very act of writing something down (implicit in the form of a "Memo") changes thoughts from what they would otherwise be if they're not a "composite".

      (Aside: Does vocalizing something follow similar logic? I don't know that I'd go so far as to say predictable, but are there inevitable changes that take place for thought in the process of communicating them (vs. thoughts that go uncommunicated).)

    91. what we call the executive capability.

      Are you the originator of the term "executive functioning"?

      You're not mentioned in the relevant Wikipedia article.

    92. a free outpouring of thoughts

      See Peter Elbow. I'd call this a thought technology in its own right.

    93. For instance, trial drafts could rapidly be composed from re-arranged excerpts of old drafts, together with new words or passages which you stop to type in.

      Copy/Paste functions. See also this suggestion for adding swap.

    94. The memo-writing process may be executed by using a set of process capabilities (in intermixed or repetitive form) such as the following planning, developing subject matter, composing text, producing hard copy, and distributing.

      One implication of the every-process-is-part-of-a-sub-process is that somewhere down the line, we're likely to hit tacit/sub-conscious/implicit processes over which we don't exhibit or exert conscious control. Some of these we might be able to make explicit, and some we might not be able to.

    95. integument

      Making a distinction based on the physical boundary of the (a) human organism. This seems like an artificial distinction.

    96. within

      Container metaphor. Capabilities within tools seems to mis-locate them--it seems much more likely that a "capability" is an emergent property arising from the system that includes tool and context (and purpose).

    97. No person uses a process that is completely unique every time he tackles something new.

      Alternatively: Every process every person uses is completely unique every time.

      The difference between these positions is perceptual, not a feature of the system (except insofar as perceptions are emergent properties of those systems).

    98. Although every sub-process is a process in its own right

      Holons.

    99. Every process of thought or action is made up of sub-processes.

      Separable sub-processes.

    100. It is the augmentation means that serve to break down a large problem in such a way that the human being can walk through it with his little steps, and it is the structure or organization of these little steps or actions that we discuss as process hierarchies.

      I'm wondering about something like climate (biosphere) derangement. What if what's called for isn't any given step, but a sea-change in collective perspective? It seems like this paper has one foot in the circle of techno-fundamentalism re: problem solving. Operationalizing things by breaking them down into smaller, solvable chunks is reductionism...

    101. In other words, the human mind neither learns nor acts by large leaps, but by steps organized or structured so that each one depends upon previous steps.

      Is this self-evident? Depends on what the definition of a "large leap" is, doesn't it? (Maybe definition isn't the right word for this--since largeness perhaps can't be defined.)

    102. The explicit new system we contemplate will involve as artifacts computers, and computer-controlled information-storage, information-handling, and information-display devices.

      Why limit this? Artifacts might also include material possessions like comfortable beds, hygiene products, etc. that enhance health/wellbeing and meet needs that sponsor the intellectual work to be done.

      Or, a web of sponsoring human relationships.

    103. for human comfort

      This seems like something strange to include.

    104. and moving the whole structure about five feet,

      Different selection tools (e.g lasso).

    105. one of its important precepts is to pursue the quickest gains first,
    106. one of its important precepts is to pursue the quickest gains first, and use the increased intellectual effectiveness thus derived to help pursue successive gains.

      Bootstrapping.

    107. If Section II begins to seem unrewardingly difficult, the reader may find it helpful to skip from Section II-B directly to Section III.
    108. that compare to those made in personal geographic mobility since horseback and sailboat days.
    109. In the first (search) phase of our program we have developed a conceptual framework that seems satisfactory for the current needs of designing a research phase.
    110. like most systems its performance can best be improved by considering the whole as a set of interacting components rather than by considering the components in isolation.
    111. We do not speak of isolated clever tricks that help in particular situations.
    112. Increased capability in this respect is taken to mean a mixture of the following: more-rapid comprehension, better comprehension, the possibility of gaining a useful degree of comprehension in a situation that previously was too complex, speedier solutions, better solutions, and the possibility of finding solutions to problems that before seemed insoluble.
    1. In so far as feasibility is concerned, speech production poses less severe problems of a technical nature than does automatic recognition of speech sounds.

      See Stephen Krashen on our not knowing all of the rules of English.

    2. In large part, the interest stems from realization that one can hardly take a military commander or a corporation president away from his work to teach him to type.

      I wanted to say this has been solved (ish), but this isn't the case. And it's clear that it's not the case when you watch students typing in classrooms--typing poorly. This seems like one of the more basic improvements agreeable to Engelbart's augmentation framework. With incredible knock-on effects.

    3. Computer-Posted Wall Display

      This hasn't been implemented to the extent that I think it could be--certainly lagging behind desk-surface stuff.

    4. Nowhere, to my knowledge, however, is there anything approaching the flexibility and convenience of the pencil and doodle pad or the chalk and blackboard used by men in technical discussion.

      Interesting to read in light of the perennial and extended discussions about productivity and displays and pencil/paper on the Cortext podcast.

    5. It is clear that, working within the loose constraints of predetermined strategies, computers will in due course be able to devise and simplify their own procedures for achieving stated goals.

      By recognizing functions, for example, with matching solutions formulated more simply? This seems like an application of trie memory, so long as you can be sure of parity. Which probably involves checking multiple solutions (many?). I'm imagining a parabola, for whatever reason. This comment might be off the rails.

    6. Men appear to think more naturally and easily in terms of goals than in terms of courses.

      How about re-framing "courses" as a series of intermediary/instrumental goals? Thinking goal hierarchies again.

    7. By examining the storage at a given level, one can determine what thus-far similar items have been stored.

      I don't think I have sufficient grasp of what this means, but I think I see the contours, and the contours suggest it's important.

    8. The trie memory scheme is inefficient for small memories, but it becomes increasingly efficient in using available storage space as memory size increases.

      Upshot. Reminds me of using powers of two to express numbers as a memory saving tactic (mentioned in a recent Radiolab episode on cosmic rays and bit-flips).

    9. 5.3 Memory Organization Requirements

      This doesn't take long to brush up against the limitations of my technical understanding.

    10. trie memory

      Not an OCR typo. See Wikipedia.

    11. Implicit in the idea of man-computer symbiosis are the requirements that information be retrievable both by name and by pattern

      Yup. That's the main power of thinking in terms of view control.

    12. part indelible memory and part published memory.
    13. Published memory will be "read-only" memory.
    14. but it will accept a clearly secondary status in those areas.

      Psh.

    15. or in several alternative ways if the human operator is not sure what he wants

      More view control stuff (to use Engelbart's language).

    16. SAGE System

      Probably this.

    17. It seems likely that the contributions of human operators and equipment will blend together so completely in many operations that it will be difficult to separate them neatly in analysis.

      I think this is more true as time goes on.

    18. I could find nothing comparable to a time-and-motion-study analysis of the mental work of a person engaged in a scientific or technical enterprise.

      I think this is because it's much harder to do. We're moving toward it with things like time tracking software, but that's still not where it will be.

    19. At present, however, there are no man-computer symbioses.

      How 'bout now in 2019?

    1. Bloggers can bundle, but making Tweets look like Tweets is actually pretty difficult for normal people and even for geeks like me.

      This has been handled pretty well on a couple of platforms (Wordpress, the late lamented Storify, etc). Does anyone know whether it was fixed more on the Twitter API side or more on the bundling tool side? It's interesting to think that forms of information are more or less bundle-able (reactive or inert, in the atomic metaphor) and that this can be controlled as much by the publisher as by the remixer.

    2. Now, how does that mother build an online scrapbook of all the items that were poured into the system?

      The assumptions here are interesting. Does mom have the right to every picture taken at her party? Do the guests have the right to take pictures and post them on the web?

    3. 1. Search would INSTANTLY improve. (I need a whole blog post on why this is so).

      Does this exist? If so, did you update and re-distribute? I don't see a hyperlink here.

    4. Imagine I was talking about a real time event. The news is already 30 minutes old. We need a new system for real-time curation of what’s happening on my Twitter stream.

      What's the benefit of real-time vs. ten minutes later? What is the window, even, for real-time? If there's editorial content added, that doesn't happen instantaneously, and different subjects will require widely different investments of time for the editorial addition to not be ignorant, I can imagine.

    5. Seth Godin doesn’t have comments on his blog.

      Neither does Audrey Watters, and she's disabled Hypothes.is. Which brings up an interesting thought on individual agency within a system designed for collective augmentation.

    6. Of course, once you update you need to redistribute.

      News organizations and corrections--thinking about bad actors.

    7. Blogs are pretty bad at this. If I come back in two hours and update this post you probably won’t see the update. In fact, not only can I update this post, but everyone who leaves a comment underneath is really updating it too.

      Comment-as-update is an interesting thought.

    8. If you give me #7 without giving me #1 first your tool will suck and you won’t be used by curators.

      Sounds self-assured. This tone is a bit grating for me.

      Note: My encountering mentions of sexual harassment allegations against Scoble is coloring my reading.

    9. Real-time

      This is the answer to my above question. These previous instantiations of curation were not real-time.

    10. Real-time curators need to bundle.

      Is this list specific to web curation, or will it have analogs with curation in other media? (Bundling seems to be "built in" to something like a campus literary magazine.)

    11. Or I can forward those links to you via email. That’s curation.

      Ish? But mostly not really?

    1. by avoiding to work under tight time constraints and quantity-driven production goals.

      This is interesting.

    2. Attention to details empowers the curator to appreciate first and before others the traits and patterns of outstanding work.

      I think I'm predisposed to focus on fine distinctions of language use--particular personally accountable speech/autonomy supportive speech.

    3. order

      Coherence?

    1. Can we self-organize our research, discover, summarize, and prioritize what is known through theory and practice, then propose, argue, and share a tentative resource guide for peeragogical groups?

      Takes me back (always again) to the article on Carl Rogers and Non-Directive Teaching.

      Bringing resources and wrangling a few spaces (physical ones, in this case; notably one separate from the classroom where resources could be gathered and organized, and students could drop in most any time) were primary details.

    2. my third step was to elevate students to the status of co-learner

      Again, this metaphorical construct assumes that they aren't there to start with.

    3. we discovered that four students work better than six for a semester-long project

      I'm a bit hesitant about the universal language here. I think I'm wanting to know how some of the course's structural limitation are inputs into this outcome.

      Also, maybe humans aren't very good at this kind of collaboration yet, so maybe this is a local (temporally speaking) truth rather than a global one? It reminds me of some of the Sudbury critique about most educational research being conducted in the artificial environment of school (when it's not in the even more artificial environment of a controlled experiment).

    4. to take more responsibility

      MWLB: Responsibility, too, is an object.

    5. The more I give my teacher-power to students

      MWLB: Authority/Power is an object. (It can be possessed/given.)

    1. without necessarily visiting the site where you publish.

      This reminds me of a decision I made as a Peace Corps Volunteer--rather than blogging, I wrote regular emails, under the assumption that people would be more likely to read them if they showed up in an inbox than if they had to visit a blog.

    2. flood

      Metaphors We Live By

    1. Good to know this is something that can be annotated here. If someone else shows up here, I'd be curious what you think about Remi Kalir's Marginal Syllabus stuff--and whether we should follow suit here.

    1. Our institutions have not prepared us to be ongoing contributors to human knowledge, as we have been led to believe that this is the domain of “experts”.

      I certainly don't think I'm anywhere near as prepared as I would like to be--and I'm the beneficiary of an "elite" education.

    2. As a society we were in a state of shock and did not have the tools to deal with all of this time, so television filled the void.

      I think it's much more complicated than this explanation suggests.

    3. exchange

      The Ideas are Objects metaphor (and therefore Ideas Can Be Exchanged) doesn't seem to capture this. Propagation, replication, spread seems to be closer to what I think is appropriate. (Because if I 'give' you an idea, I have lost nothing--the idea has been duplicated. This is an important and salient point due to the implications it has for scarcity or lack thereof.)

    4. anytime and anywhere.

      Apparently you don't spend much time out of reseau.

    5. As years of sorting, categorizing and making explicit develop into a large amount of information we can begin to see its value.

      Accretion. I've wondered recently about creating some sort of document where I collect information on things I've explicitly cited in formal writing.

    6. There are many ways of making knowledge explicit.

      Is there a distinction to be made here between making explicit knowledge and making knowledge explicit? Certainly there are times when tacit knowledge transforms into explicit knowledge, but without awareness of what tacit knowledge we have, can we intentionally make it explicit? My sense is no, at least much of the time.

    7. Even more powerful than making our knowledge explicit is to make it public.

      Domain of One's Own

    1. phonetic signs, introduced to transcribe the name of individuals, marked the turning point when writing started emulating spoken language

      Interesting connection to identity and self-representation there.

    2. Writing was used exclusively for accounting until the third millennium BC, when the Sumerian concern for the afterlife paved the way to literature by using writing for funerary inscriptions

      I'm interested in this apparent instrumental - abstracted - literary/metaphysical progression. It seems to be recapitulated with great frequency (and not a one-way progression.)

    1. lay audiences

      Worth unpacking as a term.

    2. One of the most important events in the shaping of early print culture was the successful rebellion of the Netherlands. In their small, semi-autonomous provinces, numerous printing presses sprang up that operated relatively free of censorship, and provided an outlet for authors, even within areas held by the Counter-Reformation.
    3. Studies of Renaissance and early European print culture generally remain unrelated to work on the Enlightenment tradition and eighteenth-century thought.
    4. she remained dissatisfied with the continuing split between the history of ideas and the history of book publication.
    5. business

      This is where the page note with the Josh Marshall link is most relevant.

    6. allowed

      Metaphors We Live By: Implied anthropomorphic authority.

    7. Laying inherited scientific works side by side for the first time also pointed up discrepancies and contradictions. At the same time, the new ability to convey maps, charts, and pictures in a uniform and permanent way meant that older theories in cartography, astronomy, anatomy, and botany could be checked against new observations.
    8. it was possible for manuscript readers to imagine that the past minds of antiquity had possessed a much more complete understanding of the world, which had been fragmented and degraded over time.
    9. scattered and incomplete

      If you were relying on memory to compare--after time has elapsed to travel, say, from one monastery to another--you're going to end up with a qualitatively different kind of comparison that most present day textual comparison discussions.

    10. the most important feature was not that the literature was new, but rather than readers for the first time could see multiple texts together and compare them.
    11. She also emphasizes her belief that historians have underestimated the role of the printing press
    12. cooperating in a new, more cosmopolitan environment

      No Contest resonance.

    13. The passage of time no longer inevitably brought with it a lessening of knowledge.

      Related to a different Eisenstein (Charles, this time) w/r/t decaying currencies--that money, unlike other commodities, does not rot/rust/etc.--and that knowledge may be more like money post-printing press than it was prior.

    14. reversed

      Metaphors We Live By: Attitudes have directions. I'm skeptical about this--my instinct is that it's more complex than a reversal, which means this orientational metaphor obscures some things I think are important.

    15. could now focus their efforts on revision

      Chris Friend's Computers and Writing essay chapter I read recently in Disrupting the Digital Humanities.

    16. tremendous difficulties in preserving the knowledge

      e.g. Copying errors, which means there's space for a discussion of the way writing has influenced memetics.

      (Contingency, Adaptability, Inevitability from Kevin Kelly's What Technology Wants as features of a replicator--see also that original chapter from Richard Dawkins' The Selfish Gene)

    17. fundamentally changed the mentality of early modern readers
    1. I propose an architecture of layers of interoperability to unbundle complex, inflexible, and monolithic systems iii and increase competition, cooperation, generativity, and flexibility.

      I can't get behind a general comment on increasing competition.