57 Matching Annotations
  1. Mar 2022
  2. Jan 2022
    1. The essay is most famous for its description of a hypothetical information-retrieval system, the Memex, a kind of mechanical Evernote, in which a person's every "book, record, or communication" was microfilmed and cataloged.

      It really kills me that there's so much hero worship of all this, particularly given the information processing power of index card systems at the time. I don't really think it took such a leap to image automating such a system given the technological bent of the time.

      Of course actually doing it is another thing, but conceptualizing the idea at the time would have be de rigueur.

  3. Oct 2021
    1. It was a general‑purpose tool designed to help knowledge workers perform better and faster, and that was a controversial idea. Letting nonengineers interact directly with a computer was seen as harebrained, utopian—subversive, even.

      A revolutionary idea.

    2. The mother of all demos

  4. Sep 2021
    1. That payoff will come when we make better use of computers to bring communities of people together and to augment the very human skills that people bring to bear on difficult problems

      This quote by Doug Engelbart was selected for the IBM THINK Poster 2015 http://bit.ly/1DHBLYI. For more on the IBM THINK Exhibit see http://bit.ly/1oZu1RN.

      The quote is from Engelbart's paper "Improving our Ability to Improve" http://bit.ly/1po1K7p which he presented at the World Library Summit in Singapore in 2002.

  5. Aug 2021
    1. when you're reading some fresh code in your browser, do you really want to stop to configure that test harness

      Running the tests should be as easy as opening something in the browser.

  6. May 2021
  7. Mar 2021
    1. Douglas Engelbart, who published a vision of tools empowering humans in his pioneering 1962 paper Augmenting Human Intellect: A Conceptual Framework.
    1. Engelbart’s strategic vision began with the recognition of a major reason why some large-scale problems continue to elude humankind’s best efforts. His radical scale change principle asserts that as a complex system increases in scale, it changes not only in size but also in its qualities. This principle, in fact one of the three basic laws of Hegelian dialectic, seems at odds with the common-sense view that large-scale systems are reducible to smaller-scale parts without loss of qualities. Even if Engelbart knew that the computer was just another artifact at a time when more engineering was not necessarily the solution, he also knew that this specific language artifact was offering unusual characteristics. He understood that the computer was opening the cognitive realm to more dimensions than the usual three, allowing non-linear thinking. But, most importantly, it was extremely fast; it could calculate, display and help organize ideas at a blazing speed. He realized that the introduction of the computer, as a powerful auxiliary to human intellect, could turn a quantitative change into a qualitative change. Facing numerous too urgent and complex problems, the little inelastic mind of the human being could, with the augmentation of the computer, become up to the challenge. Most importantly, this basic tenet of his philosophy ended up playing as important of part in the human system as in the tool system.


    1. In a 1995 interview for JCN Profiles entitled “Visionary Leaders of the Information Age,” Engelbart argues that, while tech (which he calls “the tool system”) has advanced beyond anyone’s wildest dreams, “the human system” continues to lag. He explains: The scale of change [on the tool side was] going to increase by huge factors in the coming decades. It became apparent to me then that this human system side was in for massive, massive changes. […] Are we ready for viewing the scale of change on this [human] side that it will take in order to really, really harness what’s over here [tool side]? […] We better start learning and being explicit about this change in the human system rather than just letting the product people throw new stuff at us.

      在1995年JCN Profiles的题为“信息时代有远见的领导者”的采访中,恩格尔巴特认为,虽然科技(他称之为 "工具系统")的进步超出了任何人最疯狂的梦想,但“人类系统”却继续落后。他解释道:


    2. When I look at what the connected world has become, I can’t help but feel that Mike Daisey was right: “We were hopelessly naïve.” And the more I learn about Douglas Engelbart, the earliest days of the personal computer, and the internet, the more I believe that the technology that currently shapes our experience of the world is designed based on unquestioned assumptions and ideologies. By questioning them now, perhaps we can change the future.

      当我看到互联世界变成了什么样子,我不禁觉得迈克·戴西(Mike Daisey)是对的:"我们是无可救药的天真"。我对道格拉斯·恩格尔巴特(Douglas Engelbart)——个人电脑和互联网诞生之初——了解得越多,我就越相信,如今塑造我们的世界体验的技术,是基于无可置疑的假设和意识形态设计出来的。通过现在对它们的质疑,也许我们可以改变未来。

    1. I was pretty annoyed with myself for having fallen for the trap of not documenting my own systems, but not sure how I could have remembered all of the Hugo-isms

      I've explained such a system, and promised Andy Chu an example that I've yet to be able to complete, but it comes down to this:

      A website is fundamentally a document repository. One of the first documents that you should store in that repository is one which explains, in detail, the procedures for provisioning the host powering the site and how content gets published. (Even better if it's so detailed that the procedures exhibit a degree of rigor such that a machine can carry them out, rather than requiring manual labor by a human.)

  8. Feb 2021
    1. Three principal conclusions may be drawn concerning the significance and implications of the ideas that have been presented.6a First any possibility for improving the effective utilization of the intellectual power of society's problem solvers warrants the most serious consideration. This is because man's problem-solving capability represents possibly the most important resource possessed by a society. The other contenders for first importance are all critically dependent for their development and use upon this resource. Any possibility for evolving an art or science that can couple directly and significantly to the continued development of that resource should warrant doubly serious consideration.6b Second, the ideas presented are to be considered in both of the above senses: the direct-development sense and the 'art of development' sense. To be sure, the possibilities have long-term implications, but their pursuit and initial rewards await us now. By our view, we do not have to wait until we learn how the human mental processes work, we do not have to wait until we learn how to make computers more intelligent or bigger or faster, we can begin developing powerful and economically feasible augmentation systems on the basis of what we now know and have. Pursuit of further basic knowledge and improved machines will continue into the unlimited future, and will want to be integrated into the "art" and its improved augmentation systems—but getting started now will provide not only orientation and stimulation for these pursuits, but will give us improved problem-solving effectiveness with which to carry out the pursuits.6c Third, it becomes increasingly clear that there should be action now—the sooner the better—action in a number of research communities and on an aggressive scale. We offer a conceptual framework and a plan for action, and we recommend that these be considered carefully as a basis for action If they be considered but found unacceptable, then at least serious and continued effort should be made toward developing a more acceptable conceptual framework within which to view the over-all approach, toward developing a more acceptable plan of action, or both.6d This is an open plea to researchers and to those who ultimately motivate, finance, or direct them, to turn serious attention toward the possibility of evolving a dynamic discipline that can-treat the problem of improving intellectual effectiveness in a total sense. This discipline should aim at producing a continuous cycle of improvements—increased understanding of the problem, improved means for developing new augmentation systems, and improved augmentation systems that can serve the world's problem solvers in general and this discipline's workers in particular. After all, we spend great sums for disciplines aimed at understanding and harnessing nuclear power. Why not consider developing a discipline aimed at understanding and harnessing "neural power?" In the long run, the power of the human intellect is really much the more important of the two.




      第三,越来越清楚的是,现在就应该采取行动ーー越快越好ーー在一些研究机构采取行动,而且是大规模的行动。我们提出了一个概念框架和一项行动计划,我们建议将这些框架和计划作为行动的基础加以认真考虑。 如果考虑到这些框架和计划但发现它们不可接受,那么至少应继续认真努力,制定一个更可接受的概念框架,在此框架内看待总体方法,制定一个更可接受的行动计划,或两者兼而有之。

      这是对研究人员以及那些最终激励他们、资助他们或指导他们的人来说,是一个公开的呼吁:把严肃的注意力转向发展一门能够在总体意义上解决提高智力效率问题的动态学科的可能性。这一学科的目标应该是产生一个持续的改进循环——对问题认识的提高,改进开发新的增强系统的手段,以及改进的增强系统,可以服务于世界上的问题解决者,特别是本学科的工作者。毕竟,我们为旨在理解和利用核电的学科花费了大量的资金。为什么不考虑发展一门旨在理解和驾驭 "神经力量 "的学科呢?从长远来看,人类智力的力量确实是两者中更重要的。

  9. Jun 2020
    1. NexistWiki exists at the intersection of Weblogs, Wikis, and Douglas Engelbart's call for massive improvements in addressability and evolvability of information resources. Each object presented on a Webpage with NexistWiki is followed by two objects

      object followed by two objects

  10. May 2019
    1. a working station that has a visual display screen some three feet on a side; this is his working surface, and is controlled by a computer (his "clerk") with which he can communicate by means of a small keyboard and various other devices

      Here's an example of a state of the art workstation in 1962.

      Tektronix 4014.jpg<br>By The original uploader was Rees11 at English Wikipedia. - Transferred from <span class="plainlinks">en.wikipedia</span> to Commons., CC BY-SA 2.5, Link

    2. different planes here and there, curved surfaces occasionally

      Many new technologies were combined to realize this prescient sentence.

      WaltDisneyConcertHall.jpeg<br>By Jon Sullivan - PDPhoto, Public Domain, Link

    3. can be of significant benefit to the human in nonmathematical processes of planning, organizing, studying, etc.

      I'll be interested to see if this report is entirely Positivist, or if Engelbart recognizes the possibility of computing being weaponized in sectors like politics, economics, security and warfare.

    4. He is designing a building. He has already dreamed up several basic layouts and structural forms,

      I find it interesting how decades of using computers has led to "new methods of thinking and working that allow the human to capitalize upon the computer's help." With all the new technologies, I think the central intellectual development has been to reverse the sequence of design decisions Engelbart describes. Best practice these days is to start with "the people who will occupy this building, and the daily sequences of their activities."

    1. The individual does not use this information and this processing to grapple directly with the sort of complex situation in which we seek to give him help. He uses his innate capabilities in a rather more indirect fashion, since the situation is generally too complex to yield directly to his motor actions, and always too complex to yield comprehensions and solutions from direct sensory inspection and use of basic cognitive capabilities.

      The mention here of "innate capabilities" and the importance to yielding motor actions toward complex challenges, is noted. A question arises, regarding "basic cognitive capabilities" and their role in the process?

  11. Feb 2019
    1. These are only a few of the total, I'm sure

      As an educator, it's encouraging - in an odd sort of way - that formal schooling, the work of teaching, and (especially) K12 learning was not mentioned in this list given dominant narratives about technology replacing/improving the practices of teaching and learning.

    2. such that computer processes based upon these rules can be said to extract meaning from these statements and to do operations based upon this meaning.

      Given both recent research and highly publicized corporate missteps, is it not prudent to ask: What role does human bias play in designing the computer processes that extract meaning and perform operations?

    3. if you were being given a personal discussion-demonstration by a friendly fellow (named Joe)

      I thought it might be useful, at the outset of this section, to inquire about Engelbart's choices as an author. I'm struck by his decision to craft this expository and hypothetical description, to provide us readers with another set of entry points and scaffolds to better understand his prior arguments. Though the style and tenor is quite different, I'm reminded of Bernard Suits' book The Grasshopper that relied upon dialogue and extended analogy to rebut Wittgenstein's claims of "family resemblances." In any case, perhaps I'm most curious about unpacking authorial motivation and decision-making, for this section differs in so many ways from more conventional technical reports, literature reviews, or surveys of theory. This section may not have been necessary, but - presumably - it was included because it accomplished something the previous sections were unable to capture? Or is this "merely" for the purposes of exposition?

    4. maintain stoutly that a practical augmentation system should not require the human to have to do any computer programming—they feel that this is too specialized a capability to burden people with

      Jon Udell's conversation with Gardner Campbell touches upon this point, around minute 11. https://youtu.be/-lClojNraK4

    5. we very rarely go back to it in its original form

      I'm reminded of the Annotation for Transparent Inquiry project that is part of the Qualitative Data Repository.

    6. something like footnotes, only much more flexible

      Something, perhaps, like open annotation?

    7. Let us use what we call 'antecedent links'
    8. 'What's this?', 'How come?', and 'So what?'

      Oh, it's a dissertation defense.

    9. Golly, you could be writing math expressions, ad copy, or a poem, with the same type of benefit.

      Coming to this observation, as I read more deeply into this narrative, I'm curious about the generative tension between text (n) and text (v). How have others perceived, and perhaps also contributed to, the augmentation of text (n/v) - in terms of composition, editing, visualization...

    10. far-reaching effects throughout the rest of your capability hierarchy

      This is making me think of complaints about people's capabilities being reduced as we become more reliant on technological tools (e.g., not having the same acumen for arithmetic because we rely on calculators, or not remembering things as well because we rely on external memory aids). I suppose that if these claims are true we could say that in a way we are losing capabilities, but it might also be the case that we are relegating to a kind of composite or purely artifact process capability (as described above) something that was an explicit-human process capability. We aren't losing it, we're just moving it to a different aspect of our capabilities. And what other changes in our capabilities higher up the hierarchy might be made possible by doing this that wouldn't have been possible otherwise?

    11. We assume that it is our H-LAM/T system (Human using Language, Artifacts, Methodology, in which he is Trained) that has the capability and that performs the process in any instance of use of this repertoire.

      I'm really wishing right now that I knew more about cognitive science because I wonder to what degree empirical evidence suggests that our minds work in this very logical, hierarchical, organized way that sounds to my untrained ear like how one might conceive of computers working...is this an adequate model for the human mind as well given what we know empirically?

    12. just as the mechanic must know what his tools can do and how to use them, so the intellectual worker must know the capabilities of his tools and have good methods, strategies, and rules of thumb for making use of them.

      I keep thinking here about how many of these processes and sub-processes are likely unconscious or habitual to the extent that we don't actually know our tools well. Perhaps this is part of the model as well, though this way of putting it (that we need to know our tools and when to use each one) is not encompassing that idea for me.

    13. augmentation means, and we define four basic classes of them

      On a first read, this list is striking me as possibly too individualistic. Meaning, augmenting the intellect is about providing the individual with tools, methods, language and training. Is there a way in which we can augment our intellects, improve our problem-solving capacities, through better interactions with other people? A basic idea here would just be the ways in which we distribute our problem-solving capacities amongst people with different expertise, and find ways to bring our thoughts and capabilities together. Perhaps that is part of the "methodology," but the way that category is described here it's about how the individual uses methods rather than a larger description of the systems and structures and practices through which we are able to collaborate well (or not) to augment our collective problem-solving abilities. In what ways do these structures help or hinder our ability to solve complex problems, together?

    14. changes in our technology or in our understanding of the human being.

      Or changes in the human being that occur through changes in our technology (and our social relationships and practices as well).

    15. the intelligence of a human being, derived ultimately from the characteristics of individual nerve cells,

      Reduction/anti-reductionism debate awaits here.

    16. executive capability

      Executive capabilities/processes compared. Latter are tied to metacognition in some learning theories. Here tacit knowledge is included in capabilities and excluded from processes (i.e. as inferior or biasing?)- if I'm reading correctly.

    17. 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.

      Learning theory.

    18. 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.

      "Better, stronger, faster" like the Six Million Dollar Man. Clynes & Kline proposed the Cyborg in 1960. Engelbart's vision seems at once more far-reaching and less like science fiction.

    19. involving the unconscious processing and mediating of received and self-generated information, and the unconscious mediating of conscious processing itself.

      Anticipating more on this...

    1. effective intellectual augmentation was always realized within a system, and that any intervention intended to accelerate intellectual augmentation must be understood as an intervention in a system.

      "“the success of an intervention depends on the interior condition of the intervenor.” - Hanover Insurance's Bill O'Brien, quoted by Otto Schamer in The Blind Spot of Leadership: Presencing as a Social Technology of Freedom. This is the core of Theory U, a set of practices for individual and group self-awareness, intentionality, and innovation - i.e., the Human System as a complex, adaptive, anticipatory system.

  12. Jan 2019
    1. Augmenting Human Intellect: A Conceptual Framework

      You are in the right place for annotation Doug Engelbart's paper as part of the February 2019 Framework Project - see https://framework.thoughtvectors.net/

      For an overall view of activity here, see the paper's entry on CROWDLAAERS

    2. Are you curious about the collaborative annotation activity occurring atop Engelbart's conceptual framework? Use the CROWDLAAERS ("crowd layers") dashboard to view real-time analytics associated with text-participants, total annotations and replies, collaborative threads, active days, and tags. This link will always show updated learning analytics associated with this conversation as it grows over time - enjoy!

  13. Dec 2018
  14. Nov 2018
    1. Links in Images. It is of course possible to create image maps but the current tools do not support this for non-graphics people. Doug had the example of showing a basic map where each location name could be clicked on to jump to its corresponding document. This is not quick to do today. https://youtu.be/M5PgQS3ZBWA?t=953

      show picture of link

  15. May 2017
    1. An opportunity arises for interested NICs to connect and collaborate in a NIC of NICs, or MetaNIC, for collectively improving core capabilities like DKRs. This introduces an accelerative multiplier for member NICs and their constituent NICs.1g One type of MetaNIC will have special strategic significance – a NIC whose focus for improvement would be improving the development and utilization of DKRs. I would encourage many such NICs to explore this frontier.
  16. Mar 2017
    1. Distributed Cognition

      I heart this word, Heart heart heart it. What is the story of our species, if not the story of inventing tools for thought? Our global lightspeed telecommunications network has vastly expanded the distribution and the potential for tool using and tool making. We will be the victims of our own ingenuity unless we get smarter about distributed cognition. A very Engelbartian moment in Jenkins' paper.

  17. Jan 2017
    1. Three or four years later, Engelbart repeated his hypertext-meets-desktop-sharing-meets-video-conferencing demo. In the audience was an MIT prof described by Andries van Dam, another east-coast prof in attendance, as among "the best and the brightest" of the early 1970s computing cognoscenti. According to van Dam, at the end of the presentation, the MIT man raised his hand and said "I don't get it - everything you've shown me today I can do on my ASR-33."

      MIT profs don't see the value in Engelbart's technology.

    1. "Doug's demo was not unlike a flying saucer dropping out of the sky and landing on the White House lawn,Â" Saffo continues. Â"It just electrified this industry because it showed people the potential of computers that they never considered."

      Disruptive potential of inventions.

    1. People say that the 1968 Fall Joint Computer Conference in San Francisco was a watershed. After seeing your demonstration, people left that room never thinking about computers the same way again. Would you say that's an accurate encapsulation?

      Reception of the Mother of All Demos

  18. Apr 2016
    1. In 1968 Doug Engelbart showed a hypertext system that could link to regions within documents. I

      I love the YouTube videos of his demos. I was only recently made aware of them and was blown away by how many of their ideas are now realities.

  19. Mar 2016
    1. payoff will come when we make better use of computers to bring communities of people together and to augment the very human skills that people bring to bear on difficult problems

      This quote by Doug Engelbart was selected for the IBM THINK Poster 2015 http://bit.ly/1DHBLYI. For more on the IBM THINK Exhibit see http://bit.ly/1oZu1RN.

      The quote is from Engelbart's paper "Improving our Ability to Improve" http://bit.ly/1po1K7p which he presented at the World Library Summit in Singapore in 2002.

  20. Jan 2016
  21. Oct 2015
  22. Sep 2015