Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!mit-eddie!ll-xn!ames!ucbcad!ucbvax!OZ.AI.MIT.EDU!Wayne From: Wayne@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU (Wayne McGuire) Newsgroups: comp.society.futures Subject: Filtering A Global Hypermedia Network Message-ID: Date: Thu, 19-Nov-87 07:23:00 EST Article-I.D.: MIT-OZ.MDCG.WAYNE.12351836366.BABYL Posted: Thu Nov 19 07:23:00 1987 Date-Received: Sun, 22-Nov-87 08:16:07 EST References: Sender: usenet@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Organization: The ARPA Internet Lines: 59 Even after a robust global hypermedia network is brought into being --one which richly interlinks the full semantic and propositional content of all the texts and digitized audio/visual works in the world, including all the informal and spontaneous nth levels of commentary on primary works by anyone and everyone--one will still require an intelligent filter to make this information manageable, to access it and use it most productively and not get buried by trivia. Perhaps powerful filters, albeit local not global, will be required _especially then_, even more than now. Even if one is stationed on a fairly specialized node of hypermedia knowledge space--let's say parallel processing programming languages--each day is likely to bring into one's mailbox or dynabook far more items, and pointers to items, and pointers to pointers to items, etc. than anyone would be able usefully to sort through and prioritize with the aim of reading carefully even a small percentage of the take. In this situation a global superintelligence and information evaluator would be helpful in deciding which handful of hundreds or thousands of links and pointers attached to a given item is, from the cognitive context of a particular user, worth tracking down in depth. Hypermedia will not alter the fundamental human constraint that we read words and documents serially, one after another, and that while the volume of new information is exploding, the time in which to select and meaningfully absorb knowledge from the world remains constant. Another thought on how a global intelligence might use user models and profiles assembled by personal assistants: any GM (Global Mind) worth its salt, and able to learn from its experience, would be able to say in the case of Person X, I've seen nearly 5,000 cases like this one before; by abstracting all the knowledge from those previous cases, there is a high probability that X needs or wants Y, but doesn't yet know it and wouldn't know how to get Y if he or she even knew that Y was required and available. I know exactly the best way to open X's mind to the knowledge that Y is probably what they need to pay attention to now to get on with the next stage in their development. Of course, the privacy issue still looms large in all this, and the potential for abuse (as in the thought recognition research you earlier alerted us to) is enormous. One should always have the option simply to say no to cooperating with a personal assistant which in turn is cooperating with a global supermind. In a worst-case scenario one's micro could become one's figurative jailer, the oppressive agent of a police state, and not really your good buddy in the quest for self-realization. Yet another thought: each day now in many settings, from global networks to small BBS's, thousands of email messages are being exchanged, many of which are gropiong in deep ignorance on sundry topics. The person who left a message on a Virginia BBS yesterday (this actually happened) which reveals a misunderstanding of cryptographic techniques doesn't know that someone somewhere else in the world, on a network that is invisible to him, left a message on the same day and on the same topic that dispells this ignorance. One can see possibilities in these situations for an automateed Global Referee (to be turned on or off at will, of course), specializing in spreading the light and tearing down walls of ignorance. How about a standard hypermedia link/property: is-more-authoritative-than. Wayne