Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!mcnc!ece-csc!ncrcae!ncr-sd!hp-sdd!hplabs!ucbvax!OZ.AI.MIT.EDU!Wayne From: Wayne@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU.UUCP Newsgroups: comp.society.futures Subject: Filtering A Global Hypermedia Network Message-ID: Date: Fri, 20-Nov-87 05:18:00 EST Article-I.D.: MIT-OZ.MDCG.WAYNE.12352075787.BABYL Posted: Fri Nov 20 05:18:00 1987 Date-Received: Sun, 22-Nov-87 09:55:54 EST References: Sender: usenet@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Organization: The ARPA Internet Lines: 30 > Date: Fri, 20 Nov 87 01:36 N > From: (Thomas Fruin) > > What is the rationale for bringing a "global superintelligence" in to > solve the filtering problem for a global hypermedia network? There are > _so_ many disadvantages of having one centralized body: impracticality > due to size, reliability (what if the thing goes down), and the issue > of privacy you already mentioned. Impracticality due to size: with nanotechnology and Crays that will fit in pocket watches or teeth? Reliability: why can't a global mind or global hypermedia advisor replicate itself each day and be distributed by fiber optic or superconductive links in multiple copies throughout all the cities in the world? If one goes down, just turn on another. Privacy: yes, a serious problem, but you should realize that we already leave behind us a large and detailed digital trail which profiles our most intimate habits of mind. Many large corporations and government agencies can access and manipulate that data now. Your privacy is already long gone. So why would one want a global hypermedia advisor? For the same reasons, I suppose, that most of us would rather take advantage of the resources of the Library of Congress or Harvard's Widener Library than those of our local public library: knowledge and power. It's a basic human drive. Wayne