Docstoc

Lecture Welcome to artstream ucsc edu University of California

Document Sample
Lecture Welcome to artstream ucsc edu University of California Powered By Docstoc
					  hypertext 2: as we may write

              fdm 20c introduction to digital media
                            lecture 07.04.2003




warren sack / film & digital media department / university of california, santa cruz
last time
• specific questions
     •   who was vannevar bush?
     •   who was emanuel goldberg?
     •   what is a microfilm selector?
     •   what is a memex? is the www a memex?
• general questions
     • what is the stated motivation of the research?
     • what problem does this research address?
     • who funded this research?
     • what is the economics of the work (i.e., who will buy it?, sell
       it?, use it?)
     • who are the “dramatis personae” of the article?
          – e.g., “humans,” scientists, men, “girls,” secretaries, etc.
     • how is a machine un/like a person?
     • what is “thinking”?
outline

• who is douglas engelbart?
   – artist, designer, writer, scientist, engineer?

   – does his “framework” allow him to escape these categorizations?

• a reading of “augmenting human intellect”

• who is ted nelson?
   – artist, designer, writer, scientist, engineer?

• an abbreviated reading of “a file structure for the complex”

• hypertext as reified strategy of reading and writing
   – is it art?, design?, science?, technology? education?, a method of
     reading and writing?, all of the above?
engelbart: cv

• education
     • ph.d. electrical engineering, uc berkeley
     • b.eng., electrical engineering, uc berkeley
     • b.s., electrical engineering, oregon state university
• employment
     •   director of the bootstrap institute
     •   director of the bootstrap project (stanford)
     •   senior scientist, mcdonnell douglas
     •   senior scientist, tymshare, inc.
     •   director, augmentation research center, sri
     •   researcher, stanford research institute (now sri international)
     •   assistant professor, electrical engineering, uc berkeley
     •   electrical engineer, naca ames laboratory (now nasa)
     •   electronic/radar technician, us navy
engelbart: cv (continued)

• “firsts” of the augmentation research center
     •   the mouse
     •   2d display editing
     •   hypermedia & hypermedia email
     •   outline processing
     •   multiple window displays
     •   document version control
     •   shared-screen teleconferencing
     •   computer-aided meetings
     •   distributed client-server architecture
     •   virtual terminal protocols
     •   remote procedure call protocols
• more information
     • www.bootstrap.org; and,
     • sloan.stanford.edu/mousesite
computing of the 1960s

• common technologies of the 1960s
  – standard computer i/o of the 1960s was hollerith
    cards and paper printouts
  – standard computer-human interaction of the 1960s
    was batch processing
• research prototypes included...
  – Ivan Sutherland’s MIT Dissertation, the Sketchpad
    system (1963)
  – MIT Project MAC’s Compatible Time-Sharing System
    (1961) and later the Multiplexed Information and
    Computing Service (1969)
engelbart’s 1968 nls demo

• demo given to 1000 at the Fall Joint Computer
  Conference in San Francisco with computers
  and support staff in Menlo Park
questions: augmenting human intellect

    •   what is the stated motivation of the research?
    •   what problem does this research address?
    •   who funded this research?
    •   what is the economics of the work (i.e., who will buy it?, sell
        it?, use it?)
    •   what is the stated genealogy of the technology?
    •   who are the “dramatis personae” of the article?
    •   what narrative strategies are employed int he article?
    •   othering: who are “we”? who are “they”?
          – or, more specifically, how is a machine un/like a person?
    • what is “thinking”?
    • what is “reading”?
    • what is “writing”?
engelbart: motivation

• “Man’s population and gross product are increasing at a
  considerable rate, but the complexity of his problems grows still
  faster, and the urgency with which solutions must be found
  becomes steadily greater… Augmenting man’s intellect, …, would
  warrant full pursuit by an enlightened society…” [p. 95]
engelbart: stated problem

• “augmenting human intellect”
  =
  better & faster comprehension
  +
  better & faster & more solutions to problems
  [see p. 95]
engelbart: funding

• stanford research institute
• air force office of scientific research
• arpa projects
   – see j.c.r. licklider
   – see also arpa contractors meeting letter from ivan
     sutherland (7-8 april 1966)
      • sloan.stanford.edu/mousesite/EngelbartPapers/Contents.html
engelbart: economics

• short term
  – uses of the system could be envisioned with
    engelbart’s framework, but the multidisciplinary
    nature of the framework also made the uses of the
    system difficult to understand
• long term
  – engelbart >> xerox parc >> apple
  – engelbart >> personal computer industry and the
    products and companies involved in computer-
    supported cooperative work
engelbart: genealogy

• bush’s memex [p. 98]
• engelbart’s note and file system [p. 99-102]; cf.,
  hollerith cards
• general references to psychology, computer
  programming, “physical technology,” “display
  technology,” industrial engineering,
  management science, systems analysis,
  information retrieval [p. 104]; and, “dozens of
  disciplines in engineering, mathematics, and the
  social life, and physical sciences” [p.95]
• but note how -- except for bush’s work -- all of
  the prior work is only vaguely referenced
englebart: dramatis personae

  – “man”
  – humans
  – diplomats, executives, social scientists, life scientists,
    physical scientists, attorneys, designers [p. 95]
  – architect (a man) and “his clerk” [pp. 96-97]
  – vannevar bush [pp. 98-99]
  – douglas engelbart (in a first person narrative) [pp. 99-
    102]
  – “professional problem solvers” [p. 102]
  – “you” and “joe” (in a hypothetical narrative) [pp. 102-
engelbart: narrative strategies

• “graphic vision”/science fiction narrated in the
  second person
• reporting style
• personal reflection
• speculative voice
• demo: don’t forget the demo, the strongest
  rhetoric in new media
engelbart: othering: the
man/machine dichotomy
• H-LAM/T system: human using language,
  artifacts, methodology, in which he is trained
  – “There are two separate domins of activity within the
    H-LAM/T system: that represented by the system, in
    which all explcit-human processes occur; and that
    represented by the artifacts, in which all explcit-
    artifact processes occur. ... Exchange across this
    [man-artifact] interface occurs when an explicit-
    human process is coupled to an explicit-artifact
    process. [p. 96]
  – see diagram on page 96.
engelbart: what is thinking?

    • thinking as symbolic processing [see pp. 98-99; i.e., his
      comments on the Memex]
        – cf., Herbert Simon and Allen Newell’s understanding of humans
          and computers as symbolic processors
    • thinking as writing: see p. 104 of his fictional narrative:
        – “You are quite elated by this freedom to juggle the record of
          your thoughts, and by the way this freedom allows you to work
          them into shape. You reflected on this cut and try process
          really did appear to match the way you seemed to develop your
          thoughts. Golly, you could be writing math expressions, ad
          copy, or a poem, with the same type of benefit. You were
          ready to tell Joe that now you saw what he had been trying to
          tell you about matching symbol structuring to concept
          structuring...” [p. 104]
engelbart: what is reading?

• reading as rendering and restructuring: “...after
  a few passes through a reference, we very
  rarely go back to it in its original form. It sits in
  the archive like an orange rind with most of the
  real juice squeezed out.” [p. 108]
engelbart: what is writing?

• writing as thought/symbol (re)structuring: see,
  for instance, p. 101: “It became apparent that
  the final issuance from my work, the memo
  itself, would represent but one facet of a
  complex symbol structure that woulkd grow as
  the work progressed
ted nelson: cv

• education
  – b.a., philosophy, swarthmore
  – m.a., sociology, harvard
  – ph.d., media and governance, keio university
• inventor of hypertext
questions: a file structure for ...
    • what is the stated motivation of the research? (“to use the
      computer for personal files and creativity” [p. 134])
    • what problem does this research address? (lists of pointers
      and elements to be stored on disk (i.e., persistent data
      structures slightly more complicated than conventional
      database records) [p. 139])
    • who funded this research? (nelson [p. 134]
    • what is the economics of the work (i.e., who will buy it?, sell
      it?, use it?) unknown; see history of xanadu and nelson’s
      polemic again the www (ted.hyperland.com/buyin.txt)
    • what is the stated genealogy of the technology?
      (blackboards, bush’s memex and nelson’s own experiments
      with card files, etc. [pp. 134-135])
questions (continued)

    • who are the “dramatis personae” of the article? (writers,
      scientists, “the user”)
    • what narrative strategies are employed in the article?
      (personal stories, diagrams, technical citations; e.g., p. 131-
      132)
    • othering: who are “we”? who are “they”?
        – or, more specifically, how is a machine un/like a person?
    • what is “thinking”? (“I believe that a system as the ELF
      actually ties in better than anything previously used with the
      actual processes by which thought is progressively
      organized, whether into stories or hypertext or library
      categories. [p. 144])
    • what is “reading”? (an activity of filing and cross-indexing
      documents [figure 11.4])
    • what is “writing”? (“the task of writing is rearrangement and
      reprocessing” [p. 136])
hypertext: medium-as-mirror-as-prosthesis

 – in engelbart’s formulation the symbols stored and
   processed on the computer are “augmentations”
 – in nelson’s formulation they are “adjuncts”
 – medium-as-prosthesis: cyberneticians consider
   machines as prostheses or extensions to humans
   (and/or vice versa)
 – medium-as-mirror: researchers of (symbolic) artificial
   intelligence see the symbols of computation as the
   forms of thought
 – this difference in understandings of the medium of
   computation is, in some ways, bridged in the thinking
   of engelbart and nelson in the usage of writing-as-
   thinking-as-symbol-manipulation/rearrangement
hypertext/augmentation/adjunct

 – juxapose this with the other methodologies for
   reading and writing
    • surrealist/dadaist game of automatic writing
        – tristan tzara’s recipe for a poem
    • william burroughs on the cut up method
    • walter benjamin’s writings entitled passagewerken
    • ludwig wittgenstein’s method of composing his philosophical
      investigations
 – engelbart’s “framework” today:
    • see corporate strategies for “knowledge management”
    • see the writings of philosopher Pierre Levy on “collective
      intelligence”
 – nelson’s work today:
    • the www? but see nelson rant against the web as posted on,
      ironically, his current web page
next time

• tim berners-lee
• the world-wide web

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:2
posted:6/26/2012
language:
pages:25
jolinmilioncherie jolinmilioncherie http://
About