January 2008 Archives
I first read Pea’s piece two years ago, in rereading my initial response to it I am struck by the evolution of my own thoughts on the concept of distributed intelligence. First, I based my entire response on a misunderstanding of Pea’s use of the word intelligence.
“Pea discusses the role of tools in distributed intelligence, mentioning such items as pulse meters and currency exchange calculators saying, “These tools literally carry intelligence in them … (53).” I interpret him to be referring to the intelligence of the designer of said tools and that the designer has embedded his/her intelligence within them. But this could also be interpreted to mean the items encase a web of intelligence unique to themselves. I am disturbed by the position. Artifacts carry the result of an individual’s ability to use his/her intelligence but, in my opinion, not the intelligence itself. That would be as if the pop-up paperclip at the bottom of my word processing program was actually reading and thinking about what I was writing before it suggested help in writing my letter. Though Pea does say, “a software program may provide timely cues to the different subtasks of writing … (68)” in regards to distributed intelligence, finding and helping with problems this does not mean the paperclip is actually intelligent.”
As I revisit the piece I am struck by my prior error. Pea does not intend for intelligence to be confused with cognition. Intelligence, in his opinion, is “accomplished rather than possessed (Pea, 50)”. This connects intelligence with action, of achieving understanding and crafting solutions rather than mere thought processes, as I previously supposed. In this sense, intelligence must, by definition, be distributed throughout a population. One person knows how to build a house, another milk a cow and a third darn socks and by pooling their respective intelligences a functional community is formed.
We cyber-immigrants are faced with the same general need to pool our collective aptitudes and produce an end which is greater than the sum of it’s parts. If intelligence were not distributed, we would be born knowing everything we need to know in life, but this does not occur. Children are taught how to function in the world. These lessons are passed down from generation to generation with the instructions becoming modified to fit a changing environment. As we grow we sit in classrooms, discussing and debating our own ideas as well as the ideas of those who have come before us. A book is a simple example of “off-loading” thoughts. By capturing an idea in writing it no longer belongs to the individual but is free to be modified and applied by the collective.
This is the epitome of web 2.0! Sharing ideas, passing along conclusions, refining thoughts all with the help of potentially EVERYONE. Anyone can read and comment on anyone else’s posted ideas. These comments can either be internalized by the author and used to refine his/her argument or they can be rebutted but either way the idea has changed. Posts are copied, forwarded, altered and parodied. They squirm out of the individuals’ head and into the hands of others taking on a life of their own.
Distributed intelligence is faster, easier and more widespread than ever. Have a question? Simply, “google it” to find an answer or start a thread in a discussion board and hear what other’s have to say. With the inception of web 2.0 we are no longer bound by bricks and mortar. Friendships are formed, ideas are shared, debated and revised, lessons are learned and taught, and data is available in real-time – the potential of distributed intelligence is far reaching and remarkable but we must also never cast aside human-held cognition in exchange for machine-held intelligence.
As a the world community becomes increasingly meshed it becomes even more imperative to form a reflective practice of connection to off-line culture, traditions and values. We are a collective species, we do not thrive in isolation. So even if you’re a member of a thriving on-line community, make a point to drop into someone’s office instead of emailing them, dial the phone instead of sending a text message and smile at a stranger instead of sending a ☺. Though ((((hugs)))) can cheer you up they will never be as good as sharing a cup of coffee with a friend or having an actual shoulder to cry on. Web 2.0 may enhance our distributed intelligence but reading about how to tie your shoes should never replace a parents’ loving instruction and guidance.
“Pea discusses the role of tools in distributed intelligence, mentioning such items as pulse meters and currency exchange calculators saying, “These tools literally carry intelligence in them … (53).” I interpret him to be referring to the intelligence of the designer of said tools and that the designer has embedded his/her intelligence within them. But this could also be interpreted to mean the items encase a web of intelligence unique to themselves. I am disturbed by the position. Artifacts carry the result of an individual’s ability to use his/her intelligence but, in my opinion, not the intelligence itself. That would be as if the pop-up paperclip at the bottom of my word processing program was actually reading and thinking about what I was writing before it suggested help in writing my letter. Though Pea does say, “a software program may provide timely cues to the different subtasks of writing … (68)” in regards to distributed intelligence, finding and helping with problems this does not mean the paperclip is actually intelligent.”
As I revisit the piece I am struck by my prior error. Pea does not intend for intelligence to be confused with cognition. Intelligence, in his opinion, is “accomplished rather than possessed (Pea, 50)”. This connects intelligence with action, of achieving understanding and crafting solutions rather than mere thought processes, as I previously supposed. In this sense, intelligence must, by definition, be distributed throughout a population. One person knows how to build a house, another milk a cow and a third darn socks and by pooling their respective intelligences a functional community is formed.
We cyber-immigrants are faced with the same general need to pool our collective aptitudes and produce an end which is greater than the sum of it’s parts. If intelligence were not distributed, we would be born knowing everything we need to know in life, but this does not occur. Children are taught how to function in the world. These lessons are passed down from generation to generation with the instructions becoming modified to fit a changing environment. As we grow we sit in classrooms, discussing and debating our own ideas as well as the ideas of those who have come before us. A book is a simple example of “off-loading” thoughts. By capturing an idea in writing it no longer belongs to the individual but is free to be modified and applied by the collective.
This is the epitome of web 2.0! Sharing ideas, passing along conclusions, refining thoughts all with the help of potentially EVERYONE. Anyone can read and comment on anyone else’s posted ideas. These comments can either be internalized by the author and used to refine his/her argument or they can be rebutted but either way the idea has changed. Posts are copied, forwarded, altered and parodied. They squirm out of the individuals’ head and into the hands of others taking on a life of their own.
Distributed intelligence is faster, easier and more widespread than ever. Have a question? Simply, “google it” to find an answer or start a thread in a discussion board and hear what other’s have to say. With the inception of web 2.0 we are no longer bound by bricks and mortar. Friendships are formed, ideas are shared, debated and revised, lessons are learned and taught, and data is available in real-time – the potential of distributed intelligence is far reaching and remarkable but we must also never cast aside human-held cognition in exchange for machine-held intelligence.
As a the world community becomes increasingly meshed it becomes even more imperative to form a reflective practice of connection to off-line culture, traditions and values. We are a collective species, we do not thrive in isolation. So even if you’re a member of a thriving on-line community, make a point to drop into someone’s office instead of emailing them, dial the phone instead of sending a text message and smile at a stranger instead of sending a ☺. Though ((((hugs)))) can cheer you up they will never be as good as sharing a cup of coffee with a friend or having an actual shoulder to cry on. Web 2.0 may enhance our distributed intelligence but reading about how to tie your shoes should never replace a parents’ loving instruction and guidance.
I am not at my best in the morning but am striving to use my time
better in 2008, yet after watching Web 2.0 I may have to change my
resolution. With my eyes still groggy with sleep and soy latte in hand I clicked into youtube to watch Web 2.0 -- whoa -- it was too early to attempt to change my identity! Yet, slowly I realized, I have been evolving, becoming more and more connected to my 'machine'.
While I continue to find comfort in putting pen to paper, the call of instant 'publication' is enticing. No longer are my thoughts solely mine, not only can anyone read my writing but unlike traditional publication, anyone can comment on my writing as well. I can literally engage in a conversation with my readers. Their opinions can alter the direction of a piece and revisions are instantaneous, so when is a piece ever final?
Books don't change. I love that -- the same words I read, pages I turn, margins I scribble in could have been touched, read, absorbed by ANYONE! When you hold an old book you are holding history in your hands. But where is history going now?
We claim to be documenting our lives, sharing our viewpoints and expanding everyone's world view. But tomorrow we can go back and hit 'delete'. Edits, alterations and ideas are hidden or erased in an instant. Even while writing this piece I have gone back and changed entire sentences but if I hadn't told you, you would have never known. But you can stand in the Library of Congress and actually see where Benjamin Franklin changed words, moved paragraphs and rearranged the skeleton of our country.
Early drafts of the Declaration of Independence are a mess, but they
live on! If it had been written today, all we would have in 200 years
is a link we could click on to read that day's version of history.
So I am currently struggling through a love-hate relationship with the digital world. Without it I would not have access to the hundreds of journal articles I read every year from the comfort of my living room couch, could not look up the weather in Italy on a whim and could not listen to any song I wanted to the moment I have the urge and my writing would, most likely, remain hidden in my journals but it would remain.
When I attempted to migrate my old blog entries into the new system, I feared they were lost forever when the computer could not find my saved export file. Months of writing gone.
I've been told I need to 'back-up' my files, create copies of copies so nothing is lost. People spend hours waiting for their computers to sync with hand-held devices and external hard-drives. While we 'back-up' our digital identities are we letting our un-virtual identities slip away?
How long will it be before we can plug in and down-load our thoughts into a machine? If we can live out our lives on-line, with no need to even go grocery shopping, how long will it be before we can create a digital scrapbook of sorts? A file we can access at any time to review what was(n't), the trips untaken, baseballs unthrown and waves un-played in. How long will it be before we need a back-up life?
While I continue to find comfort in putting pen to paper, the call of instant 'publication' is enticing. No longer are my thoughts solely mine, not only can anyone read my writing but unlike traditional publication, anyone can comment on my writing as well. I can literally engage in a conversation with my readers. Their opinions can alter the direction of a piece and revisions are instantaneous, so when is a piece ever final?
Books don't change. I love that -- the same words I read, pages I turn, margins I scribble in could have been touched, read, absorbed by ANYONE! When you hold an old book you are holding history in your hands. But where is history going now?
We claim to be documenting our lives, sharing our viewpoints and expanding everyone's world view. But tomorrow we can go back and hit 'delete'. Edits, alterations and ideas are hidden or erased in an instant. Even while writing this piece I have gone back and changed entire sentences but if I hadn't told you, you would have never known. But you can stand in the Library of Congress and actually see where Benjamin Franklin changed words, moved paragraphs and rearranged the skeleton of our country.
Early drafts of the Declaration of Independence are a mess, but they
live on! If it had been written today, all we would have in 200 years
is a link we could click on to read that day's version of history.So I am currently struggling through a love-hate relationship with the digital world. Without it I would not have access to the hundreds of journal articles I read every year from the comfort of my living room couch, could not look up the weather in Italy on a whim and could not listen to any song I wanted to the moment I have the urge and my writing would, most likely, remain hidden in my journals but it would remain.
When I attempted to migrate my old blog entries into the new system, I feared they were lost forever when the computer could not find my saved export file. Months of writing gone.
I've been told I need to 'back-up' my files, create copies of copies so nothing is lost. People spend hours waiting for their computers to sync with hand-held devices and external hard-drives. While we 'back-up' our digital identities are we letting our un-virtual identities slip away?
How long will it be before we can plug in and down-load our thoughts into a machine? If we can live out our lives on-line, with no need to even go grocery shopping, how long will it be before we can create a digital scrapbook of sorts? A file we can access at any time to review what was(n't), the trips untaken, baseballs unthrown and waves un-played in. How long will it be before we need a back-up life?
