Ontological Breakdown



Date: Mon, 31 Jul 1995 15:16:24 -0700
From: delong@econ.berkeley.edu (Brad De Long)
To: apple-internet-users@abs.apple.com
Subject: Ontological Breakdown
Message-ID: 

I am not at all sure that this is the right place to put this. I can already hear Chuq Von Rospach saying "Now, if this were apple-philosophy-internet-virtuality..."

Nevertheless, the experience was profoundly disturbing, and made we want to consult a philosophical professional (in the same way that a health problem makes me want to consult a medical professional...)

Let me back up. For the past year or so one of my main Internet activities has been to use it to look for pictures of dinosaurs. The five-year-old sits on my right knee and the two-year-old on my left. We stare Triceratops eye-to-eye, and to count the teeth of Tyrannosaurus Rex. (The five-year-old is pretty good at following links; the two-year-old is still at the "Twicer'ops. Piktur Twicer'ops" stage.)

One of our favorite places is the address above: the University of California Museum of Paleontology-the UCMP. On the Internet, the UCMP is a marvelous virtual, interactive museum. It carries the endorsement of Adam C. Engst, who writes that he could "spend the rest of my afternoon here, browsing the exhibits, and all without hurting my feet."

Last June I stopped being a Senior Treasury Department Official, and became a Berkeley economics professor. Since the UCMP is in /berkeley.edu/, I asked around, and was told that the UCMP had just moved into the newly-renovated Valley Life Sciences Building.

So one afternoon I paused in my attempts to deal with the pile of paper created by the Associate Vice Chancellor for Sending Junk Mail to Faculty and the Assistant Associate Vice Chancellor for Thinking Up Pointless Rules, and the five-year-old, the two-year-old, and I crossed Strawberry Creek to enter the Valley Life Sciences Building.

We walked past a wall of news clipping and pictures of paleontological digs. We soon found ourselves in the central stairwell in front of a banner that said "University of California Museum of Paleontology." There was a very impressive Tyrannosaurus skull behind glass. On the next floor up there was a similarly impressive Triceratops skull. The hip bones of a Tyrannosaurus (a different Tyrannosaurus) hung suspended in the stairwell.

That was pretty much it. The UCMP really had just moved, and did not have all the public exhibits unpacked yet. By mid-September a Tyrannosaurus Rex will fill up the entire three-story stairwell. But the public fossil collection is very small: the UCMP is a _research_ museum, not a display museum: it is for twenty-five- year-old graduate students fascinated by posters with titles like "Acid Rain an Agent of Extinction at the K-T Boundary--Not!" This research museum is not designed for five-year-olds, or for thirty-five-year-olds who don't know as much about geology and chemistry as they should.

I stood in the stairwell. I looked at the few-very impressive-fossils. I thought to myself, "Let's get back to my office computer, so that we can link to http://ucmp1.berkeley.edu/expo/dinoexpo.html and see the real University of California Museum of Paleontology.

"The real museum," I thought, "has audio narration by the discoverers of dinosaurs. The real museum has many more bones-a Diplodocus skeleton, for one thing. The real museum has detailed exhibits on dinosaur evolution and geology...

"No-wait.

"_This_ is the real museum. The Internet Web site http://ucmp1. berkeley.edu/expo/dinoexpo.html is just the "virtual" image-an electronic reflection-of this place."

And that was when I felt I needed a consulting philosopher real bad.

There have long been speculations about how the electronic shadows made possible by the computer and telecommunications revolutions will acquire the intensity of effect, the immediacy, the complexity and the depth to become-in a certain sense-real. That afternoon in the Valley Life Sciences Building was the first time in my life that I had compared a place in the real world, the UCMP, to its virtual electronic image in cyberspace-and found the real world lacking, found that the real world experience lacked, compared to its virtual electronic image, the intensity of effect, the immediacy, the complexity, and the depth necessary for reality.

Thinking back, I realized that the electronic world behind the computer screen has been slowly acquiring reality-and the real world losing it-for some years. I check the card catalog for something or other every week; but it has been four years since I saw a wooden or metal drawer with 3 by 5 cards in it. If I say "it's on my desktop," I almost surely mean that a pointer to the computer file exists at the "root" level directory of my notebook computer. As far as desktops and card catalogs are concerned, the "virtual" images have so swamped the "real" objects as to make them vanish from my consciousness.

My cousin Tom Kalil tells me that cyberspace has obtained "liftoff": traffic on the NSFNET electronic network backbone is up from 3.6 billion bytes in March 1993 to 4.8 trillion bytes in March 1995. "WebCrawler" and "Yahoo" now index over 4 million electronic documents, and receive more than 9.4 million hits per week.

Some are oblivious to this transformation: I think of a respected academic elder who claimed that all physical discoveries since 1930 (including our current computer and communications technologies) were less significant than the past generation's "discoveries" in literary criticism-and who had the lack of perception (or perhaps he was simply irony-challenged) to make this claim in an electronic mail message!

For two generations people have been talking about how computers will have an extraordinary impact on human society and human knowledge. Our children will think as differently from us as we think differently from pre-Gutenberg monks, who would spend ten years copying and writing a commentary on one single illuminated manuscript. Our children will find our doctrines and beliefs as quaint as we find Socrates' distrust of the written word as an unsuitable tool for education.

The evening after returning from our expedition to the Valley Life Sciences Building I went upstairs to put the five-year-old to bed. He was talking-but not to himself.

"If you want to read books," he said, "click on the bookcase. If you want to play with dinosaur toys, click over here." He was pretending to be a Help System.

"To play with Lion King toys, click on the bottom of the bed."

I have pretended to be many things at play and work-a space explorer, a wise king, a Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, a Berkeley professor. But I never pretended to be a help system.

"If you need help, click on my picture on top of the dresser. I'll be there in a flash..."

Not only is the virtual world behind the computer screen acquiring reality, but the real world is acquiring aspects of virtuality as well...

Brad De Long

"Now 'in the long run' this [way of summarizing
the quantity theory of money] is probably
true.... But this **long run** is a misleading  | Brad De Long
guide to current affairs. **In the long run**   | Dept. of Economics
we are all dead.  Economists set themselves     | U.C. Berkeley
too easy, too useless a task if in tempestuous  | Berkeley, CA 94720
seasons they can only tell us that when the     | (510) 643-4027  376-1362
storm is long past the ocean is flat again."    | (510) 642-6615 fax

Re: Ontological Breakdown

Date: Tue, 1 Aug 1995 05:35:06 -0400
From: buddy@shadow.net (bud)
To: apple-internet-users@abs.apple.com
Subject: Re: Ontological Breakdown
Message-ID: 

>"To play with Lion King toys, click on the bottom of the bed."

Please buy this kid a ball glove. :)


Re: Ontological Breakdown

Date: Tue, 1 Aug 1995 10:06:52 -0400
From: rogervg@aug.com (Roger Van Ghent)
To: delong@econ.berkeley.edu, apple-internet-users@abs.apple.com
Cc: mac_cbug@netscape.com
Subject: Re: Ontological Breakdown
Message-ID: 

Brad:

Thanks for your lovely description of the extension of consciousness*.

I suggest that the ontological question is:

How do the developers of Internet Client Programs deal with the phenomenon you describe ... the sense that we enter another existence when we enter the Internet? This new medium, so different from anything we have experienced before, can make or break a client program designed to communicate using the Internet. For example, Web browsers are already falling by the wayside (e.g., Mosaic, MacWeb, Anarchie, TurboGopher, as excellent as they are) because they do not take advantage of the medium well enough.

Netscape, a more extended use of the medium, will quickly lose its edge unless its designers learn to integrate the many channels of communication on the internet. Simply using helpers to translate, playback or display documents will rapidly become unacceptable as users demand more immediacy to their experiences. I don't mean that we just have to add more horsepower. We are discussing space and time in our heads, not on our computers.

Just as architects initially use new technologies to imitate old (e.g., the early online editors imitated the typewriter's line by line mode), so also the new hyperlink and communications technologies imitate the three dimensional world of the desk. If you can't find it on top, open a few drawers (links).

I would like to see these tools move in a multidimensional, multi-channel direction.

For example, a Web browser could have several modes of communication for its users... one for children, one for young adults, one for women, one for scholars, etc. Each mode could be configured to communicate best to the user. The result would be a hyperlink that behaves differently depending on which mode is being used. [The discussion about limiting children's access and censorship on the Internet is really one about how different people want different usages.] The issue then becomes: what switches do we need to configure a certain kind of usage?

Another dimension would be related to communications channels. We are already seeing examples of multi-channel communication on the internet, with moving pictures (even in real time) and sound (also sometimes in realtime). New tools should be made to activate a user's peripherals. For example, a message (link or web page) might appear on a monitor, play on a speaker _and_ activate a robotic peripheral. The tyrannosaurus rex in your museum might also run across your desktop or on the floor. Or a message could activate a CD Rom and pull off images, sound and/or text as needed. It would be reaching out into the user's environment to take advantage of what is there. The issue then becomes: how do we let the message/medium know what it can use?

In other words, I'd like to stretch the desktop model to include the environment I live in ... my office, my home ... my car ... my backpack ... as part of the communications scheme.

A final thought. As Apple Internet Users, we should start to drive the software development process in the directions we want. Could we start to develop some specifications for the next browser, mailer, talker, inter-net-actor? The specifications should not just be a wish list. It should be a serious SRS (System Requirements Specification). It would avoid implementation dependent requirements, and focus on what we would like to be able to do on the Internet.

If anyone is interested in pursuing this aspect of the 'Ontological Breakdown' question, please respond with the subject "Client Program SRS". Is this an appropriate use of the channel apple-internet-users@abs.apple.com? I think so.

Thanks again for introducing this valuable topic.

Regards, Roger

* Marshall McCluhan (of "The medium is the message" fame) pointed out in "Understanding Media" that the computer is an extension of the consciousness, as the hammer is an extension of the arm and the telescope an extension of the eyes.

It should not surprise us that the world we see, hear and touch on the Internet becomes vivid in our imaginations, not just our intellectual understanding. It is a gripping medium, hot to the touch. I remember the days of 'Grand Central Station' and 'Suspense' when I sat glued to the radio with images of dark deeds and bright heros in my head. The same thing is happening on the Internet. Radio is a 'hot' medium, so is the computer. (This was not entirely clear in the days of linear text editors.)

This new form of communication (the medium) is becoming the message which is arriving inside our minds directly, responding to our desires (e.g., the hyperlinks). Your children are responding not to what _you_ see and hear, but what _they_ as individuals see and hear, which is quite different for each child.

Whatever the message is, whether Tyrannosaurus as a paleontological artifact or as a child's scary beast, the medium is carrying it, formatting it, as a real object in our minds. Behavior, vividness and utility all become a part of the message on the internet and we interpret it as we get it, each in our own way.

McLuhan wrote of radio "[It] affects most people intimately, person-to-person, offering a world of unspoken communication between writer-speaker and the listener." He could have been talking about your (and my) visits to the "real" Museum of Paleontology via the WWW.

R

Roger Van Ghent                 | 904 797-5997
1st Coast Software Engineering  | rogervg@aug.com
4005 Moultrie Foreside Blvd.    | rogervg@aol.com
St. Augustine, FL 32086
--
                    |
     \_            /;
     `\~--.._     //'
      `//////\  \\/;'
        ~/////\~\`)'
          ~'-;  |    "HAWTWYWHPSM"
            ;'_\'\
           /~/ '" "'
         `\/'

HTML markup by Brad Cox (bcox@gmu.edu) http://www.virtualschool.edu/mon