Prime Time Replay:
Mark Stefik
author of Internet Dreams:
Archetypes, Myths, and Metaphors
MsgId: *emedia(1)
Date: Mon Nov 24 20:01:28 PST 1997
From: DaveThomer At: 207.93.51.74
Mark Stefik is a principal scientist at the Xerox Palo Alto Research Center. His current research activities are in sensemaking systems and trusted system approaches for creating, protecting, and reusing digital property. For several years he has taught a course on knowledge systems at Stanford University, and his textbook from that course, "Introduction to Knowledge Systems," was published in 1995 by Morgan Kaufmann. His book, "Internet Dreams: Archtypes, Myths, and Metaphors" was published in 1996 by MIT Press. In it, he explains how the way we think of the Internet shapes what it will become and explores commonly used metaphors to explain the Net and the larger information infrastructure.Tonight, Mark Stefik is our guest on E-Media. You'll have the chance to talk directly to Mark starting at about 9:20, at which point your browsers will allow you to post your comments. Be sure to sign your name to your post, since otherwise you will only be identified as "guest."
Good evening, everyone, and welcome to E-Media. I'm Dave Thomer, and tonight we're talkingto Mark Stefik, author of "INTERNET DREAMS: ARCHETYPES, MYTHS, AND METAPHORS." Hello, Mark, and welcome. It's great to have you here tonight.
MsgId: *emedia(7)
Date: Mon Nov 24 21:01:25 PST 1997
From: Mark_Stefik At: 13.1.100.58
Hi Dave. Think I've got the protocol now. Glad to be here, Dave. Welcome to everybody.
MsgId: *emedia(10)
Date: Mon Nov 24 21:04:34 PST 1997
From: DaveThomer At: 205.186.166.193
Great. "INTERNET DREAMS" was interesting to me because it's one of those rare occasions when we seem to step back and talk about the way we talk about things, in this case the Net and the new information infrastructure, as you refer to it. What got you thinking about the metaphors used to describe the Net in the first place?
MsgId: *emedia(12)
Date: Mon Nov 24 21:10:19 PST 1997
From: MarkStefik At: 13.1.100.58
I had a set of favorite papers about the Net, and started looking for ways to understand people's creativity. I guess that the idea of metaphors - once I started looking at digital libraries and digital adventures an so on led to the idea of archetypes. What struck me was that what was driving the best thinkers about the Net was quite universal -- and reflected . . . some deep-seated goals and ambitions. Such as preserving knowledge, communicating, or going away for an adventure. I began to see a very human side to what we were creating, and it was a lot richer to look at that than to buzz around with the superhighway story.
MsgId: *emedia(14)
Date: Mon Nov 24 21:14:49 PST 1997
From: DaveThomer At: 205.186.166.193
The essays and papers in the book are quite a collection; I remember seeing things like the flame form letter back when I was an active participant in FidoNET years ago, while the excerpt from 'As We May Think' by Vannevar Bush was a reminder that the Net didn't just arrive out of nowhere once all the computer connections were together. Even though the technology of the Net and the technology in Bush's essay were completely different, the execution is quite similar . . . how close do you think the metaphors you study in the book are to capturing the future of information?
MsgId: *emedia(16)
Date: Mon Nov 24 21:18:19 PST 1997
From: MarkStefik At: 13.1.100.58
Hmm. Themes like "preserving human knowledge" have a long history and I suspect a long future too. The Net, however, is giving us a chance to rexamine our roots and dreams in light of new technology and a much more interconnected World. So it's old and new at the same time.
MsgId: *emedia(17)
Date: Mon Nov 24 21:18:47 PST 1997
From: DaveThomer At: 205.186.166.193
Sorry for the interruption. It's almost a shame that the superhighway metaphor has become such a cliche and a buzzword now . . . I don't think many people really stop to think about what it means any more. Which is a shame, because there are some ways in which it is helpful, and just as many ways that it can be limiting.
MsgId: *emedia(18)
Date: Mon Nov 24 21:23:16 PST 1997
From: MarkJStefik At: 13.1.100.58
I was really fond of a quote by Robert Louis Stevenson that I put in the book. It was when he persuaded some tribal chiefs in Samoa to oopen a road in the wilderness. He said "our road is not built to last a thousand years, but in a sense it is. When a road is built, it is a strange thing how it collects traffic, how every year as it goes on, more and more people are found to walk thereon, and others are raised up to repair and perpetuate it." The Internet as superhighway is like that. The superhighway today is just a begginning.
MsgId: *emedia(20)
Date: Mon Nov 24 21:26:40 PST 1997
From: DaveThomer At: 205.186.166.193
I also found the combination of myths with archetypes interesting, because it combines how we think of the Net with how we think of ourselves using it. Sometimes I'll log on specifically to find one piece of information, in which case I usually have a particular site or two in mind, but other times I just want to spend some time looking around and seeing what's new. They're two completely different experiences, and right now the Net is fairly good at promoting both of them.
MsgId: *emedia(21)
Date: Mon Nov 24 21:30:25 PST 1997
From: MarkJStefik At: 13.1.100.58
That's right. There's this whole business about technology and society co-evolving. For example, how telephones have changed our lives. I've recently been looking at the relationship between different inventions -- especially ones involving communication and transportation . . . change the societies around them. The Net is a prime example of a potent communication technology. Like the forum we're having tonite -- which combines the fan-out potential of radio and tv -- with interactivity. The technology changes how we can relate to each other -- or . . . how we access and use the information we create, as you suggested in your comment.For an example, the Erie Canal was built and opened up the way from New York City, through the Great Lakes, to the Midwest. People were wildly for and against it. Both sides were right. It changed everything -- both for Manhattan and the new states.<
MsgId: *emedia(23)
Date: Mon Nov 24 21:32:11 PST 1997
From: EllenDatlow At: 38.26.14.103
The chat is now open to questions/comments from the audience. Please press "pause" before typing and don't forget to sign your name.
MsgId: *emedia(25)
Date: Mon Nov 24 21:36:57 PST 1997
From: DaveThomer At: 205.186.166.193
One of the issues you brought up is that, because so many people have the ability to publish information on the Net without the system of checks and screens that have developed in print publishing, there is a danger that the value of the information available digitlly may be perceived as low. I know I get frustrated whenever I wind up on a site that hasn't been updated in a year and a half and contains nothing new . . . what improvements need to be made in the digital library before it becomes more trustworthy?
MsgId: *emedia(28)
Date: Mon Nov 24 21:41:51 PST 1997
From: MarkJStefik At: 13.1.100.58
Improvements to the Digital Library . . . Well, lot's of things here. For starters, the term "digital library" for most folks is pretty confusing when combined with "commerce" since libraries are free. And the Net is nothing like a library. Writings are not edited; Librarians do not . . . cataloging the entries and so on. We don't really have an information marketplace yet. My take is that there is round of work where encryption technologies and digital rights technologies are being introduced to make "the net safe for documents" and to pave the way for authors to publish for a fee. So there is another example of coevolution. Digital rights technnology makes for-fee publishing on the Net possible; meanwhile, people begin to understand copyright and experiment with the value of paying small fees for quality goods and access.
MsgId: *emedia(27)
Date: Mon Nov 24 21:39:16 PST 1997
From: DaveThomer At: 205.186.166.193
Do you think we'll rely on the name brand, now that information providers from older media have established a presence online, or will there perhaps be improvements in the directories and search engines that will be helpful in identifying valid and accurate information?
MsgId: *emedia(31)
Date: Mon Nov 24 21:51:04 PST 1997
From: MJStefik At: 13.1.100.58
Re name brands. There is this whole theme of disintermediation which means the elimination of middle men. People were saying that the net would remove distributors from publishing since publishers could sell direct. I don't see that happening at all. People will not go from one publisher to another just looking for books on a topic --say exotic cooking. They'll want to go to a comprehensive source. So what makes one source -- say like a digital Amazon.com -- better than another? Something about reviews, credibility, the shopping experience. That's where the competition will be.<
MsgId: *emedia(32)
Date: Mon Nov 24 21:51:11 PST 1997
From: DaveThomer At: 205.186.166.193
What about accessibility to the marketplace? As ubiquitous as the Net may seem, PCs are in less than half America's households, according to the last figures I saw, and I doubt that all of those households are wired. Do you think it's just the cost and complexity of the technology that keeps PCs and the Net from being as commonplace as TV or radio, or is there something in the way the Net is described that keeps many people from believing it's either relevant or important?
MsgId: *emedia(34)
Date: Mon Nov 24 21:55:29 PST 1997
From: MJStefik At: 13.1.100.58
re: accessibility of Net; cost and complexity. Good question. And let's not just look at the Internet world as U.S. Ease of use and expense are real issues. For example, my browser to this chat has crashed 4 times already!I'm also struck, for example, that our forum tonite probably has most people sitting at desks; While a few million other folks are sitting in easy chairs "watching" rather than "reading". We have a lot of work to get even the form-factor right for our Internet appliances.
MsgId: *emedia(36)
Date: Mon Nov 24 22:00:52 PST 1997
From: DaveThomer At: 205.186.166.193
My browser acts up on occasion too . . . it seems like the Net is a continuous case of the reach of our ideas for communication just slightly exceeding the grasp of the technology. I guess that's what keeps us progressing, and why we're not viewing this chat on a monochrome monitor via a 300 bps modem. :) (I remember when I had a 1200 baud modem, and the concept of 28,800 bps was almost too large to be believable.)
MsgId: *emedia(37)
Date: Mon Nov 24 22:04:01 PST 1997
From: Mark___Stefik At: 13.1.100.58
Getting back to your brand name question. Sure the existing brand names help. We see companies merging in the communications field to tie brands together -- such as Viacom owning Paramount (movies) and Simon&Schuster (books). Or Disney in the News about its Web pages. I think that "middlemen" are working to establish brands. For example, AOL is becoming a distributor when it sells digital goods; on-line magazines like HotWired are expanding their middleman role. So where do you go habitually online? Or does going somewhere matter if you use programs to find things for you?
MsgId: *emedia(39)
Date: Mon Nov 24 22:14:33 PST 1997
From: guest At: 13.1.100.58
Fred Stevens (Santa Cruz) Does the book have anything to do with real dreams -- like Jungian archetypes and so on?
MsgId: *emedia(41)
Date: Mon Nov 24 22:16:59 PST 1997
From: Mark_J_Stefik At: 13.1.100.58
Fred -- sounds like a plug for the last chapter of the book. We did this on-line dream session with Jeremy Taylor -- the dream researcher -- and saved the on-line dream session in the book together with comments from the participants and from Taylor. For them, the net was just a vehicle for a great dream circle. We all saw the dream ahead of time, then the dreamer was online so that we could ask questions or project onto the dream. "If it were my dream . . ." What mattered was the quality of the conversation for all. Taylor runs a daily on-line dream show, which still runs I think.<
MsgId: *emedia(40)
Date: Mon Nov 24 22:16:19 PST 1997
From: DaveThomer At: 205.186.166.193
Of course, where you go is an interesting question when physically you're not going anywhere . . . just one of many new ways of thinking we're going to need, I suppose. Unfortunately, we're out of time for this evening. I'd like to thank Mark Stefik for being with us tonight. Good luck with "INTERNET DREAMS" and your future projects, and thanks for a very interesting discussion.
MsgId: *emedia(43)
Date: Mon Nov 24 22:24:24 PST 1997
From: Mark_J_Stefik At: 13.1.100.58
Thanks, Dave and everyone on-line. As Taylor said, "dreams come in the service of health and wholeness." He was talking about the dreams we have at night; but I think that the Internet dreams that are driving this Net we are creating are also for the health and wholeness of the world. Good nite, all.
MsgId: *emedia(44)
Date: Mon Nov 24 22:27:20 PST 1997
From: DaveThomer At: 205.186.166.193
Good night, Mark, and good night to everyone in the audience. We'll see you next week on E-Media, when I'll be talking to Richard Garfield, who created MAGIC: THE GATHERING and the entire genre of collectible card games. Be sure to check out www.omnimag.com for a complete schedule of this week's Prime Time programming and much more. Good night!
Home || Prime Time || Live Science || Machine Dreams || Project Open Book || SF-Fantasy-Horror
Continuum || Antimatter || Mind-Brain Lab || Interactive IQ || Gallery || OMNI ToonsQuestions, comments and suggestions can be mailed to the webmaster.
Copyright © 1998 by Omni Publications International, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.