Featured Annotator: Howard Rheingold

Portrait of Howard Rheingold

Howard Rheingold

Our Featured Annotator interview series in the Engelbart Framework Annotation expedition continues with Howard Rheingold, whose work has been tremendously influential on me and many, many others who seek to understand the character and potential of the digital age. Howard’s epic Tools For Thought awakened me to depths in this story that I had only suspected before reading his account. Even more to the point, Howard’s work conveys and catalyzes insight on every page.

In this case, our Featured Annotator brings not only deep insights into Engelbart’s Augmenting Human Intellect: A Conceptual Frameworkbut also a remarkable personal history with that document and its author. As you will hear, Howard met Doug Engelbart not long after Doug’s Augmentation Research Center had ceased operations at SRI. Over many years and many conversations, Howard got to know Doug well, and he brings to this interview a stirring account of Doug as a human being and, as Howard puts it in Tools for Thought, a lonely long-distance thinker.

I have a head full of words, but I struggle to find the language I would need to describe the extent and importance of Howard’s contributions to the planetary conversation about how to build a better future together. He is merrily, definitely, and defiantly, an intellectual philanthropist.

I hope you enjoy the interview.

Featured Annotator: Jon Udell

Jon Udell

Part of the Engelbart Framework Annotation event involves what we’re calling “featured annotators.” As Alan Levine and I discussed the event last fall and early this year, we quickly agreed there should be a meta-layer, or perhaps a meta-meta-layer, in which certain annotators would be interviewed for additional thoughts on Engelbart’s Augmenting Human Intellect: A Conceptual Framework, and especially their thoughts on their own annotations. How did they select the passages they chose to annotate? How did they think about the nature, tone, length, etc. of the passages they annotated? Most generally (most meta), how do they think about the activity of annotating? It seemed not only interesting but pedagogically effective to hear experts musing metacognitively in this way. And it would be an opportunity to expand the annotations multimodally.

We initially thought about doing real-time streams of people annotating, asking them to think aloud (or one might say “narrate their work“) as they did their annotations, but eventually we decided that would be unwieldy and perhaps a little too much like Monty Python’s “Novel Writing With Thomas Hardy” sketch. I bring up this early abandoned idea, though, as a little marker for considering the mix and character of synchronous and asynchronous events in the act of reading and writing. (More to say on that topic sometime.)

Instead of real-time narration, then, we settled on the idea of post-annotation interviews with our featured annotators. I did three of these interviews last week. If all goes according to plan, there will be fourteen of these interviews by the end of this event. (Chaucer didn’t live to finish his storytelling plan; I hope I do.) Today I’m pleased to say that the first of our featured annotator interviews is ready for your viewing.

I’m speaking with Jon Udell, whose work I became aware of shortly after I became aware of Doug Engelbart’s, a kind of temporal rhyme in my own lifestream. I was at lunch with Jerry Slezak, a member of the dream team at the University of Mary Washington, and Jerry mentioned to me a screencast on the topic of Wikipedia and heavy metal umlaut bands. Intrigued, I watched the screencast as soon as I got back to the office, and was thus introduced to the creative world of a deep thinker–a rare and memorable event. Jon has played a major role in this phase of my own intellectual and professional development. I look to him as an exemplar, a mentor, and a friend.

Here’s my conversation with Jon.

Engelbart Framework Project podcast 2 parts 1 and 2

Image of audio waveform

Week 2 of the Engelbart Framework Annotation Project focuses on two excerpts from Doug Engelbart’s 1962 research report Augmenting Human Intellect: A Conceptual FrameworkHere are the audiobook recordings for Week 2.

The first excerpt, Section II parts A and B, is Engelbart’s overview of the H-LAM/T framework he proposed as a way of understanding and thus potentially accelerating the augmentation of human intellect.

This link takes you to the annotation indicating the beginning of this excerpt from the report.

The second excerpt, Section III part A subsection 1-2, discusses one of the primary antecedents for the conceptual framework Engelbart proposes: the 1945 essay “As We May Think,” by Vannevar Bush. In my reading, I’ve tried to differentiate the long quotation from Bush’s essay from the commentary and analysis Engelbart provides on either side of that long quotation. I didn’t want to try to emulate Bush’s Yankee accent–too much of a stunt, and I wouldn’t have done it well in any case–so instead I read the Bush quotation with a more declamatory style, while reading Engelbart’s words in a more ruminative and somewhat more intimate voice. If you get lost, just refer back to the original 1962 document. 🙂

This link takes you to the annotation indicating the beginning of this excerpt from the report.

As always, I hope these readings are helpful. For me, doing these recordings has been quite a revelation at times, for reasons I’ll explore in future blog posts.

Engelbart Framework Project podcast 1

Graphic of Table of Contents, Week 1 highlighted

Week 1 emphasis for reading and annotating.

It’s a lot to take in. Doug Engelbart’s monumental 1962 research report Augmenting Human Intellect: A Conceptual Framework–really a monograph, and indeed a manifesto–is dense with yearning, with ideas, with analysis, and with a kind of moral philosophy devoted to human flourishing in the midst of–because of, in spite of–human invention and ingenuity.

The Engelbart Framework Annotation Project, in this first iteration, emphasizes just three key sections from Augmenting Human Intellect: A Conceptual Framework. Week 1 is devoted entirely to the Introduction, parts A and B. I’ve recorded a podcast of this section as an aid to study for those who, like me and apparently quite a few others, enjoy listening to books as well as reading them, and for whom listening means encountering the work while driving, doing the laundry, or a thousand other tasks in which reading would be impossible or at least unadvisable.

I’ll be doing podcasts for all the sections we’re emphasizing in this event. Week 2 comprises two excerpts describing Engelbart’s conceptual framework as well as his transclusion and analysis of key passages from Vannevar Bush’s As We May Think. Week 3 is the longest excerpt, the “Joe” story from Section III, where Engelbart himself believed the “fiction-dialogue” form might help his readers begin to imagine the unimaginable, and in doing so begin to shift toward the paradigms Engelbart believed we should consider and build toward, lest we founder on the shoals of our own blasted ingenuity.

So here’s the reading for Week 1. I hope my oral interpretation is helpful. And I hope you will join us for the annotation event, for as much or as little time as you can devote to it. This is only a beginning. Come let us build together!

Annotate and Augment: The Engelbart Framework Project

Annotating Engelbart's 1962 Framework

This February, 2019, join us as together we read and annotate three crucial parts of Doug Engelbart’s 1962 research report and manifesto, Augmenting Human Intellect: A Conceptual Framework. (New to the document? See “About Augmenting Human Intelllect: A Conceptual Framework, below. To go even deeper, see Christina Engelbart’s invaluable “Field Guide to Doug’s 1962 Framework.”)

Our annotations—responses, questions, conversations—will use the Hypothes.is annotation platform. As described on their website, the hypothe.is annotation platform is free, open source software “based on the annotation standards for digital documents developed by the W3C Web Annotation Working Group.”

Some specifics, including the schedule:

  • We’ll annotate the copy of Augmenting Human Intellect: A Conceptual Framework reprinted on the Engelbart Institute website: http://dougengelbart.org/content/view/138/000/ .
  • While our annotations will be public, we’ll be able to indicate our relationship to Engelbart and his work by tagging our annotations and replies. For example: #SRI (colleagues from the Stanford Research Institute), #ARC (colleagues from the Augmentation Research Center), #NIC (colleagues from the Network Information Center). #PARC (staff at the Xerox Palo Alto Research Center), #DEI (Doug Engelbart Institute), #scholar, #student, etc. Multiple tags can be used to indicate multiple relationships, as will often be the case.
  • We welcome thoughtful annotations from all readers. Each week, several featured annotators will describe their annotations, and their relationships with Engelbart and his work, in special video interviews that will be posted to the Framework Project channel on YouTube and aggregated on this site.

Schedule of activities:

Orientation Week, February 4-10, will provide opportunities to experiment with hypothes.is and web annotation, and help readers come up to speed with the platform and the project.

February 11-17 is Week One.  We’ll focus our annotations on Section I A & B, Engelbart’s introduction to the entire report.

February 18-24 is Week Two. This week focuses on a section describing the framework itself, along with Engelbart’s analysis of a similar project outlined in Vannevar Bush’s essay “As We May Think.”

February 25-March 3 is Week Three. We’ll conclude this initial annotation project by looking at a long and very unusual section from the 1962 report that’s often referred to as the “Joe” section. Part Platonic dialogue, part short story, part shop talk, this section imagines “Joe,” an intellectual worker of the future, demonstrating Engelbart’s imagined computing environment to a sympathetic observer who’s also somewhat skeptical and at times more than a little baffled by the futuristic scenario he is “witnessing.”

This event is just the beginning of the Engelbart Framework Project, with more opportunities for learning and conversation to come. For more details about this event, and for resources emerging from the event, see the Framework Project website at framework.thoughtvectors.net. You can also sign up for email updates at the project website. If you have questions, please contact Gardner Campbell: gardner.campbell AT gmail.com (substitute @ for AT). We look forward to your insights!

Heartfelt thanks to colleague and collaborator extraodinare Alan Levine for all his help with project planning and website development, and especially to Christina Engelbart, Executive Director of the Doug Engelbart Institute, for her constant encouragement, inspiration, and support for this and many other projects. 

 


About Augmenting Human Intellect: A Conceptual Framework

People who have heard of Douglas Carl Engelbart probably know that he invented the computer mouse. They may have heard of the 1968 “Mother Of All Demos” in which Engelbart and his Augmentation Research Center presented an comprehensive, interactive human-computer co-evolutionary environment to an auditorium of astonished engineers, mathematicians, and computer scientists, all of whom gave Engelbart and his team a sustained standing ovation for this glimpse of a future we have yet to inhabit fully.

But even those who know the name “Doug Engelbart” may not know the demo before the demo, the research report Engelbart described as “the public debut of a dream”: a nearly 150-page monograph titled Augmenting Human Intellect: A Conceptual Framework, published in October, 1962.

This project seeks to bring Engelbart’s 1962 manifesto back into view, and to encourage close, hospitable (though not uncritical) attention to its central ideas and Engelbart’s unusually varied strategies of analysis, argument, and description. The fruit of over a decade of intense reading, thought, and writing,  Augmenting Human Intellect: A Conceptual Framework deserves our full attention, especially at a time when many (perhaps most) computer technologies appear untethered to any philosophy besides the pursuit of maximum profit.

Engelbart’s dream was different. He believed that networked computing could empower collective intelligence, offering humanity a way to address complex problems together. Augmenting Human Intellect: A Conceptual Framework insists that benign, liberatory collective intelligence is not only possible but urgently necessary. And it seeks to demonstrate that an “integrated domain” of human-computer co-evolution was the most powerful means human beings had yet devised to permit their intellectual capabilities to solve problems faster than they invent them.