possibility: past, present and future

week 1
the readings for this week were thought-provoking.

“As We May Think” by Vannevar Bush

it is strange to read Vannevar Bush’s article, knowing that it was written before the onset of so many technologies. it was strange because it seemed as if he was writing for us, for the technologies of today. the same concepts, the same sound advice, the same endless possibilities are still available today even though we have mastered the widespread, established internet that he envisioned. i had had the attitude that “everything worth inventing has already been made or thought up”. but as i read his article, i found that there are still many things left to do. there is never an end. of course, i can think of nothing concrete and practical at the moment. but vannevar bush doesn’t seem to be asking for the do-able or the practical. his article seemed to say, “dream big dreams. impossible dreams.”

the details that he goes into regarding photography and recording information makes me realize just what amazing feats people have already done. surely enough, Bush’s faith that things will always get better and improve- exponentially faster and better processes will be discovered. the constant doubling of computer storage and processing speeds, the digitizing and projecting images, the ability to do everything on a computer… it stirs up an appreciation for just how many resources we have available to us. and the mind-blowing thing is that all of this is not the end of it. only the beginning. as we gain more resources, all of the tools we have at our disposal are pooled in an effort to do more. each new technology, each new concept is but an addition to our toolkit.

the history of the web is a testimony to the power of teamwork and innovation. and it is beginning to sink in that i can be a part of this. it is a definite possibility. these were people, simply people with a passion. it is not only giants who do these things.

“Web 2.0″ by O’Reilly

at the same time, after reading about “Web 2.0,” I realize that there is definitely some work and effort to be made in trying to participate in this exciting world. i didn’t know what half of the words meant. rather, i understood the words but couldn’t quite grasp the concept. it was there, slipping away at the edges of my mind- i could understand the power and gravity of it but i didn’t confidently possess the idea as much as i would like. words such as “the long tail,” “platform vs. application,” “decentralization”… i didn’t even really know how the internet is set up over many servers. does that mean every computer that has ever logged on to the internet has a chunk of a random website in its system? it seems like an invasion of privacy… but there seems to be no problem or outcry from the general public, so it must be alright.

they are wonderfully simple and impossible concepts. trust people? open source? free service? participation? i like where this trend is going. i just can’t understand why it works. the companies are competing for popularity? i suppose that Google and Amazon are successful because they have the most people. it is like gravity. the more dense of a user population there is, the more it attracts more people. i like one phrase in the O’Reilly article. it is when it is talking about Amazon’s success compared to Barnes and Nobles websites. the difference is that amazon added “layers of value”. it is styled and modified to exactly what people are interested in. so when you go to the site to look up something, someone else has most probably done the same thing before and has left you a nice trail to follow. then you can add whatever modification you want, kindly helping out the next person to come along.