Comments on: Intelligence Amplification

By: Ted

Ted — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 08:40:58 +0000

Your business partner didn't come up with the term "Intelligence Amplifier" unless his name is Ross Ashby and he wrote "Design for an Intelligence Amplifier" back in the 1950s.

By: feng-gui

feng-gui — Mon, 23 Apr 2007 23:31:46 +0000

ar http://www.feng-gui.com we serve a Web 3.0 service of a Digital Cortex that Finds out how people View your website or image and which areas are getting most of the attention.

By: nick rafter

nick rafter — Wed, 04 Apr 2007 08:55:13 +0000

Intelligence Amplification is NOT getting people to help the computer with what it can’t do itself. This is more like Intelligence Exploitation. Intelligence Amplification is more like using machines to enhance human capabilities. Artificial Intelligence is machines that can think like humans, independently of them. Just wanted to make sure everyone got their terms straight. Just look at the word, and think about it.

By: Elliot Turner

Elliot Turner — Fri, 01 Dec 2006 16:37:54 +0000

Some great thoughts! “Intelligence Amplification” sounds good to me, what about “Contextual Information Awareness”? That’s my pet name for the subject.

By: Luke Gedeon

Luke Gedeon — Fri, 01 Dec 2006 15:17:58 +0000

I like the term Web 3.0 but I think it should describe something bigger than just the semantic web and intelligence amplification. There is a very definite break between The Web of the 90’s and Web 2.0. The break was provided by a recession.
It will probably take another recession to clear out the bad ideas and make room for what is next. We have the ability to do so much more than we are currently doing on many different fronts. We just need to hit the reset button first.
The main thing is not to confuse the full version 3 of the Web with a few features that we are currently working on.

By: Dave Jilk

Dave Jilk — Wed, 29 Nov 2006 15:57:44 +0000

The IA label has its good and bad points – for one thing, basically all computing is intelligence amplification, so this doesn’t really capture what’s new about it. It seems that what’s new about it is the social/network aspect, and that there is an emergent synthesis that results from organizing independent behavior.

I think Digital Cortex is a terrible name, since I’m working on the real thing and that’s just an analogy.

How about “Hive Mind”?

By: Nabeel Hyatt

Nabeel Hyatt — Wed, 29 Nov 2006 03:25:37 +0000

Intelligence Amplification just likely too wordy to really catch on. Ajax, Web 2.0 — they are said so often partly because they are so easy to say.

If it makes you feel better, most labels suck. Are people who play Runescape for 30 hours a week, or log into Pogo.com every single day to play — a “casual gamer” ??

By: David Henderson

David Henderson — Wed, 29 Nov 2006 01:48:01 +0000

My guess is Web 3.0 will stick – as bad as it is.

By: leafar

leafar — Wed, 29 Nov 2006 00:22:07 +0000

In other word you replace the semantic web by the user semantic. I love the idea that the shortest way is human computation.
I am just starting to use lijiit and my google answer page starts to be really complicated to read with all the pop ups and badges. But that’s good amplification.
I adopt the term
Thanks

By: You Mon Tsang

You Mon Tsang — Tue, 28 Nov 2006 18:00:34 +0000

Intelligence Amplification is a great term. Tim O’Reilly used it in his ETech keynote in March 06. I think it captures a current trend well.

By: Krishna

Krishna — Tue, 28 Nov 2006 16:30:48 +0000

Till all the bugs are fixed, a better choice would be “Stupidity subdued”….Just as some of the Artificial Intelligence apps were found to be “Naturally Stupid” till they were either debugged or completely abandoned.