Just for the fun of it

Continuous Partial Attention, Partial Attention Continuously, Attention Continuously and Partially, Continuous Partial Thinking, Partial Thinking Continuously, Thinking Partially and Continuously . The computer was once a “place” we went to do specific tasks a specific way. Then it was a “place” to search out what tasks were being done in other places. Now we can do limited interactive communications. Computers match our specified inputs with others specified input (Match.com). Interactive Communication may be becoming logical and intuitive using computers and networks. Computers may be programmed to look at our use and consumption patterns of information(like Walmart or a grocery chain).  Computers may start looking at the information consumption patterns of many and then matching those with similar patterns of consumption and need (information logistics). Computers may start identifying patterns of needs and problems on a world wide basis. Computers may start collaborations of people to solve problems and needs at the person to person level, then teams, then scaled groups of people based or their abilities (and unique perspectives)  Continuous attention, continuous thinking? and so it grows. What are the logical processes and system logistics needed to support a collaboration network? Just for the fun of it: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6WSS-4WW85G1-7&_user=10&_coverDate=07%2F30%2F2009&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=browse&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=194a586d003347f5cb11d39b070f5e50

How about that!  Here is a humorous way to access the abstract!       http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/09/15/human_brain_like_us_elections/

Interesting day in the Webthink

I found several items that might come up and yield subject to the time to follow along some leads. Still cannot avoid the suspicion that there are going to be some major hits on the Web/Net with SQL injectors and sophisticated hacks. Companies of all sizes appear to be getting a base back in but things are bad for a lot of people. I think there is potential for some real damage to the Web operability in a mini-dark age for the Web, Web 2.5. I need to read up on the issues of Trust and Security going forward to a 4.0 world. People have had some fairly predictable behaviors over time as a whole? I THINK SO. What would the Opt-out world look like to those who have opted-in?

Research Proposal Com530

Com 530 – Research proposal for: Professor Janna Q. Anderson
William Boyce Cheek – Elon iMedia Graduate Student

“Imagining the Future of Web 4.0: An Opt–in Collaboration”

Preface: Growing up the presence of entertainment ideas such as Colossus: The Forbin Project (1970), Skynet in the Terminator (1984-2009) series or Logan’s Run (1976) with presumably machine managed human euthanasia left quite an impression on me, though not permanent. The common thread was in each total authority and control being given to great computational machines.  Only an opt-in conceptualization is being proposed to be studied, but not for the expression of thinking machines in the movie. It is a democratized choice, one of the underpinning of the potential strength of the Web and Internet.
**********************************
The purpose of this paper and research is to explore the proposition of an era to be considered as Web 4.0, what it may be made up of or how the Web/Internet might be operating through that period. Currently the research consideration is targeted at an opt-in Web and Net- based collaboration with problem solving questions being identified, facilitated, logistically supported, identifying the necessary and appropriate collaborators, stakeholders, primary beneficiaries, delivering the final product and distributing equitable proceeds throughout the collaboration network.

Current online discussions appear to have tapped the notion of up to a Web8.0 but the argument over the existence of something identifiable as Web 2.0 still continues. The details, processors, agents, designers, software and legal framework will obviously have to follow in development.

Web 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0 … are or could be best defined as eras, epochs or momentary periods characterized by some unique aspect of the human, computer, software and related systems interfacing in a very unique way. A broad scanning of materials indicate (to be documented) Web 1.0 is often referred to as everything Web related prior to Web 2.0”(O’Rielly, 2004) with focusing moments in the late 1960’s, and again in the early 1990’s. There is some credit given to Berners-Lee with the html source code in 1990 and Marc Andreessen’s Mosaic in 1993 (Anderson, 1990). Web 2.0 now a 4 to ten year old period of time focused on the interactive interface. Web 3.0, the Semantic Web, is yet to be rolled out. While the research and paper will be a journey into the future, one focal issue of my professional interests is the individualized, interactive possibilities offered to the needs of special needs populations and the aging boomer population. Some of these developments may be tested and developed as a result of the convergence of the real world and virtual worlds (VR) now in use and in the process of development in VR such as Second Life or There.

The methodology will include a detail literature search and collation of current online discussions concerning Web 4.0. An analysis of plausibility will be explored. At least 4 professionals involved in research into the future of the Internet and Web will be included and the research may include an opinion survey of a what-if scenario to measure current collegial opinions of the proposition of an Opt-in Collaboration Web 4.0.

Draft outline

Abstract
A Brief History of the Nomenclature and Genre/Era.
Possible Elements or the Key components.
Plausible Systemic Elements to consider
The Plausible Environment of Web 4.0
Examples of Its Potential Uses (What futurists are saying about the identified event period)
Potential issues blocking or impeding 4.0 developments
Social, Economic, Cultural, and Technological Impacts
Potential Threats
Conclusions and Recommendations for Continuing study
Glossary
Bibliography

Berners-Lee, Tim; James Hendler and Ora Lassila (May 17, 2001). “The Semantic Web”. Scientific American Magazine.
Tim O’Reilly (2005-09-30). “What Is Web 2.0″
Past & Future:An Interactive Media Chronology Crowdsourced from online resources Edited by Janna Quitney Anderson, July, 2009

Related editorial endnote:
Could there be a brief Web 2.5 when the Web and Internet under go a brief dark period as a result of attacks on the collective utility for commerce, exchange and directed collaboration by the destructive and criminally directed SQL Injectors now becoming more prevalent and the treat being noted by Robert Lemos ? “UNSAFBITS Blog”, MIT Technology Review, August 25, 2009.

Hello world!

Welcome to WordPress.com. This is your first post. Edit or delete it and start blogging!