Category Archives: nugget2

“Man-Computer Symbiosis” Nugget (Revised)

“It seems reasonable to envision, for a time 10 or 15 years hence, a “thinking center” that will incorporate the functions of present-day libraries together with anticipated advances in information storage and retrieval and the symbiotic functions suggested earlier in this paper. The picture readily enlarges itself into a network of such centers, connected to one another by wide-band communication lines and to individual users by leased-wire services. In such a system, the speed of the computers would be balanced, and the cost of the gigantic memories and the sophisticated programs would be divided by the number of users.”

I’m glad Max who said, “This caught my attention because the author’s idea in this section is the basic idea of the Internet as we know it today.”, pointed out the date of when this was written. I went into this thinking it was a more modern piece. Oops.

I chose this nugget because I thought J. C. R. Licklider presents a very interesting idea. I hope I’m understanding what he’s saying, but I’m picturing a library, but with as much information as Google or an even more advanced Google. It really reminds me of the show Sherlock. There is this concept in the show called a “mind palace”. The brilliant characters in the show, like Sherlock himself, have an ability to go inside their own minds and have access to tons of information they’ve remembered, more than the average person. It makes me wonder what it would be used for and who would have access to this. Because if it would be a public library sort of set-up, I’m really jealous of future college kids.

I think it’s an interesting concept, just like the rest of Licklider’s essay. For computers and humans to work together seems to be the direction our society is headed, if we’re not already there. I liked when Virinchi described the cooperation between computers and humans by saying, “improve efficiency by using mankind’s flexibility and a computers accuracy.” I think it’s fascinating that we create these machines, yet they are now capable of solving problems many humans cannot at lightning speeds. Brooke furthers this idea of how advanced technolgy is when she states in her post, “He stated that a computer knowing 1,000 basic english words and 1,000 technical words would be enough, where Siri knows over 5,000 and that is considered limited…”.  It makes me curious to see how much computers will become involved in our lives. Will we use them to the fullest? Is it possible to overdue it? And the tiniest little voice in my head is asking, could computers possibly take over? But I’m pretty sure I’ve just watched too many movies about that. Though this blogger (I’m sorry I can’t find your name) seems to agree. He/she says, “This is far off in the future of course, but it is possible that one day, the man-machine relationship can go from a symbiotic one to them seeing us as parasites and trying to eliminate us.” Overall, I think creating technology to further our own intelligence is a step in the right direction. Though, this blogger does make a good point when they say, “Until such a day, I think we would be wise to mind the distinction between the duties of a man and those of a machine.” I’m sure it will become a very highly debated topic in the future.

Man- Computer Symbiosis (Blog #2)/ Revised blog

It seems likely that the contributions of human operators and equipment will blend together so completely in many operations that it will be difficult to separate them neatly in analysis. That would be the case it; in gathering data on which to base a decision, for example, both the man and the computer came up with relevant precedents from experience and if the computer then suggested a course of action that agreed with the man’s intuitive judgment. (In theorem-proving programs, computers find precedents in experience, and in the SAGE System, they suggest courses of action. The foregoing is not a far-fetched example. ) In other operations, however, the contributions of men and equipment will be to some extent separable.Men will set the goals and supply the motivations, of course, at least in the early years. They will formulate hypotheses. They will ask questions. They will think of mechanisms, procedures, and models. They will remember that such-and-such a person did some possibly relevant work on a topic of interest back in 1947, or at any rate shortly after World War II, and they will have an idea in what journals it might have been published. In general, they will make approximate and fallible, but leading, contributions, and they will define criteria and serve as evaluators, judging the contributions of the equipment and guiding the general line of thought.In addition, men will handle the very-low-probability situations when such situations do actually arise. (In current man-machine systems, that is one of the human operator’s most important functions. The sum of the probabilities of very-low-probability alternatives is often much too large to neglect. ) Men will fill in the gaps, either in the problem solution or in the computer program, when the computer has no mode or routine that is applicable in a particular


In present day, because of the technology advances, people depend on computers more than ever. This article relates back to the first article we read about how people’s thought process and associative traits. People will think of what they want to question,prove, or learn more about; then take the next step into researching their topic. The next step may be looking back on other people’s results or observations then building from their. This article helps provide evidence to my own ideas about people’s though process, as well as evidence for Bush’s ideas that were written in his article.

When conducting research, people mostly turn to other people’s work and research. Whether they look on the computer, journals, books, or published articles. This is one of the main important steps when finding evidence to support one’s ideas or research. This part of the article was most interesting to me because of the connection it makes between this entire article and Bush’s article. People rely on the computer , just as much as they rely on one another; but for the most part computers are just another way for people in society to build off one another’s work. The computer resources are there to help researchers with their findings.

In Maryam’s Blog , she asked a good question about how people communicate with computers. I think the simplest answer is by using Coding. In my opinion, if you are not studying to become a computer programer then communicating with computer is not something for you. THis is not an easy skill to accomplish, but those who can do it, are lucky.


After reading MJ’s Blog, i can see a connection between my blog, the first article we read, and his own blog. We depend more on technology rather than our self-knowledge.In the old days, people had to only depend on books for resources. Now we can use books, ebooks, and computers.


Max’s Blog is also interesting to me because he agrees with me and explains how technology is highly depended on for everything. Technology is making us become lazier when conducting research because all we have to do is go to google and type in whatever we wanna search. We no longer have to go to the library and do all this extra work to find answers.


In Abdulabdo’s blog, he says that we rely on the computer because it is a faster thinker than our brains. It is also filled with more information than we are.

While reading What’s for Dinher’s Blog, i began to realize that if we continue to rely mostly on technology to do all of our thinking, then what will be the point of going to school, of having a brain for anything other than assisting everything in our bodes, etc. The internet is basically becoming our BRAIN.