| ||||||||||||
PRINT
COMMENT
SUBSCRIBE
RSSToday, our world is much more complex. There's too much knowledge to store in just one mind. So, we tend to find other places to keep it for when we need it. Hence the concept of transactive memory, which I touched on last week.
Misty, Watercolored Memories
We have different methods for storing different types of memories. The way we remember our 21st birthday (if we still remember it at all) is different than the way we remember our phone number. Then there's the way we remember how to ride a bike, or what Led Zeppelin's "Black Dog" sounds like.
And some people are better at remembering certain types of things than others. That's why we've adapted to extend our memory capabilities by using transactive memory. We rely on others to store memories that we might need at some point. Our wives remember birthdays. Our kids remember how to program our smart phone. Our co-worker remembers how to run the virus scan on our computer. We don't have to remember all these things; all we have to remember is who does.
The Transactive Web
But what about computers, and, by extension, the Internet? What about search? Doesn't this take transactive memory to a level never thought of before? Even the reduced work load of remembering who remembers what is significantly more trouble than just being able to instantly recall information with a well-placed query. We dump the details of our life on a hard drive somewhere, and search for it when we need it. Even if we're looking for something we didn't know we needed, like the recipe for haggis (how many of you celebrated Robbie Burns Day last Friday?) we can find it when we needed it. And we don't have to remember it, because we know it will be there come next Jan. 25.
The Adaptive Brain
And that brings us to the second point I raised last week, that of neurological plasticity. Our brain prunes itself, getting rid of capacities we really don't need anymore, and strengthening those that we do. This happens to the greatest extent in the first few decades of our lives, but it is a lifelong process. I am forcibly reminded of this when my 14-year-old daughter asks me for help with her algebra homework. At one point in my life, I knew this stuff. But most of those neurons have long since disappeared. To offer any help at all, I have to relearn what I once knew, building new neural pathways.
So, as we have to worry less about remembering certain things, like facts, dates, phone numbers and addresses, will our semantic memory capabilities, the place we store these things, become less exercised and therefore, pruned out of the way? And in its place, will we develop greater skills in navigating online spaces?
It's really not a question, it's already happening. We can see the difference in the generational abilities in the online space, or when our kids kick our virtual butts in a Wii showdown. But we're still in a place where we're balanced on the cusp between the pre- and post-digital world. We still have a foot in each realm. Let's fast-forward a generation or two and see which capabilities that seem so essential to us today have disappeared. And which new talents, unfathomable to us today, have taken their place.
Exponential Technological Advances
Now, obviously, this is nothing new. We don't need to remember how to shoe a horse, and our great-grandfather would be amazed (and possibly aghast) at a trip on a California freeway. Change has always happened, and humans have always adapted. But there's something different now. Raymond Kurzweil calls it The Law of Accelerating Returns. The need to adapt to leaping technological advance is getting more and more demanding. Technological growth is exponential. At today's rate, we experience 20,000 years of progress in a century. In the year 2045, Kurzweil believes we'll hit a point where machines become smarter than humans. Could the human mind, which is amazing in its adaptability, simply be outstripped by technology?
One last thought. If you believe in evolution (as I do) humans have evolved as the preeminent species through a long line of trial and error, with our environment as the ultimate judge of genetic worthiness. The problem is that evolution is a long, slow process. Our evolutionary environment, the one we've adapted to excel in, is a hunter-gatherer society several thousand years past. Evolution never equipped us to function in the world we live in, except in one regard. It equipped us with an adaptable mind that allows self-awareness. And even that is inextricably tied to our human nature. The human mind is a wonderful thing, but unfortunately, it doesn't benefit from Moore's Law.
Meet Gord Hotchkiss at Search Insider Summit Utah!
Gord Hotchkiss will be there speaking during "Conference Opens and Opening Remarks" on December 03 at 8:45 AM. Top executives will be there. Will you?
Register today and save.
Register today and save.
RSS FEEDS
This same phenomenon can be seen in the beak size of Gallapagos finches. The population always has a range of beak sizes; the percentage of any given beak size can vary over a fairly short period of time, depending on conditions. Again, no individual mutation or adaptation; rather, a redeploying of the characteristics already in place.
Again, the phenomenon can be seen in neuroplasticity, where the mind redeploys already-existing elements of the brain, to achieve different tasks. (For instance, the portions of the brain normally devoted to vision can, in the case of a blind person, be redeployed to enhance other senses.)
What does this have to do with search engines? I would submit that, prior to the development of the Web and various search engines, there was a certain economy in retaining specific information. It would take too long to go to the library and look it up. So, people kept that information in their heads. (Note, by the way, that some people build up a library of their own, for information sufficiently important to have close at hand, but not so vital that it need be retained in the brain.)
We now have something very close to a universal library, via the Web. We can redeploy our brain resources away from retention of specific data, and towards higher level tasks: where do I look for the information? how do I structure the question to find the answer the most quickly? what sources are the most reliable? No mutations required; just an adaptive use of the resources we already have.
This makes me wonder whether we will ever develop machines that are "smarter" than we are; for the definition of "smart" changes depending on the environment. To take an extreme example: assume a Harvard PhD and an illiterate bushman. Now, put them, unequipped, on the savannahs of Africa. Who is "smart"? A machine may be able to solve an equation more quickly than a human; this frees up the human to devise more complex equations which may be solved. Perhaps "smart" resides not so much in knowing the answers as in knowing how to posit the questions.
We may be able to develop machines that can do incredible things incredibly fast; but the machines will always lag us, because, by offloading work to the machines, we free up our brains to perform higher-level tasks. Such as, developing machines that can do incredible things incredibly fast.
Searching is a tool not a substitute for thinking using the memories and patterns we develop over a lifetime. If our ancestors had to whip out their laptops to remember that that big scary lion was looking for his next meal, we never would have survived. Will someone please stop the search madness?
Many times while writing or researching a news topic or source for an article, I find myself blindly recalling "I saw/read that somewhere..." The trick is that I know neither the exact URL, nor the website name, nor the page title, nor the author; only that the information I need is between the 20th and 30th google result of one or two quoted terms, two or three links deep in the website somewhere.
Or sometimes, I'll remember that I can only get to a certain URL through the Links portion of separate but related website that I can recall...
Esther Hicks would say that as each generation is born into this world they're mentally hard-wired to easily acclimate to the current state of technology and environment. Of course Esther isn't a scientist, but I'm sure you can find thorough research by accredited people to back this statement. It just makes sense.
Here's an equally interesting article in the same vein on the newly acquired ability and way in which we think and learn: Micro-Learning! Written by a brilliant guy named Jon who founded the digital audiobook site called LearnOutLoud.com and is ramping up to launch EduFire.com. (No he didn't pay me to say this - I just dig his products and thinking.)
http://edurev.com/blog/2007/05/
Cheers!
I think it begs the discussion on the difference (or importance) between thinking and memory. I am a big fan of the Jeopardy, for example. I marvel at the contestants who are human "Googles". They are masters of memory and recall, but they are no Einstein, Da Vinci, or Edison.
Technology enables us to search (and find) in seconds and minutes, what used to take us hours and days. The same technology, however, cannot help us find that new big idea or innovation. It does, though, help us to invest more time thinking.
Thanks for getting me thinking about this interesting subject.