Human-in-the-loop computing has its limits. What must we do differently to prepare for the networking of thousands of embedded processors per person? And how do we move from human-centered to human-supervised computing? For the past 40 years, most of the IT research community has focused on interactive computing, J.C.R. Licklider’s powerful and human-centered vision of human-computer symbiosis [3]. In tandem with this research has come the creation of an IT industry that is hurtling toward the human/machine/network breakpoint—the point at which the number of networked interactive computers will surpass the number of people on the planet. We still have a long way to go before Licklider’s vision is attained—and are many years from extending per-capita penetration to most parts of the world. However, “missing science ” may no longer be the factor limiting progress toward these long-cherished goals. It is reasonable, though perhaps heretical, to suggest that refinements of the existing science base will be sufficient to drive these efforts forward. It is time for a change. The computer science research community now enjoys a rare and exciting opportunity to redefine its agenda and establish the new goals that will propel society beyond interactive computing and the human/machine breakpoint. In lifting our sights toward a world in which networked computers outnumber human beings by a hundred or thousand to one, we should consider what these “excess ” computers will be doing and craft a research agenda that can lead to increased human productivity and quality of life.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
David L. Tennenhouse (2000) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: