重新思考互聯(lián)網(wǎng)

原文: The End of the Web, Search, and Computer as We Know It

David Gelernter is a professor of computer science at Yale University and chief scientist at Lifestreams.com. His books include Mirror Worlds, Machine Beauty, and the forthcoming Other Side of the Mind. A former member of the National Endowment for the Arts governing board, Gelernter is also a painter; his works are currently on show at Yeshiva University Gallery in Manhattan.

worldstream-gelernter_rosspatton
worldstream-gelernter_rosspatton

PEOPLE ASK WHAT the next web will be like, but there won’t be a next web.

The space-based web we currently have will gradually be replaced by a time-based worldstream. It’s already happening, and it all began with the lifestream, a phenomenon that I (with Eric Freeman) predicted in the 1990s and shared in the pages of Wired almost exactly 16 years ago.

This lifestream — a heterogeneous, content-searchable, real-time messaging stream — arrived in the form of blog posts and RSS feeds, Twitter and other chatstreams, and Facebook walls and timelines. Its structure represented a shift beyond the “flatland known as the desktop” (where our interfaces ignored the temporal dimension) towards streams, which flow and can therefore serve as a concrete representation of time.

It’s a bit like moving from a desktop to a magic diary: Picture a diary whose pages turn automatically, tracking your life moment to moment … Until you touch it, and then, the page-turning stops. The diary becomes a sort of reference book: a complete and searchable guide to your life. Put it down, and the pages start turning again.

逝者如斯夫 不舍晝夜

Today, this diary-like structure is supplanting the spatial one as the dominant paradigm of the cybersphere: All the information on the internet will soon be a time-based structure. In the world of bits, space-based structures are static. Time-based structures are dynamic, always flowing — like time itself.

The web will be history.

METAPHORS HAVE A PROFOUND EFFECT ON COMPUTING

DAVID GELERNTER

Until now, the web has been space-based, like a magazine stand; we use spatial terms such as “second from the top on the far left” to identify a particular magazine. A diary, on the other hand, is time-based: One dimension of space has been borrowed to represent time, so we use temporal terms like “Thursday’s entry” or “everything from last spring” to identify entries.

Time as a metaphor may seem obvious now. Especially because it’s natural for us to see our lives as stories, organized by time.

Yet it took us more than 20 years in computing to get here. The field has finally moved from conserving resources ingeniously to squandering them creatively. In this new environment, we can focus on the best way — instead of the cheapest, most conservative way — for the internet to work.

And today, the most important function of the internet is to deliver the latest information, to tell us what’s happening right now. That’s why so many time-based structures have emerged in the cybersphere: to satisfy the need for the newest data. Whether tweet or timeline, all are time-ordered streams designed to tell you what’s new.

Of course, we can still browse or search into the past: Time moves forwards and backwards in the cybersphere. Any information object can be added at “now,” and flows steadily backwards — like a twig dropped in a brook — into the past. You can drop files, messages, and conventional websites (those will appear as static, single elements) into the stream, which acts as a content-searchable cloud file system.

But what happens if we merge all those blogs, feeds, chatstreams, and so forth? By adding together every timestream on the net — including the private lifestreams that are just beginning to emerge — into a single flood of data, we get the worldstream: a way to picture the cybersphere as a whole.

沒有人可以可到全部驰坊,每個(gè)人看到的都是其中的一小部分姻氨。

No one can see the whole worldstream, because much of the information flowing through it is private. But everyone can see part of it.

Imagine an old-fashioned well with a bucket on a rope, with the bucket plunging deeper and deeper into the well. This well of time is infinitely deep, so the bucket will plunge forever — and the rope is always as long as it needs to be, so there will always be more rope to unwind. (The infinite scrolling we now experience on many timestreamed websites is merely the rope unwinding.) The bucket represents the head or start of the worldstream, the oldest data object. The rope-axle represents now, and the rope (plunging deeper and deeper into the past) is the stream itself.

Instead of today’s static web, information will flow constantly and steadily through the worldstream into the past. So what does it all mean?

今天油猫,互聯(lián)網(wǎng)最重要的功能是告訴我們剛剛發(fā)生了什么。

Today, the most important function of the internet is to tell us ** what’s happening right now **.

STREAMS COMPLETELY CHANGE THE SEARCH GAME

Today’s operating systems and browsers — and search models — become obsolete, because people no longer want to be connected to computers or “sites” (they probably never did).

What people really want is to tune in to information. Since many millions of separate lifestreams will exist in the cybersphere soon, our basic software will be the stream-browser: like today’s browsers, but designed to add, subtract, and navigate streams.

Searching content in a time stream is a matter of stream algebra, which is easier than the algebra of space-based structures like today’s web. Add two timestreams and get a third (simply merge the AP news feed and my friend Freeman’s blog streams into time-order); and content search is a matter of stream subtraction (simply subtract all entries that don’t mention “cranberries” to yield all the entries that do). The simple, practical features of stream algebra have one huge benefit: giving us made-to-order information.

Every news source is a lifestream. Stream-browsers will help us tune in to the information we want by implementing a type of custom-coffee blender: We’re offered thousands of different stream “flavors,” we choose the flavors we want, and the blender mixes our streams to order.

Every site’s content is liberated from the confines of space. It becomes part of a universal timestream. Instead of relying on Amazon the site to notify me if there’s a new Cynthia Ozick book or new books on the city of Florence, I can blend together several booksellers’ lifestreams and then apply my search since stream algebra allows any streams to be added (new and used books) and content (Florence, Ozick) to be subtracted.

E-commerce changes drastically. We shouldn’t have to work to find what’s new, yet the way the web is currently architected it’s no different logically than having to visit a thousand separate physical shops. The time-based worldstream lets us sit back instead and watch a single, customized fashion show across sites.

People no longer want to be connected to computers or ‘sites’ (they probably never did).

Worldstreams thus let us blend and tune our information any way we like: My preferred Yale football news, book updates, and shopping recommendations are interspersed with all my email, other messages, posts, documents, calendar notes, and so forth. Think these features already exist in an app somewhere? They don’t. They can’t, not until the millions of different streams each telling their own stories share the same interface for the stream browser to draw on.

Does this sort of precise control limit the serendipitous nature of the web? In a way, yes. But it’s about time: “Bring me what I want” is almost always more useful than “Let me rummage around and see what I can find.” No matter how fast it seems, most search is a waste of time. In a way, we are using time (i.e., the time-based structure) to gain time.

Instead of doing an endless series of separate searches, we tune the knobs on our stream-browser to continuously feed us just the information we need.

This future doesn’t just kill the operating system, browser, and search as we know it — it changes the meaning of “computer” as we know it, too. Whether large or small (e.g., a smartphone), a computer’s main function in the near future will be tuning in to — as a car radio tunes in a broadcast station — the constantly flowing global cyberflow. We won’t care much about the computer devices themselves since we’ll be more focused on the world of information … and our lives as attached to it.

Finally, the web — soon to become the cybersphere — will no longer resemble a chaotic cobweb. It’s already started to happen. Instead, billions of users will spin their own tales, which will merge seamlessly into an ongoing, endless narrative: the earth telling its own story.
Editor: Sonal Chokshi @smc90

davidgelernter-napkinsketch_wiredopinion_schokshi
davidgelernter-napkinsketch_wiredopinion_schokshi

UPDATE from author (posted 14 February 2013):

Given the various reactions to this piece, I’d like to point out that while metaphors help clarify a far-future vision, software helps build towards that vision now.

How should we arrange all the stuff on the internet? Conventional solution: use links to form a web. Users follow links from one information-object to related ones. Unconventional alternative: use narrative streams (individually, “l(fā)ifestreams”; blended together, the “worldstream”). Users follow time-ordered sequences from one info-object to the next, and these streams flow: their tails lengthen constantly as new information arrives. Which suggests an unconventional GUI, using virtual 3D: objects flow towards you out of the future and away from you into the past. We’ve actually built a first draft of this future: prototype software that makes the vision concrete. Go to lifestreams.com to request an invite. There, you’ll see a narrative stream made of only five sources (Twitter, Facebook, mail, RSS, memos). Eventually there will be billions of sources: probably 100 or so right on your control panel that track people, institutions, blogs, photo-streams, businesses. Put these billions of streams together and you get the worldstream.

It’s wonderful that computing today is full of non-academics; wonderful that my piece on Wired has more influence than any journal article I might write. But no matter who or where you are, the same powerful processes drive this field: We see big visions, then use existing technology to build software that takes little steps forward. I’ve made correct predictions in my time (the cloud, Carriero and Gelernter ’85;
the web etc., Mirror Worlds, ’91; blogs, chat-streams, and others, “Lifestreams: Bigger than Elvis,” 1995) — and so I can tell you that being right is worth exactly $0.0. But it moves the field forward; and it’s fun!

以下引用自品玩

時(shí)間流互聯(lián)網(wǎng)之未來闡述一:從空間轉(zhuǎn)向時(shí)間
時(shí)間流互聯(lián)網(wǎng)之未來闡述二:桌面將成為一級(jí)菜單和第一入口
時(shí)間流互聯(lián)網(wǎng)之未來闡述三:移動(dòng)OS、HTML5 和超級(jí)App
時(shí)間流互聯(lián)網(wǎng)之未來闡述四:手機(jī)惹盼、Google Glass屯吊、智能手表、平板捧颅、電視……
時(shí)間流互聯(lián)網(wǎng)之未來闡述五:Facebook Home、HTC BlinkFeed功能较雕、SO.HO…
時(shí)間流互聯(lián)網(wǎng)之未來闡述六:智能終端與終端界面的未來暢想

David Gelernter 的觀點(diǎn)碉哑,總的來說,就是現(xiàn)在的互聯(lián)網(wǎng)還是以一個(gè)個(gè)網(wǎng)站亮蒋、一款款A(yù)pp扣典、一項(xiàng)項(xiàng)服務(wù)這種獨(dú)立的形式存在的,你需要分別去登陸各個(gè)網(wǎng)站慎玖,每個(gè)服務(wù)都有一個(gè)獨(dú)立的ID贮尖,他們?cè)诳臻g上是分開的,就像你去街上逛的一家家店鋪一樣趁怔。而隨著網(wǎng)絡(luò)的發(fā)展湿硝、信息世界的開放、智能終端的普及润努,這些獨(dú)立的內(nèi)容會(huì)聚合在一起关斜,并以時(shí)間流的形式呈現(xiàn)給我們每個(gè)人。你只要刷信息流铺浇,就可以看到這個(gè)世界在發(fā)生什么痢畜、看到朋友們?cè)诟墒裁矗カ@取信息鳍侣、購(gòu)物丁稀、發(fā)布內(nèi)容、檢索倚聚、與人溝通等二驰。

互聯(lián)網(wǎng)時(shí)間流的概念,意味著未來的信息會(huì)高度整合秉沼,這些信息包括博客桶雀、RSS訂閱、Twitter等社交網(wǎng)絡(luò)信息唬复、Instagram圖片矗积、朋友分享的電影圖書音樂、Foursquare 簽到等等敞咧。David Gelernter 稱之為魔法日記(他把空間模式稱為雜志攤)棘捣,信息流像日記一樣不斷地滾動(dòng),記錄著你的世界上發(fā)生的每一條信息休建,當(dāng)你觸碰她時(shí)乍恐,她便停止评疗,你可以不斷地翻閱、搜索茵烈、在里面和朋友互動(dòng)等百匆。而這個(gè)日記最基本的特征就是根據(jù)時(shí)間排序,你生活中的所有行為呜投,都會(huì)以時(shí)間這一最基本的標(biāo)簽保存起來加匈。

最后編輯于
?著作權(quán)歸作者所有,轉(zhuǎn)載或內(nèi)容合作請(qǐng)聯(lián)系作者
  • 序言:七十年代末,一起剝皮案震驚了整個(gè)濱河市仑荐,隨后出現(xiàn)的幾起案子雕拼,更是在濱河造成了極大的恐慌,老刑警劉巖粘招,帶你破解...
    沈念sama閱讀 212,332評(píng)論 6 493
  • 序言:濱河連續(xù)發(fā)生了三起死亡事件啥寇,死亡現(xiàn)場(chǎng)離奇詭異,居然都是意外死亡洒扎,警方通過查閱死者的電腦和手機(jī)辑甜,發(fā)現(xiàn)死者居然都...
    沈念sama閱讀 90,508評(píng)論 3 385
  • 文/潘曉璐 我一進(jìn)店門,熙熙樓的掌柜王于貴愁眉苦臉地迎上來逊笆,“玉大人栈戳,你說我怎么就攤上這事岂傲∧疡桑” “怎么了?”我有些...
    開封第一講書人閱讀 157,812評(píng)論 0 348
  • 文/不壞的土叔 我叫張陵镊掖,是天一觀的道長(zhǎng)乃戈。 經(jīng)常有香客問我,道長(zhǎng)亩进,這世上最難降的妖魔是什么症虑? 我笑而不...
    開封第一講書人閱讀 56,607評(píng)論 1 284
  • 正文 為了忘掉前任,我火速辦了婚禮归薛,結(jié)果婚禮上谍憔,老公的妹妹穿的比我還像新娘。我一直安慰自己主籍,他們只是感情好习贫,可當(dāng)我...
    茶點(diǎn)故事閱讀 65,728評(píng)論 6 386
  • 文/花漫 我一把揭開白布。 她就那樣靜靜地躺著千元,像睡著了一般苫昌。 火紅的嫁衣襯著肌膚如雪。 梳的紋絲不亂的頭發(fā)上幸海,一...
    開封第一講書人閱讀 49,919評(píng)論 1 290
  • 那天祟身,我揣著相機(jī)與錄音奥务,去河邊找鬼。 笑死袜硫,一個(gè)胖子當(dāng)著我的面吹牛氯葬,可吹牛的內(nèi)容都是我干的。 我是一名探鬼主播父款,決...
    沈念sama閱讀 39,071評(píng)論 3 410
  • 文/蒼蘭香墨 我猛地睜開眼溢谤,長(zhǎng)吁一口氣:“原來是場(chǎng)噩夢(mèng)啊……” “哼!你這毒婦竟也來了憨攒?” 一聲冷哼從身側(cè)響起世杀,我...
    開封第一講書人閱讀 37,802評(píng)論 0 268
  • 序言:老撾萬榮一對(duì)情侶失蹤,失蹤者是張志新(化名)和其女友劉穎肝集,沒想到半個(gè)月后瞻坝,有當(dāng)?shù)厝嗽跇淞掷锇l(fā)現(xiàn)了一具尸體,經(jīng)...
    沈念sama閱讀 44,256評(píng)論 1 303
  • 正文 獨(dú)居荒郊野嶺守林人離奇死亡杏瞻,尸身上長(zhǎng)有42處帶血的膿包…… 初始之章·張勛 以下內(nèi)容為張勛視角 年9月15日...
    茶點(diǎn)故事閱讀 36,576評(píng)論 2 327
  • 正文 我和宋清朗相戀三年所刀,在試婚紗的時(shí)候發(fā)現(xiàn)自己被綠了。 大學(xué)時(shí)的朋友給我發(fā)了我未婚夫和他白月光在一起吃飯的照片捞挥。...
    茶點(diǎn)故事閱讀 38,712評(píng)論 1 341
  • 序言:一個(gè)原本活蹦亂跳的男人離奇死亡浮创,死狀恐怖,靈堂內(nèi)的尸體忽然破棺而出砌函,到底是詐尸還是另有隱情斩披,我是刑警寧澤,帶...
    沈念sama閱讀 34,389評(píng)論 4 332
  • 正文 年R本政府宣布讹俊,位于F島的核電站垦沉,受9級(jí)特大地震影響,放射性物質(zhì)發(fā)生泄漏仍劈。R本人自食惡果不足惜厕倍,卻給世界環(huán)境...
    茶點(diǎn)故事閱讀 40,032評(píng)論 3 316
  • 文/蒙蒙 一、第九天 我趴在偏房一處隱蔽的房頂上張望贩疙。 院中可真熱鬧讹弯,春花似錦、人聲如沸这溅。這莊子的主人今日做“春日...
    開封第一講書人閱讀 30,798評(píng)論 0 21
  • 文/蒼蘭香墨 我抬頭看了看天上的太陽(yáng)芍躏。三九已至邪乍,卻和暖如春,著一層夾襖步出監(jiān)牢的瞬間,已是汗流浹背庇楞。 一陣腳步聲響...
    開封第一講書人閱讀 32,026評(píng)論 1 266
  • 我被黑心中介騙來泰國(guó)打工榜配, 沒想到剛下飛機(jī)就差點(diǎn)兒被人妖公主榨干…… 1. 我叫王不留,地道東北人吕晌。 一個(gè)月前我還...
    沈念sama閱讀 46,473評(píng)論 2 360
  • 正文 我出身青樓蛋褥,卻偏偏與公主長(zhǎng)得像,于是被迫代替她去往敵國(guó)和親睛驳。 傳聞我的和親對(duì)象是個(gè)殘疾皇子烙心,可洞房花燭夜當(dāng)晚...
    茶點(diǎn)故事閱讀 43,606評(píng)論 2 350

推薦閱讀更多精彩內(nèi)容