21-nelson74-4web2

21. Computer Lib

/Dream Machines

1974

315

;

Hypergrams may also be programmed to show the

consequences of a user’s prod—what follows or accompanies

some motion of the picture that he makes with a pointing

tool, like the heartbeat sequence. 

Stretchtext™ Fills in the Details

This form of hypertext is easy to use without getting lost. As

a form of writing, it has special advantages for discursive and

loosely structured materials—for instance historical

narratives. 

There are a screen and two throttles. The first throttle

moves the text forward and backward, up and down on the

screen. The second throttle causes changes in the writing

itself: throttling toward you causes the text to become longer

by minute degrees. Gaps appear between phrases; new words

and phrases pop into the gaps, an item at a time. Push back

on the throttle and the writing becomes shorter and less

detailed. 

The stretchtext is stored as a text stream with extras,

coded to pop in and pop out at the desired altitudes:

Hypermap Zips Up or Down

The screen is a map. A steering device permits the user to

move the map around the world’s surface: a throttle zooms it

in. Not by discrete jumps, but animated in small changes, the

map grows and grows in scale. More details appear as the

magnification increases. The user may request additional

display modes or “overlays,” such as population, climate, and

industry. Such additional features may pop into view on

request 

Queriable Illustrations: a Form of

Hypergram

A “hypergram” is a picture that can branch or perform on

request. In this particular example, we see on the screen a

line-drawing with protruding labels. When the student

points at a label, it becomes a sliding descriptive ribbon,

explaining the thing labeled. Or asterisks in an illustration

may signal jumps to detailed diagrams and explanations, as

in discrete hypertexts. 

---

the

NEWMEDIA

READER

Dissection on the Screen

The student of anatomy may use his light-pen as a scalpel for

a deceased creature on the screen. As he cuts, the tissue parts.

He could also turn the light-pen into hemostat or forceps,

and fully dissect the creature—or put it back together again.

(This need not be a complex simulation. Many key

relationships can be shown by means of fairly simple

schematic pictures, needing a data structure not prohibitively

complicated.)

Hyper-comics are Fun

Hyper-comics are perhaps the simplest and most

straightforward hyper-medium. The screen holds a comic

strip, but one which branches on the student’s request. For

instance, different characters could be used to explain things

in different ways, with the student able to choose which type

of explanation he wanted at a specific time.

‘Technicality’ Is Not Necessary

Proponents of CAI want us to believe that scientific teaching

requires a certain setup and format, incomprehensible to the

layman and to be left to experts. This is simply not true.

“Technicality” is a myth. The problem is not one of technical

rightness, but what should be.  

The suggestions that have been given are things that

should be; they will be brought about.

21. Computer Lib

/Dream Machines

316

---

21. Computer Lib

/Dream Machines

1974

Ah, Love! could you and I with Him conspire

To grasp this sorry Scheme of Things entire,

Would not we shatter it to bits—and then

Re-mould it nearer to the Heart’s Desire!

Edward Fitzgerald.

Almost everyone seems to agree that

Mankind (who?) is on the brink of a

revolution in the way information is handled,

and that this revolution is to come from some

sort of merging of electronic screen

presentation and audio-visual technology

with branching, interactive computer

systems. (The naïve think “the” merging is

inevitable, as if “the” merging meant anything

clear. I used to think that too.)

Professional people seem to think this

merging will be an intricate mingling of

technical specialties, that our new systems

will require work by all kinds of committees and consultants

(adding and adjusting) until the Results—either specific

productions or overall Systems—are finished. Then we will

have to Learn to Use Them. More consulting fees.

I think this is a delusion and a con-game. I think that when

the 

real media of the future arrive, the smallest child will

know it right away (and perhaps first). That, indeed, should

and will be the criterion. When you can’t tear a teeny kid

away from the computer screen, we’ll have gotten there.

We are approaching a screen apocalypse. The author’s basic

view is that RESPONSIVE COMPUTER DISPLAY SYSTEMS

CAN, SHOULD AND WILL RESTRUCTURE AND LIGHT UP

THE MENTAL LIFE OF MANKIND. (For a more

conventional outlook, see box nearby, “Another Viewpoint.”)

I believe computer screens can make people happier,

smarter, and better able to cope with the copious problems

of tomorrow. But only if we do right, right now. 

Why?

The computer’s capability for branching among events,

controlling exterior devices, controlling outside events, and

mediating in all other events, makes possible a new era of

media.

Until now, the mechanical properties of external objects

determined what they were to us and how we used them.

But henceforth this is arbitrary.

The recognition of that arbitrariness, and reconsideration

among broader and more general alternatives, awaits us. All

the previous units and mechanisms of learning, scholarship,

arts, transaction and confirmation, and even self-reminder,

were based in various ways upon physical objects—the

properties of paper, carbon paper, files, books and

bookshelves. To read from paper you must

move the physical object in front of you. Its

contents cannot be made to slide, fold, shrink,

become transparent, or get larger.

But all this is now changing, and suddenly.

The computer display screen does all these

things if desired, to the same markings we have

previously handled on paper. The computer

display screen is going to become universal very

fast; this is guaranteed by the suddenly rising

cost of paper. And we will use them for

everything. This already happens wherever

there are responding computer screen systems.

(I have a friend with two CRTs on his desk; one

for the normal flow of work, and one to handle interruptions

and side excursions.) A lot of forests will be saved.

Now, there are many people who don’t like this idea, and

huff about various apparent disadvantages of the screen. But

we can improve performance until almost everyone is

satisfied. For those who say the screens are “too small,” we

can improve reliability and backup, and offer screens

everywhere (so that material need not be physically carried

between them).

The exhilaration and excitement of the coming time is

hard to convey on paper. Our screen displays will be alive

with animation in their separate segments of activity, and

will respond to our actions as if alive physically too. 

The question is, then: HOW WILL WE USE THEM? Thus

the design of screen performances and environments, and of

transaction and transmission systems, is of the highest

priority. 

317

;

---