Internet Hierarchy of Needs elaborated, Part 2
Summary: This post is part of a series; it’s a discussion on my thinking behind Level 2 of the Internet Hierarchy of Needs. Just joining this conversation? You might want to start here.
Level 2: Connectivity Needs
The ability to connect to and between documents and sites, and its subsequent implications
Thanks to the comments on the original Internet Hierarchy of Needs post, the question I’m exploring here is the appropriateness of combining the first two levels I’d originally outlined: Existence (basic elements for the Internet to work: computers connecting to each other and volume of documents) and Connectivity.
Perhaps a good way to approach this question is from the other direction: rather than ask whether they should be combined, let’s ask why they were separated in the first place.
This question is actually fundamental to the entire exploration of this model, which looks at the character and behavior of the Internet as a global system and its relationship with people.
So what is the distinction between being able to connect computers and being able to link from within documents?
I think it’s huge.
Connecting computers means I give you a key to my filing cabinet. You can look in it, read files, and maybe edit them or make some copies if I let you or if you don’t care about my IP. Powerful stuff.
Not nearly as powerful, though, as the ability to connect from within documents. Here’s why: when I link from within a document, the object of my link becomes a part of the document. The document becomes defined through the relationship, rather than existing as a stand-alone item that can be accessed externally.
This is a significant evolutionary step. This is the difference between a collection of atoms and a living creature. This is the difference between Archie and Google.
Our existence is defined by relationships. You are live in relation to a place, work in relation to a job, love in relation to a partner. You are Rosemary’s granddaughter and the spitting image of your father.
The difference between Level 1 and Level 2 is the difference between a collection of hardware and a natural system.
I wish to be totally clear here that my aim with this post is not to present a defensive stance; it is to elaborate thinking and encourage discussion. On that note, I’d love to hear from you, Jon Lister! And from the rest of you as well—what are your thoughts?
February 11th, 2008 at 10:50 am
Hi Kaila,
In my previous comment, I separated “Infrastructure” and “Access”, whereas you combine them into “Existence”. I think that’s fine really, as we’re talking about the Internet after all.
I can see what you’re getting at with the forming of relationships between documents. It’s the invention of hypertext that is the epoch-defining event. If we look at what we have today, not all digitally recorded relationships are done through hypertext (that’s an understatement), but that’s the start of embedding relationships between documents into documents, in a totally human-readable way.
Next I’d question whether you think this needs to come before the evolution of search/sort, or whether this depends on it. Or perhaps these co-evolve?
J.
February 11th, 2008 at 11:12 pm
Hey there Jon,
Thanks for your great comment. It’s certainly true that we’ve been searching and sorting since the Dewey Decimal System, and the ability to search doesn’t depend on hypertext. That being said, the ability to extract meaning from the relationships—created by hyperlinks—doesn’t exist without the relationships themselves.
So, yes, they do co-evolve, but there is a definite ceiling that can only be broken once documents are interconnected.
What do you think?