Papers in PDF format

came into common use. A number of electronic utilities serving this sort of function already exist on an ad hoc
basis (newsgroups, email nicknames, lists of 'cool sites', and such-like), but we have not been able to locate any
documented attempts to consciously engineer this convergence - nor even any clear suggestions about the
general way in which such a seemingly obvious use of computer technology might be implemented!
Individuals will soon be able to define the behaviour of their own personal information system, based on input
from a wide range of other people and drawn from many sources - a far journey from the days when people
opened their daily paper, read the contents, and considered themselves to be well-informed. On the other hand,
the general concept of a “newspaper” - with size and location defining the relative importance of content - still
provides the best metaphor to use in discussing something that otherwise is essentially brand new.
For more than a decade now we've been awaiting the "Daily Me", a digital newspaper concept originally put
forward by Nicholas Negroponte and elaborated by many others. Such an integrated service is envisioned as
offering a personalised selection of information that has all been actively located and filtered by intelligent
agents, based on criteria set by the user according to their particular interests. Negroponte also makes a tonguein-cheek
reference to the "Daily Us", but just as a rather marginally-functional agent of such personalisation;
having a filter than may be adjusted only according to one's mood or time available for mainstream "features"
type material. He goes on to describe a more astute "digital sister-in-law"; an interface agent with stored
knowledge of both one's expressed media preferences and actual past responses [Negroponte 1995]. All this
assumes, of course, that most of the information relevant to a particular person's life can be automatically
gathered together from the various roadside attractions to be found scattered along an information
superhighway.
We contend that a key factor is generally being undervalued in all of this theorising about the future potentials
of computer ‘intelligence’ to automate online media selection - that is, the existence of a vital community of
intelligent humans - and that ‘The Daily Us’ is in fact an apt name for a powerful class of application that
could be made available here and now. To implement this we need to develop effective support for a
continuous feed of relevant references offered by any member of the community - which are received
unsolicited by the user - so that these can then be used in the automatic compilation of a unique final
presentation.
Even when we eventually have intelligent agents which are able to serve Negroponte's "digital sister-in-law"
function, the recommendations of other real people will continue to fulfil a unique function - particularly in
terms of exposing us to critical pieces of information from areas we'd never think to intentionally explore
otherwise. Most importantly, though, we don’t have to wait for more powerful systems in order to share the
results of our own innate intelligence much more effectively. Hyperlinked suggestions received from a user's
friends, professional colleagues and other circles of mental association can already be very effectively fielded
using the capabilities of existing personal computers.
There are a few existing initiatives which can provide some insight into the range of considerations involved in
letting other people help structure a user’s access to information. The most relevant is probably the NoCeM
project, intended to perfect selective controls for access to Usenet files. Though primarily directed at blocking
out unwanted postings from view, it can also work the other way around, to only acknowledge postings from
specifically authorised persons - or specific postings that those other ‘approved’ people have recommended
[‘moose’ 1996]. Beyond this, there is a body of work that has been done within the field of Computer
Supported Collaborative Work that will provide useful hints toward designing an appropriate user interface.
Process of Interaction
The way in which suggestions are filtered provides a good starting point from which to discuss the proposed
interactive infrastructure which could eventually lead to a highly-personalised version of ‘The Daily Us’:
Anyone could recommend anything to anyone else; without being concerned that this might be taken as an
unwanted intrusion. Such recommendations would be automatically filtered and ‘graded’ as to their probable
importance (i.e., whether or not they appear on the “front page”) based on an process which has assigned
stature to whatever past suggestions they may have made - all by way of one’s own personal assessment of the
media itself. In short, whoever proved to be the best source of references would naturally come be promoted to
the most effective ‘virtual editor’ position.
The likely ‘relevance level’ of known contributors would initially be assigned by the user, but the stature of