From the founding director of the MIT Center for Collective Intelligence comes a fascinating look at the remarkable capacity for intelligence exhibited by groups of people and computers working together. If you're like most people, you probably believe that humans are the most intelligent animals on our planet. But there's another kind of entity that can be far smarter: gr From the founding director of the MIT Center for Collective Intelligence comes a fascinating look at the remarkable capacity for intelligence exhibited by groups of people and computers working together. If you're like most people, you probably believe that humans are the most intelligent animals on our planet. But there's another kind of entity that can be far smarter: groups of people. In this groundbreaking book, Thomas Malone, the founding director of the MIT Center for Collective Intelligence, shows how groups of people working together in superminds -- like hierarchies, markets, democracies, and communities -- have been responsible for almost all human achievements in business, government, science, and beyond. And these collectively intelligent human groups are about to get much smarter. Using dozens of striking examples and case studies, Malone shows how computers can help create more intelligent superminds simply by connecting humans to one another in a variety of rich, new ways. And although it will probably happen more gradually than many people expect, artificially intelligent computers will amplify the power of these superminds by doing increasingly complex kinds of thinking. Together, these changes will have far-reaching implications for everything from the way we buy groceries and plan business strategies to how we respond to climate change, and even for democracy itself. By understanding how these collectively intelligent groups work, we can learn how to harness their genius to achieve our human goals. Drawing on cutting-edge science and insights from a remarkable range of disciplines, Superminds articulates a bold -- and utterly fascinating -- picture of the future that will change the ways you work and live, both with other people and with computers.
Superminds: The Surprising Power of People and Computers Thinking Together
From the founding director of the MIT Center for Collective Intelligence comes a fascinating look at the remarkable capacity for intelligence exhibited by groups of people and computers working together. If you're like most people, you probably believe that humans are the most intelligent animals on our planet. But there's another kind of entity that can be far smarter: gr From the founding director of the MIT Center for Collective Intelligence comes a fascinating look at the remarkable capacity for intelligence exhibited by groups of people and computers working together. If you're like most people, you probably believe that humans are the most intelligent animals on our planet. But there's another kind of entity that can be far smarter: groups of people. In this groundbreaking book, Thomas Malone, the founding director of the MIT Center for Collective Intelligence, shows how groups of people working together in superminds -- like hierarchies, markets, democracies, and communities -- have been responsible for almost all human achievements in business, government, science, and beyond. And these collectively intelligent human groups are about to get much smarter. Using dozens of striking examples and case studies, Malone shows how computers can help create more intelligent superminds simply by connecting humans to one another in a variety of rich, new ways. And although it will probably happen more gradually than many people expect, artificially intelligent computers will amplify the power of these superminds by doing increasingly complex kinds of thinking. Together, these changes will have far-reaching implications for everything from the way we buy groceries and plan business strategies to how we respond to climate change, and even for democracy itself. By understanding how these collectively intelligent groups work, we can learn how to harness their genius to achieve our human goals. Drawing on cutting-edge science and insights from a remarkable range of disciplines, Superminds articulates a bold -- and utterly fascinating -- picture of the future that will change the ways you work and live, both with other people and with computers.
Compare
Adnan Khaleel –
This book probably made sense 3 decades ago, but nothing new is really discussed here. The idea of super minds besides be a abstract construct, lacks any tangible practical use. I’ve wasted my time on this book, I’d advise you not do the same.
Terralynn Forsyth –
Pretty disappointing - felt like the explanations of "superminds" and collective intelligence were well laid out, but the arguments for why thinking in this way for the "future of work" were unclear. It was a pretty general and unoriginal overview of an highly discussed topic. Some interesting concepts, such as "integrated information theory", for understanding, measuring, and assessing consciousness are introduced, but practicality is missing from this book. Pretty disappointing - felt like the explanations of "superminds" and collective intelligence were well laid out, but the arguments for why thinking in this way for the "future of work" were unclear. It was a pretty general and unoriginal overview of an highly discussed topic. Some interesting concepts, such as "integrated information theory", for understanding, measuring, and assessing consciousness are introduced, but practicality is missing from this book.
Jim Crocker –
This one should get you thinking. No it's not about some kind of computer mind-meld. It's a serious discussion about the "intelligence" of groups of people. Here's a quote: "Groups have scientifically measurable properties. Psychologists can measure intelligence of groups. Some groups are smarter than others and we can understand why." All I can say is that I "knew" it all along. I'll be reading and re-reading this one for a while. This one should get you thinking. No it's not about some kind of computer mind-meld. It's a serious discussion about the "intelligence" of groups of people. Here's a quote: "Groups have scientifically measurable properties. Psychologists can measure intelligence of groups. Some groups are smarter than others and we can understand why." All I can say is that I "knew" it all along. I'll be reading and re-reading this one for a while.
Kyle –
Reasonably well written, it is both too complicated to introduce someone to the topic and too broad to move the subject forward. The author has a particular view of intelligence and emergent thinking, which is fine, but it did not seem based on research. It seemed largely a stealth advertisement for his think tank.
Mark Fallon –
We know that we're stronger together. research has proven that we're also smarter together. Now add the power of computer networking and AI..... We know that we're stronger together. research has proven that we're also smarter together. Now add the power of computer networking and AI.....
João –
Is a group conscious? How can we improve collective intelligence? The author offers non intuitive and tought provoking answers. Nice job.
Jerrod Carter –
This felt like a book that was published under the "publish or perish" model. An MIT prof throwing in as many references to other MIT prof's studies as he could. Really, maybe the only takeaway I got from this book was that we should look at making computers part of groups, not just as personal assistants. Just as they can increase our individual productivity, they could also increase a group's productivity and decision making by including their insights into a decision making process. Probably This felt like a book that was published under the "publish or perish" model. An MIT prof throwing in as many references to other MIT prof's studies as he could. Really, maybe the only takeaway I got from this book was that we should look at making computers part of groups, not just as personal assistants. Just as they can increase our individual productivity, they could also increase a group's productivity and decision making by including their insights into a decision making process. Probably could have made that point in a good essay a lot better than in a book.
Steve –
Apparently I am not the target audience. It must be better suited for the fields of organizational dynamics, management, marketing and perhaps sociology. If you have experience in computer science, machine learning or are in the fields of engineering or biomedical engineering you will not find this book thought provoking or an interesting read. I was definitely disappointed.
JB Lynn –
A highly interesting look at how groups think and work together to problem-solve. Probably my favorite sections of the book were all the different real-world scenarios of some interesting experiments and studies that have been going on in the effort to study and improve upon AI technology and how that's been incorporated into our lives. There's also a lengthy references section at the end with plenty of options for anyone who might want to read more on a particular idea/study mentioned in the boo A highly interesting look at how groups think and work together to problem-solve. Probably my favorite sections of the book were all the different real-world scenarios of some interesting experiments and studies that have been going on in the effort to study and improve upon AI technology and how that's been incorporated into our lives. There's also a lengthy references section at the end with plenty of options for anyone who might want to read more on a particular idea/study mentioned in the book.
Lorenzo Barberis Canonico –
Amazing! Full of examples that will blow your mind, while also providing a really robust framework to think about collective intelligence across a variety of domains
Ken Hamner –
Good overall summary of the inevitable and accelerating ability of people to leverage machine learning and artificial intelligence in the advancement of knowledge and ideas. Pretty good book.
Douglas Summers-Stay –
This brings together a lot of threads about how groups of people can work together to solve problems. The author was the first to try to measure the intelligence quotient of a group. I have issues with how they did it, though-- instead of using an established intelligence test, they made up their own tests, which seems like it would be less useful information. Also, the data that shows that the intelligence of the group depends on the social perceptiveness of the group (and because of strong cor This brings together a lot of threads about how groups of people can work together to solve problems. The author was the first to try to measure the intelligence quotient of a group. I have issues with how they did it, though-- instead of using an established intelligence test, they made up their own tests, which seems like it would be less useful information. Also, the data that shows that the intelligence of the group depends on the social perceptiveness of the group (and because of strong correlation, the number of women in the group) is sketchy: it looks like random noise with a trend-line drawn through it to me. I would bet it won't replicate. The writing could have been quite a bit denser and I would have been okay with it, even though this isn't really my field. I did like his point that building an AI is like building an intelligent community, only moreso because the individual units are so dumb. The thought I had when reading was that the difference between political systems isn't fundamentally about different goals, it's about different choice-making architectures. Democracy is about making choices by ballot. Libertarianism is about making choices by market. Fascism is about making decision by hierarchy. Communitarianism (?) is about making choices by community agreement-- I've been told that Quakers decide by unanimous voice. Communism-- I'm not sure exactly, but it's still a different way of choosing how resources get allocated, and how it is decided.
D.L. Morrese –
The idea of a group mind isn't new. A business, an army, a musical band, a nation... Many such groups can be viewed as unique entities that possesses information, goals, and attitudes that help define them but which are not necessarily the same as those of their constituent members. (For example, ask your heart its opinion of your last bacon cheeseburger.) There is also nothing new about intelligent behavior emerging from a mixed group of humans and non-humans. (A sheriff, a bloodhound, and a ma The idea of a group mind isn't new. A business, an army, a musical band, a nation... Many such groups can be viewed as unique entities that possesses information, goals, and attitudes that help define them but which are not necessarily the same as those of their constituent members. (For example, ask your heart its opinion of your last bacon cheeseburger.) There is also nothing new about intelligent behavior emerging from a mixed group of humans and non-humans. (A sheriff, a bloodhound, and a map can find an escaped prisoner far better than any of them alone.) And that's pretty much my take on this book. There's nothing new here, no insights, no new information, no fresh perspective.... It's an interesting subject, and if I had chosen to write about it, I'd probably have used the word 'emergent' a lot, and talked considerably more about how difficult it can be to pin down precisely what 'mind' may be generating seemingly intelligent behavior. But, I didn't, and I'm unlikely to. No one would pay me for the effort, and it doesn't sound like enough fun to do it without being paid.... Which makes me wonder why I'm bothering to write this review. Another good question.
Daniel –
I had never thought of anything as a supermind before reading supermind. I liked the chapter where he explained the different types of superminds. And I also like the chapter where he talks about how the future of work. Or maybe it was how A.I. will effect work now and in the future. Something like that. I think its interesting to think of communities, markets, ecosystems, governments as superminds. Reading this book made me think about how I think I have to know a lot of things and do everything I had never thought of anything as a supermind before reading supermind. I liked the chapter where he explained the different types of superminds. And I also like the chapter where he talks about how the future of work. Or maybe it was how A.I. will effect work now and in the future. Something like that. I think its interesting to think of communities, markets, ecosystems, governments as superminds. Reading this book made me think about how I think I have to know a lot of things and do everything myself. It made me think that maybe its better to be able to work with other people well. Because me as one person can't do that much. But, if I worked well with a group of people I could get more done. I don't have to know everything and do everything. Superminds made me think that many people working together can a lot of the time do good things.
Darnell –
There are some insights here, but they're buried under a lot of generic chapters. The book's formula is to call a system (like a company or market) a supermind, make some basic observations, then suggest that technology will probably have an impact on it. The number of chapters that actually dealt with computer/human interactions was very small. I felt many of the takes on other subjects weren't great either. He is bizarrely optimistic about China's social credit score system, and has an enthusia There are some insights here, but they're buried under a lot of generic chapters. The book's formula is to call a system (like a company or market) a supermind, make some basic observations, then suggest that technology will probably have an impact on it. The number of chapters that actually dealt with computer/human interactions was very small. I felt many of the takes on other subjects weren't great either. He is bizarrely optimistic about China's social credit score system, and has an enthusiasm for microtask sysems like Mechanical Turk that I can't generate. Also, not a single chapter about cooperative human/computer chess, which was honestly the main thing I wanted.
Sambasivan –
An ok read. No fresh insights for me. Seems more of a synthesis of current ideas.
Potehin Ruslan –
There's one useful idea in this book - concept of collective intelligence. Everything else - wasting your time. Extremely bad written, not interesting. There's one useful idea in this book - concept of collective intelligence. Everything else - wasting your time. Extremely bad written, not interesting.
Lobak Thirteen –
Informational and its had been a good read.
Carlos Bianchi –
A simple concept so over explained
Julia –
Nothing ground-breaking here but I did enjoy it. A bit of food for thought and helped me some connections that I never considered in detail before.
Maxelsen –
Sorin Tudor –
Trailplodder –
Jose Zea –
Philip Orange –
Scott Wolfson –
Faris –
Thk –
Stanislas –
T –