who's it for?
Being able to capture and share more efficiently and inclusively what you already know in your own specialist field with others is, in itself, something of a Holy Grail.
However, there would be no point whatsoever if we simply captured for capture's sake.
Generating even more data streams in a world plagued with existing datasets would help no one.
Instead, we propose two features which we believe would serve absolutely everyone on the rock: in every sector; at every level of responsibility; in every moment of their working lives. Here's an overview of what we mean:
The first feature is as follows. We suggest that the intuition and high-level domain expertise we capture using our visualisation technologies should be storable and easily retrievable, using machines in supportive roles where they partner and dialogue with their human counterparts.
We definitely don't want to create an "artificial intuition", where machines once more are abused in order to remove human beings from the frame of relevant 21st century activity. We are much more interested in augmenting existing human capability to intuit our futures. We aim to do this way beyond anything achieved by human beings up to now.
The second feature, on the back of points 1 and 2, would therefore involve using machines to validate human thinking, but always where humans freely chose to allow such validation.
Again, we come firmly back to the idea of augmenting human capabilities with tech rather than substituting these subjects using machines.
In all of this, we assume the human brain is a malleable, expandable, creative, and efficient deliverer of the new: it's up to us to choose whether we want - in a world of tech - to become more intelligent and thinking, or less.
And that's the choice.
And it impacts directly on our species' chances of survival, as well as that of our organisations' bottom lines.
Just imagine: imagine a tech mogul at the head of a huge transnational tech corporation. It's not hard to do, right? What do they use to get where they've got to? It's not the ability to crunch numbers or understand KPIs. We could all be taught to do that.
It really isn't, is it?
Doesn't it have much more to do with the capacity they have to see and shape futures?
Their ability to imagineer what no one has seen as yet?
Their nous when it comes to judging the opportunity?
Now imagine your organisation of 20,000 employees, or 150,000, or 300-odd ... or just 10, or maybe 2, or maybe 1. And imagine what all these people could do if they could capture and validate everything they already knew, so any and all mission-critical decisions could take into account every single piece of intellectual property generated daily in such an organisation.
Who, then, is augmented intuition really for?
Tens of thousands of privileged human beings? Hundreds of thousands of lucky ones? Or millions of species-saving geniuses, able to deliver a more efficient future for us all?