, Volume 35, Issue 1, pp 203–212 | Cite as

What Can We Know of Computational Information? Measuring, Quantity, and Quality at Work in Programmable Artifacts

  • Federico Gobbo
  • Marco BeniniEmail author


This paper explores the problem of knowledge in computational informational organisms, i.e. organisms that include a computing machinery at the artifact side. Although information can be understood in many ways, from the second half of the past century information is getting more and more digitised, von Neumann machines becoming dominant. Computational information is a challenge for the act of measuring, as neither purely quantitative nor totally qualitative approaches satisfy the need to explain the interplay among the agents producing and managing computational information. In this paper, Floridi’s method of levels of abstraction is applied to the analysis of computational information, with a chief interest in the concepts of information measure, quantification and quality.


Informational organism Computational information Computational complexity Information quality Information measuring Quantitative measuring 



We would like to thank all participants of the Fifth Workshop of the Philosophy of Information for their useful feedbacks to our work, and the reviewers for their compelling and interesting remarks. Also, Dr. Benini has been supported in this research by the project “Correctness by Construction” (CORCON), EU 7th framework programme, grant n. PIRSES-GA-2013-612638, and by the project “Abstract Mathematics for Actual Computation: Hilbert′s Program in the 21st Century” from the John Templeton Foundation. Dr. Gobbo holds the Special Chair in Interlinguistics and Esperanto at the University of Amsterdam (UvA), Faculty of Humanities, on behalf of the Universal Esperanto Association (UEA, Rotterdam). The content and opinions expressed in this article are the authors′ and they do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the institutions supporting them.


  1. Beavers AF (2011) Historicizing floridi: the question of method, the state of the profession, and the timeliness of floridi’s philosophy of information. Etica Polit Ethics Polit XIII(2):225–275Google Scholar
  2. Bridges DS, Vîţă LS (2011) Apartness and uniformity: a constructive development. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brooks FP (1995) The mythical man-month: essays on software engineering, Anniversary Edition edn. Addison Wesley Longman, BostonGoogle Scholar
  4. Burks AW, Goldstine HH, von Neumann J (1946) Preliminary discussion of the logical design of an electronic computing instrument, Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  5. Costantini S, Gobbo F (2013) A history of autonomous agents: from thinking machines to machines for thinking. In: Local proceedings of the nature of computation. 9th conference on computability in Europe, CiE 2013. Milan, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  6. Floridi L (2008) The method of levels of abstraction. Minds Mach 18(3):303–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Floridi L (2011) The philosophy of information. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Floridi L (2013) Information quality. Philos Technol 26:1–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Floridi L (2013) Technology’s in-betweeness. Philos Technol 26:111–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fortnow L (2013) The golden ticket: P, NP, and the search for the impossible. Princeton University Press, PrincetonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Floridi L (2013) The ethics of information. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gobbo F, Benini M (2013) From ancient to modern computing: a history of information hiding. IEEE Ann Hist Comput 35(3):33–39. doi: 10.1109/MAHC.2013.1
  13. Gobbo F, Benini M (forthcoming) Why zombies can’t write significant source code. J Exp Theor Artif IntellGoogle Scholar
  14. Hennessy JL, Patterson DA (2006) Computer architecture: a quantitative approach, 4th edn. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, BurlingtonGoogle Scholar
  15. Kay AC (1972) A personal computer for children of all ages. In: Proceedings of the ACM annual conference—vol 1, ACM ’72Google Scholar
  16. Papadimitriou CH (1994) Computational complexity. Addison Wesley, BostonGoogle Scholar
  17. Shoham Y (1990) Agent oriented programming. Technical Report STAN-CS-90-1335 Computer Science Department, Stanford UniversityGoogle Scholar
  18. The Onlife Group (2013) The onlife manifesto. Tech. rep, European CommissionGoogle Scholar
  19. Turner R (2013) Programming languages as technical artifacts. Philos Technol 1–21. doi: 10.1007/s13347-012-0098-z
  20. Upton E, Halfacree G (2013) Raspberry Pi user guide. Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  21. von Neumann J (1993) First draft of a report on the EDVAC. IEEE Ann Hist Comput. doi: 10.1109/85.238389

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  2. 2.University of InsubriaVareseItaly

Personalised recommendations