tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-109231552012-01-19T09:47:08.934-07:00Independent Developer of Advanced Software Technology, specializing in Software Agent TechnologyJack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.comBlogger1771100tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-13229876573215750072011-12-26T18:09:00.001-07:002011-12-26T18:09:56.601-07:00<DIV dir=ltr> <DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt"> <DIV>The great difficulty with software agents is the issue of how to program them to behave in an intelligent manner. Programming intelligence is difficult, tricky, and error-prone, when it is practical at all. Sometimes we are actually able to come up with simple, clever heuristics that seem to approximate intelligence (e.g., <A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELIZA">ELIZA</A>), or maybe even heuristics for a very limited and constrained domain that come very close to approximating human-level intelligence (e.g., <A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_Blue_(chess_computer)">Deep Blue</A> or <A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watson_(computer)">Watson</A>), but all too often our attempts at programming intelligence fall woefully short, are merely amusing, or are outright lame or horribly dysfunctional when situated in the real world. We will continue to pursue the vision of intelligent machines through programmed intelligence, but ultimately there is only one true path to true intelligence: the ability to learn.</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>Computer software that mimics intelligence focuses primarily on programming a library of encoded information and patterns that represent knowledge. That can enable a computer to answer questions or respond to environmental conditions, but only in a pre-programmed sense. The beauty of human-level intelligence is that the human mind has the ability to learn, to teach itself new facts, to recognize new patterns, to actually produce new knowledge.</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>We can also produce computers that embody quite a fair amount of the processing that occurs in the human mind, but we are still stymied by the vast ability of the mind to learn and produce knowledge and know-how itself.</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>Part of our lack of progress on the learning front is the simple fact that much of the demand for intelligent machines has been simply to replace humans for relatively mindless and rote activities. In other words, a focus on the economics of predictable production rather than creative and intuitive activities.</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>I would like to propose the overall sequence for a path forward towards intelligent machines. I call it the <EM><STRONG>agent learning loop</STRONG></EM>:</DIV> <OL> <LI>We (humans) program an agent or collection of agents with some "basic" intelligence (knowledge and pattern recognition abilities.) <LI>We (humans) program those agents with the "basic" ability to "learn." <LI>We (humans) also program those agents with the ability to communicate their knowledge and learnings with other agents, as well as to simply be able to observe the activity of other agents and learn from their successes and failures. <LI>We (humans) program those agents with the ability to create new intelligent agents with comparable abilities of intelligence and abilities to learn. These agents are then able to learn and "know" incrementally more than us, their creators. <LI>These agents then create new agents, incrementally more intelligent than themselves, and the "loop" is repeated at step #1.</LI></OL> <DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">The theory is that each iteration of the loop incrementally increases the intelligence of the agents.</DIV> <DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">One key here is that multiple agents are needed at each step and that delegation, collaboration, and competition are critical factors in learning.</DIV> <DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">There is also a significant degree of Darwinian evolution in play here as well. True learning involves the taking of some degree of risk, such as with intuitive leaps, and sometimes even random selection when alternatives seem comparable in value, or even random selection on occasion when the choice might seem purely "rational." With a single agent risk is risky, but with multiple agents alternatives can be exploited in parallel. Agents that learn poorly or incorrectly will be at a disadvantage in the next generation and likely die off, although in some cases short-term "poor" behavior can sometimes flip over in future generations to have unexpected value as the environment itself evolves.</DIV> <DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">Communications between agents is critical, as is the ability to learn from failures. In fact, agents may "learn" to seek failure as a faster path to "successful" knowledge.</DIV> <DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><BR>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack Krupansky</A></DIV></DIV></DIV><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-1322987657321575007?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-45053689146037599802011-11-16T16:07:00.001-07:002011-11-16T16:07:22.469-07:00<DIV dir=ltr> <DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt"> <DIV>Many moons ago, years before smart phones, handheld computers, and even the Web, I had this conceptual idea for an imaginary device that I called my "remote control for the world." This was around 1985 or so. It wasn't intended to be a full-blown computer with a fancy GUI, but just a simple device to control just about everything you could imagine remotely. More of a scrolling list of devices and objects and a bunch of specific function buttons. Things like turning your home A/C or sprinklers on and off or checking the temperature in your home. Maybe even starting your car or checking its gas gauge. And your bank balance. Just about any setting or indicator that you have a personal interest in. I never bothered to write it up. I'm not sure why. But recently I was reminded of it (wanting to do something remotely) and I realized that even today its still isn't quite feasible with off-the-shelf technology.</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>The biggest breakthrough has been the Internet and Web, which provides a lot of the communications infrastructure that is needed. Wi-Fi and Bluetooth as well.</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>Small, hi-res graphical displays make the UI much more practical, but ultimately that was never really a major obstacle. A simple, hierarchical scrolling list and some tactile push buttons would work reasonably well.</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>We also have RFID for random objects, bad that is more passive and not interactive, yet.</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>And some household objects and "devices" are intelligent, but we are still in the "dark ages" for most devices and objects that we encounter in our daily lives. Did I lock my door? Sure, some "intelligent homes" can tell you that and control it remotely, but my vintage 1926 apartment door doesn't seem to have an Internet-ready interface.</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>Sure, you can now finally start your car remotely, but that is still more of a specialized app than a general feature of all devices and objects.</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>Thinking about my vision in today's world, I would like to "see" in my refrigerator and "see" in the relevant sections of the supermarket, or any store. Sure, we now have web cameras and other cheap cameras, but they still are not ubiquitous enough to make my vision a reality. And most cameras are still relatively low res and not even HD, lot alone photo-quality high-definition.</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>Yes, some cars now have rear cameras, but I'd like the same for when I'm simply walking down the street. Sure, you could "hack" that, but it's still not quite "there" in terms of a consumer-friendly handheld remote control device.</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>And I'd like to trivially (without some complicated and messy UI) be able to look around corners and even "through" buildings and walls. Sure, we have a lot of elements of the requisite technology, but we're still not even close to having enough of it off-the-shelf and readily packageable to satisfy my interests.</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>Right now, right this moment, I'd like to see where the sun is and check the temperature right outside my building. I can sort of do that with a bunch of browser clicks, but not quite and not as easily as with my original vision for my "remote control for the world." In other words, we can roughly approximate a subset of my vision, but not in any full-featured sense.</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>Maybe a rudimentary version of my remote control might be available in another five years, or ten years, but somehow all of our technological advances over the past 30 years have still not done a great job of integrating our physical environment and everyday devices and objects into one "seamless" network.</DIV> <DIV><BR>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack Krupansky</A></DIV></DIV></DIV><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-4505368914603759980?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-73182703174054342612011-11-04T10:09:00.001-06:002011-11-04T10:09:59.122-06:00<DIV dir=ltr> <DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt"> <DIV>Now that I've finished reading about Apache Hadoop and Apache Mahout, I've decided that I really need to know more than a little about Ruby and Ruby on Rails. I already do know a little, but I need to know a lot more about all the ins and outs and all the details of various features.</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>I figured I'll start with a basic tutorial just to get that out of the way. Something like <A href="http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/documentation/quickstart/">Ruby in Twenty Minutes</A>. This also involves <A href="http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/downloads/">downloading and installing Ruby</A> itself on my Windows machine.</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>I started on the tutorial after downloading and installing Ruby, but realized that I would be much happier starting with the raw language specification since I am basically a compiler guy and I feel more comfortable knowing the strict specifications for white space, line terminators, comments, tokens, keywords, identifiers, literals, etc. before I start working with actual data and control structures. I found the <A href="http://www.ipa.go.jp/osc/english/ruby/index.html">Ruby Draft Specification</A>.</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>I'll do a quick scan of the spec to get the lay of the land and then go back and go through the tutorial.</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>I may go back and carefully read the <A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_(programming_language)">Ruby Wikipedia page</A> first.</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>There are multiple tutorials, each emphasizing various aspects, including similarities to other programming languages. In my case, I'm actually interested in what language features of Ruby are unique or distinct from features of other languages.</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">I'd also like to identify one or more modest-sized actual open source Ruby applications so I can see first hand what good/great Ruby code looks like.</DIV> <DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">I'll focus on information that is available online as opposed to buying actually published books on Ruby,</DIV> <DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">Ultimately, I'd like to have a hard-core technical answer to the basic question of: What is Ruby good (best) for? I know people use Ruby and Ruby on Rails for user interfaces, but that's not a hard-core answer.</DIV> <DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><BR>-- Jack Krupansky</DIV></DIV></DIV><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-7318270317405434261?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-24596635813641343082011-10-31T17:01:00.001-06:002011-10-31T17:01:45.256-06:00<DIV dir=ltr> <DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt"> <DIV>I was reading the <A href="https://cwiki.apache.org/MAHOUT/faq.html">FAQ wiki page for Apache Mahout</A> and found that the "<A href="https://cwiki.apache.org/MAHOUT/books-tutorials-and-talks.html">Books, Tutorials and Talks</A>" link was broken. Here is the <A href="https://cwiki.apache.org/MAHOUT/books-tutorials-and-talks.html">correct link for Apache Mahout Books, Tutorials, and Talks</A>.</DIV> <DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><BR>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack Krupansky</A></DIV></DIV></DIV><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-2459663581364134308?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-46195201068781358942011-10-31T16:27:00.001-06:002011-10-31T16:27:52.724-06:00<DIV dir=ltr> <DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt"> <DIV>Reading through the <A href="https://cwiki.apache.org/MAHOUT/mahout-wiki.html">Apache Mahout wiki</A>, I ran across the "Genetic Programming" section which listed <A href="https://cwiki.apache.org/MAHOUT/mahoutgatutorial.html">WatchMaker</A>, but the wiki page it pointed to had essentially zero descriptive information about WatchMaker itself or even a link to WatchMaker itself. Here's the <A href="http://watchmaker.uncommons.org/index.php">link to the WatchMaker web page</A>, which tells us that:</DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir=ltr> <DIV><EM>The Watchmaker Framework is an extensible, high-performance, object-oriented framework for implementing platform-independent evolutionary/genetic algorithms in Java. The framework provides type-safe evolution for arbitrary types via a non-invasive API. The Watchmaker Framework is Open Source software, free to download and use subject to the terms of the Apache Software Licence, Version 2.0.</EM></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">Just to briefly summarize genetic programming (from the <A href="http://watchmaker.uncommons.org/manual/ch01.html">WatchMaker User Manual</A>):</DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir=ltr> <DIV><EM>Evolutionary algorithms (EAs) are inspired by the biological model of evolution and natural selection first proposed by Charles Darwin in 1859. In the natural world, evolution helps species adapt to their environments. Environmental factors that influence the survival prospects of an organism include climate, availability of food and the dangers of predators.</EM></DIV> <DIV><EM></EM>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV><EM>Species change over the course of many generations. Mutations occur randomly. Some mutations will be advantageous, but many will be useless or detrimental. Progress comes from the feedback provided by non-random natural selection.</EM></DIV> <DIV><EM></EM>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV><EM>...</EM></DIV> <DIV><EM></EM>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV><EM>Evolutionary algorithms are based on a simplified model of this biological evolution. To solve a particular problem we create an environment in which potential solutions can evolve. The environment is shaped by the parameters of the problem and encourages the evolution of good solutions.</EM></DIV> <DIV><EM></EM>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV><EM>The field of Evolutionary Computation encompasses several types of evolutionary algorithm. These include Genetic Algorithms (GAs), Evolution Strategies, Genetic Programming (GP), Evolutionary Programming and Learning Classifier Systems.</EM></DIV> <DIV><EM></EM>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV><EM>The most common type of evolutionary algorithm is the generational genetic algorithm. We'll cover other EA variants in later chapters but, for now, all of the evolutionary algorithms that we meet will be some kind of generational GA.</EM></DIV> <DIV><EM></EM>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV><EM>The basic outline of a generational GA is as follows (most other EA variants are broadly similar). A population of candidate solutions is iteratively evolved over many generations. Mimicking the concept of natural selection in biology, the survival of candidates (or their offspring) from generation to generation in an EA is governed by a fitness function that evaluates each candidate according to how close it is to the desired outcome, and a selection strategy that favours the better solutions. Over time, the quality of the solutions in the population should improve. If the program is successful, we can terminate the evolution once it has found a solution that is good enough.</EM></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">-- Jack Krupansky</DIV></DIV></DIV><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-4619520106878135894?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-22718180091111480822011-10-31T12:30:00.000-06:002011-10-31T12:50:24.727-06:00<DIV dir=ltr> <DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt"> <DIV>While reading through the <A href="https://cwiki.apache.org/MAHOUT/mahout-wiki.html">Apache Mahout wiki</A> I ran across a broken link to the <A href="http://mahout.apache.org/taste.pdf">Taste documentation</A> on the <A href="https://cwiki.apache.org/MAHOUT/quickstart.html">Quickstart page</A>. The <A href="http://mahout.apache.org/taste.pdf">Apache Mahout Taste documentation is here</A>.</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV><A href="https://cwiki.apache.org/MAHOUT/tastecommandline.html">Apache Taste</A> is a recommendation engine:</DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir=ltr> <DIV><EM>Taste is a flexible, fast collaborative filtering engine for Java. The engine takes users' preferences for items ("tastes") and returns estimated preferences for other items. For example, a site that sells books or CDs could easily use Taste to figure out, from past purchase data, which CDs a customer might be interested in listening to.</EM></DIV> <DIV><EM></EM>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV><EM>Taste provides a rich set of components from which you can construct a customized recommender system from a selection of algorithms. Taste is designed to be enterprise-ready; it's designed for performance, scalability and flexibility. Taste is not just for Java; it can be run as an external server which exposes recommendation logic to your application via web services and HTTP.</EM></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">-- <A href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack Krupansky</A></DIV></DIV></DIV><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-2271818009111148082?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-39528829055813917172011-10-31T11:10:00.000-06:002011-10-31T11:12:07.612-06:00<DIV dir=ltr> <DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt"> <DIV>I was reading the <A href="https://cwiki.apache.org/MAHOUT/mahout-wiki.html">Apache Mahout wiki</A> and got to the <A href="https://cwiki.apache.org/MAHOUT/breiman-example.html">Breiman Example page</A> and see that the link to <A href="http://www.springerlink.com/content/u0p06167n6173512/">Leo Breiman's paper (Random Forests)</A> is broken. Here is the <A href="http://www.springerlink.com/content/u0p06167n6173512/">correct link to the paper</A>. You can <A href="http://www.springerlink.com/content/u0p06167n6173512/fulltext.pdf">download the PDF</A> as well.</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>The subject of the document is document classification.</DIV> <DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><BR>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack Krupansky</A></DIV></DIV></DIV><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-3952882905581391717?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-35119481764164306362011-10-24T16:29:00.001-06:002011-10-24T16:29:47.537-06:00<DIV dir=ltr> <DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt"> <DIV>I've finished reading the <A href="http://developer.yahoo.com/hadoop/tutorial/index.html">Apache Hadoop tuturial (from Yahoo)</A>. I didn't do any of the exercises, but at least I have more than a passing familiarity with what Hadoop is all about and how it is well-positioned to cope with Big Data.</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>Now, I'm moving on to reading up on <A href="http://mahout.apache.org/">Apache Mahout</A>. Mahout's goal is <SPAN style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; LINE-HEIGHT: 17px; WIDOWS: 2; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; TEXT-INDENT: 0px; LETTER-SPACING: normal; FONT-FAMILY: ; WHITE-SPACE: normal; ORPHANS: 2; COLOR: ; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px" class=Apple-style-span><SPAN class=Apple-converted-space>&nbsp;</SPAN>to build scalable machine learning libraries for recommendation mining, clustering, classification, frequent itemset mining, and similar purposes. There is actually a book on Mahout (<A href="http://www.manning.com/owen/">Mahout in Action</A>), but for now I'll focus on "mining" <A href="https://cwiki.apache.org/MAHOUT/mahout-wiki.html">the Mahout wiki</A>, which seems to have a lot of useful info which is likely sufficient for my immediate needs.</SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; LINE-HEIGHT: 17px; WIDOWS: 2; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; TEXT-INDENT: 0px; LETTER-SPACING: normal; FONT-FAMILY: ; WHITE-SPACE: normal; ORPHANS: 2; COLOR: ; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px" class=Apple-style-span></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV><SPAN style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; LINE-HEIGHT: 17px; WIDOWS: 2; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; TEXT-INDENT: 0px; LETTER-SPACING: normal; FONT-FAMILY: ; WHITE-SPACE: normal; ORPHANS: 2; COLOR: ; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px" class=Apple-style-span>Mahout is implemented on top of Hadoop.</SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; LINE-HEIGHT: 17px; WIDOWS: 2; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; TEXT-INDENT: 0px; LETTER-SPACING: normal; FONT-FAMILY: ; WHITE-SPACE: normal; ORPHANS: 2; COLOR: ; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px" class=Apple-style-span></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV><SPAN style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; LINE-HEIGHT: 17px; WIDOWS: 2; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; TEXT-INDENT: 0px; LETTER-SPACING: normal; FONT-FAMILY: ; WHITE-SPACE: normal; ORPHANS: 2; COLOR: ; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px" class=Apple-style-span>In the back of my head I'm thinking about <EM>entity extraction</EM> or <EM>named-entity extraction</EM> or <A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Named_entity_recognition"><EM>named-entity recognition</EM></A> or <EM>NER</EM> as it is called. In theory, Mahout greatly facilitates NER.</SPAN></DIV> <DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><BR>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack Krupansky</A></DIV></DIV></DIV><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-3511948176416430636?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-60530616164285136142011-10-17T15:04:00.001-06:002011-10-17T15:04:58.990-06:00<DIV dir=ltr> <DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt"> <DIV>Since I finished my most recent contract work assignment on Friday I'm going to spend some time reading up on <A href="http://hadoop.apache.org/">Hadoop</A> and <A href="http://mahout.apache.org/">Mahout</A>.</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>Hadoop:</DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir=ltr> <DIV><EM>The Apache Hadoop software library is a framework that allows for the distributed processing of large data sets across clusters of computers using a simple programming model. It is designed to scale up from single servers to thousands of machines, each offering local computation and storage. Rather than rely on hardware to deliver high-avaiability, the library itself is designed to detect and handle failures at the application layer, so delivering a highly-availabile service on top of a cluster of computers, each of which may be prone to failures.</EM></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>Mahout:</DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir=ltr> <DIV><EM>The Apache Mahout machine learning library's goal is to build scalable machine learning libraries.</EM></DIV> <DIV><EM></EM>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV><EM>Currently Mahout supports mainly four use cases: Recommendation mining takes users' behavior and from that tries to find items users might like. Clustering takes e.g. text documents and groups them into groups of topically related documents. Classification learns from exisiting categorized documents what documents of a specific category look like and is able to assign unlabelled documents to the (hopefully) correct category. Frequent itemset mining takes a set of item groups (terms in a query session, shopping cart content) and identifies, which individual items usually appear together.</EM></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>In short, Big Data and cluster-based computing.</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>Today I'm reading through the <A href="http://developer.yahoo.com/hadoop/tutorial/">Hadoop Tutorial</A>.</DIV> <DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><BR>-- Jack Krupansky</DIV></DIV></DIV><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-6053061616428513614?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-52443446103168524252011-07-14T10:05:00.001-06:002011-07-14T10:05:27.037-06:00<DIV dir=ltr> <DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt"> <DIV>As I continue to ponder the question of how to make real progress with software agent technology and a knowledge web, the big problem I keep coming back to is what I will call "The Big Problem with Storage", namely, how to achieve a degree of persistence in the digital networking domain comparable in robustness and reliability to storage in the physical world, and then to go a leap beyond that to achieve truly robust and reliable digital storage. Ultimately this includes communications reliability as well, but we can tolerate a little connectivity flakiness, but storage flakiness is not so tolerable since it generally cannot be recovered. What is needed is a fully redundant and diversified network storage scheme that is 100% robust and reliable so that people can have complete confidence that information and media stored on a digital network is even safer than the best storage in the real world.</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>I have written a proposal for a <A href="http://opixia.com/BaseTechnology/dvpds.htm">Vision for a Distributed Virtual Personal Data Storage</A>, but it certainly doesn't appear as if even my limited proposal will happen any time soon.</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>I would add to this requirement that we are in desperate need of connectivity options that are far more reliable than the best offered today. Wired connectivity is probably the most reliable connectivity we have, but has diversity problems. Wireless has greater potential for diversity, but has coverage issues. The sad fact is that if you truly want "always-on" connectivity to your data you need to maintain a local copy on your local computer/network.</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack Krupansky</A></DIV></DIV></DIV><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-5244344610316852425?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-20828613680440870902011-06-26T12:09:00.000-06:002011-06-26T12:10:07.856-06:00<DIV dir=ltr> <DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt"> <DIV><A href="http://opixia.com/surrogatetravel.htm">Surrogate travel</A> is the concept of using a remotely-controlled robot to simulate travel and sensual experiences in a remote location. The user can move the robot around and listen and see what is around the robot. But this may be a significant logistical challenge given today's robotic and communications technology. So, why not use an actual human in place of the robot? The human robot would have one of more video cameras and microphones to provide sensual experiences to the user as well as a headset and microphone for communications with the user, so the user could audibly direct the human robot to move in a semi-mechanical or intelligent manner and the human robot could give the human user feedback as well.</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>This intermediate form of surrogate travel would be much more technologically feasible at the present time and in some cases maybe even more economical as well as more flexible. It might also be more socially acceptable than a free-roving robot.</DIV> <DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><BR>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack Krupansky</A></DIV></DIV></DIV><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-2082861368044087090?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-89943193789613885532010-05-26T11:30:00.001-06:002010-05-26T11:30:32.589-06:00<P></P> <P>I was watching "24" online and in one of the final scenes they are showing a video feed from a drone and there was some text scrolling on both sides of the video screen. I replayed the scene and looking carefully and recognized the text... it was COBOL source code! Really! "DATA DIVISION", "FILE SECTION", "WORKING-STORAGE", "PIC", "UNIT-QTY", etc. What a hoot.</P> <P>I have been enjoying this season of "24" since it is supposedly set in NYC, but other than a very few aerial and stock street shots, the actual action scenes are not NYC at all. Even the UN shots are faked. Oh yeah... I forgot... "24" is put out by FOX. But COBOL? Who would have thought of that for an aerial drone aircraft?</P> <P>-- <A title="mailto:Jack@Finaxyz.com&#10;CTRL + Click to follow link" href="mailto:Jack@Finaxyz.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-8994319378961388553?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-35628575444997860332010-04-13T08:24:00.000-06:002010-04-13T08:25:15.956-06:00<P>Twitter is certainly an interesting phenomenon, but it also has its annoyances. This morning I saw a brief mention of Twitter considering ads. No real surprise there, but it got me thinking. By writing tweets, I am providing Twitter with <EM>content <STRONG>for free</STRONG></EM>. I am basically working for Twitter with zero compensation. So what do I really get out of the deal? Twitter does help to promote blog posts (but does not give any actual Google juice) and does provide an "outlet" for excess energy, but that is about it. Maybe once in a blue moon somebody actually connects with somebody in a valuable way, but that is the exception rather than the rule. In short, the answer to the question "What value do I get from Twitter?" is <STRONG><EM>not much at all and certainly nothing comparable to the effort invested</EM></STRONG>.</P> <P>Twitter is still a young phenomenon and evolving over time, so maybe a few months or a few years from now Twitter will actually, finally have some features that deliver significant value to me. But for new, Twitter is, well, I hate to say this, but, <STRONG><EM>a complete waste of my time</EM></STRONG>. I would not say that all of my time in Twitter has been wasted since it has been an interesting experiment with a new technology, but I have definitely reached well beyond the point of <EM>diminishing returns</EM>.</P> <P>So, to be clear, I do not consider my time spent with Twitter a <EM>complete</EM> waste of time, but simply that the <EM>marginal value</EM> has been too small, for me, personally.</P> <P>Twitter may have <EM>great value</EM> for some people, but I am not one of them.</P> <P>Besides, I now have some real, billable&nbsp;work to do, so Twitter really is <STRONG><EM>an unnecessary and unproductive&nbsp;distraction</EM></STRONG>, for me.</P> <P>And, there have been any number of times where I could have posted a more valuable blog post, but took the lazy route of a simple tweet instead. My loss.</P> <P>BTW, I have over 3,000 tweets, so it is not as if I haven't given Twitter a chance to prove itself.</P> <P>I am not sure how long my hiatus will last. Could be a few months, or maybe a year or more, or maybe just a few weeks. Three to six months would be my preliminary estimate. I may check in on occasion just to see if I have been missing anything. The bottom line is that I'll stay away from Twitter as long as it continues to show <EM>very little promise</EM> of adding any <EM>significant value</EM> to my life. So, my hiatus could in fact be extended to infinity.</P> <P>My hiatus will also give me some extra time to contemplate my experiences with Tweeter and maybe even distill them down to realize what value, if any, they have for me.</P> <P>If anybody really does see a true <EM>breakthrough</EM> in Twitter that really would add <EM>dramatic value</EM> to my life, please send me an email message about it.</P> <P>Now, it is time for my to go tweet my final tweet and then get back to <EM>real</EM> work.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Finaxyz.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-3562857544499786033?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-41176082014864152902010-04-09T21:43:00.001-06:002010-04-09T21:43:59.441-06:00<P>How dumb could a software agent be and still be considered an <EM>intelligent agent</EM>, presuming that it can communicate with and take advantage of the services of other, more intelligent software agents?</P> <P>This still begs the question of how we define or measure the intelligence of a specific software agent. Do we mean the raw, native intelligence contained wholly within that agent, or the <EM>effective intelligence</EM> of that agent as seen from outside of that agent and with no knowledge as to <EM>how</EM> the agent accomplishes its acts of intelligence?</P> <P>We can speak of the degree to which a specific agent <EM>leverages</EM> the intelligence of other agents. Whether we can truly measure and quantify this leverage is another matter entirely.</P> <P>In humans we see the effect that each of us can take advantage of the knowledge (and hence to some degree the intelligence) of others. Still, we also speak of the intelligence of the individual.</P> <P>Maybe a difference is that with software agents, they are much more likely to be highly interconnected at a very intimate level, compared to normal humans, so that agents would typically operate as part of a <EM>multi-mind</EM> at a deeper level rather than as individuals loosely operating in <EM>social</EM> groups as humans do. Or, maybe it is a spectrum and we might have reasons for choosing to design or constrain groups of agents to work with varying degrees of interconnectivity, dependence, and autonomy.</P> <P>So, maybe the answer to the question is that each agent can be extremely dumb or at least <EM>simple-minded</EM>, provided that it is interconnected with other agents into a sufficiently interconnected multi-mind.</P> <P>But even that answer begs the question, leading us to ponder what the minimal degree of interconnectivity is&nbsp;that can&nbsp;<EM>sustain intelligence</EM>.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-4117608201486415290?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-32690922361067270872010-04-09T21:41:00.001-06:002010-04-09T21:41:38.994-06:00<P>How dumb could a software agent be and still be considered intelligent, presuming that it can communicate with and take advantage of the services of other, more intelligent software agents?</P> <P>This still begs the question of how we define or measure the intelligence of a specific software agent. Do we mean the raw, native intelligence contained wholly within that agent, or the <EM>effective intelligence</EM> of that agent as seen from outside of that agent and with no knowledge as to <EM>how</EM> the agent accomplishes its acts of intelligence?</P> <P>We can speak of the degree to which a specific agent <EM>leverages</EM> the intelligence of other agents. Whether we can truly measure and quantify this leverage is another matter entirely.</P> <P>In humans we see the effect that each of us can take advantage of the knowledge (and hence to some degree the intelligence) of others. Still, we also speak of the intelligence of the individual.</P> <P>Maybe a difference is that with software agents, they are much more likely to be highly interconnected at a very intimate level, compared to normal humans, so that agents would typically operate as part of a <EM>multi-mind</EM> at a deeper level rather than as individuals loosely operating in <EM>social</EM> groups as humans do. Or, maybe it is a spectrum and we might have reasons for choosing to design or constrain groups of agents to work with varying degrees of interconnectivity, dependence, and autonomy.</P> <P>So, maybe the answer to the question is that each agent can be extremely dumb or at least <EM>simple-minded</EM>, provided that it is interconnected with other agents into a sufficiently interconnected multi-mind.</P> <P>But even that answer begs the question, leading us to ponder what the minimal degree of interconnectivity is&nbsp;that can&nbsp;<EM>sustain intelligence</EM>.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-3269092236106727087?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-27123459951434272892010-04-09T14:23:00.001-06:002010-04-09T14:23:46.176-06:00<P dir=ltr>Here's an interesting article that posits that our true rate of innovation is declining:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir=ltr> <P><EM>One of the strangest portents of the <STRONG>end of progress</STRONG> is the recent discovery that humans are losing their ability to come up with new ideas.</EM></P> <P><EM>... "The number of advances wasn't increasing exponentially, I hadn't seen as many as I had expected — not in any particular area, just generally."</EM></P> <P><EM>... the rate of innovation peaked in 1873 and has been declining ever since. In fact, our current rate of innovation — which Huebner puts at seven important technological developments per billion people per year — is about the same as it was in 1600. By 2024 it will have slumped to the same level as it was in the Dark Ages, the period between the end of the Roman empire and the start of the Middle Ages.</EM></P> <P><EM>Huebner's insight has caused some outrage. The influential scientist Ray Kurzweil has criticised his sample of innovations as "arbitrary"; K Eric Drexler, prophet of nanotechnology, has argued that we should be measuring capabilities, not innovations. Thus we may travel faster or access more information at greater speeds without significant innovations as such.</EM></P> <P><EM>Huebner has so far successfully responded to all these criticisms. Moreover, he is supported by the work of Ben Jones, a management professor at Northwestern University in Illinois. Jones has found that we are currently in a quandary comparable to that of the Red Queen in Through the Looking Glass: we have to run faster and faster just to stay in the same place. Basically, two centuries of economic growth in the industrialised world has been driven by scientific and technological innovation. We don't get richer unaided or simply by working harder: we get richer because smart people invent steam engines, antibiotics and the internet. What Jones has discovered is that we have to work harder and harder to sustain growth through innovation. More and more money has to be poured into research and development and we have to deploy more people in these areas just to keep up. "The result is," says Jones, "that the average individual innovator is having a smaller and smaller impact."</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>See: <A href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/article575370.ece">http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/article575370.ece</A></P> <P>I would summarize the problem as that our main focus is to be extremely good at repackaging and repurposing old wine in new bottles.</P> <P>In my view, we have far too much "fake innovation". Even worse, we place far to great a value on fake over true innovation.</P> <P>To make my point: Here we are a whole decade into the 21st century and <EM><STRONG>NOBODY</STRONG></EM> is knocking on my door or accosting me on the street and demanding that I should do some <EM><STRONG>true innovation</STRONG></EM>. Nobody. Oh, sure, some people want to cure cancer or prevent climate change and such, but nobody wants to pursue, for example, ... "<EM><STRONG>progress of the human mind</STRONG></EM>" (Kurzweil seems to want to eliminate it as if it were a form of cancer.)</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-2712345995143427289?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-36781690434008629502010-03-13T17:59:00.000-07:002010-03-13T18:00:06.134-07:00<P>I just updated my web page for <A href="http://agtivity.com/state_of_the_art_for_software_agent_technology.htm">State of the Art for Software Agent Technology</A>. I originally wrote it in 2004 and the world has changed a bit since then. Alas, I do not have a lot of great progress to report. As I wrote in this year's update:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir=ltr> <P><EM>The technology sector has evolved significantly since I originally wrote this page in 2004, but software agent technology has stagnated somewhat, at least from a commercial perspective. Research continues, but the great hopes for software agent technology, including my own, have been deferred.</EM></P> <P><EM>For example, the European Commission AgentLink initiative published its Agent Technology Roadmap in 2004 and an update in 2005, but there have not been any updates in the five years since then.</EM></P> <P><EM>A lot of the effort in software agents field was simply redirected to the Semantic Web, Web Services, and plug-ins for Web browsers and Web servers. Rather than seeing dramatic advances in intelligent agents, we have seen incremental improvements in relatively dumb but smart features embedded in non-autonomous Web software such as browsers and server software.</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Again, there has been a lot of progress, but no where near enough to say "Wow! Look at this!"</P> <P>My real bottom line is simply that a lot more research is needed:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir=ltr> <P><EM>I hate to say it, but for now the field of software agents remains primarily in the research labs and the heads of those envisioning its future. There have been many research projects and many of them have made great progress, but the number of successful commercial ventures is still quite limited (effectively nonexistent.) There are still many issues and unsolved problems for which additional research is needed.</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Nonetheless, I do remain hopeful and quite confident that software agent technology will in fact be the wave of the future, at some point, just not yet or any time soon.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Finaxyz.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-3678169043400862950?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-52251469878730281462010-03-07T20:51:00.000-07:002010-03-07T20:52:45.671-07:00<P>I&nbsp;just finished&nbsp;reading an essay on <EM>Edge</EM> by noted computer scientist David Gelernter entitled "<A href="http://www.edge.org/documents/archive/edge313.html">Time to Start Taking the Internet Seriously</A>" which basically argues for his concept of <EM>lifestreams</EM> as a better model for publishing and accessing information than today's <EM>web</EM> model. Rather that organizing information in a <EM>spatial</EM> form, he recommends that we think about and organize information along the <EM>time</EM> dimension. As he puts it:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir=ltr> <P><EM>The Internet's future is not Web 2.0 or 200.0 but the post-Web, where time instead of space is the organizing principle&nbsp;-- instead of many stained-glass windows, instead of information laid out in space, like vegetables at a market&nbsp;-- the Net will be many streams of information flowing through time. The Cybersphere as a whole equals every stream in the Internet blended together: the whole world telling its own story.</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>He proceeds to describe the nature of the problem and how lifestreams will address it:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir=ltr> <P><EM>13. The traditional web site is static, but the Internet specializes in flowing, changing information. The "velocity of information" is important&nbsp;-- not just the facts but their rate and direction of flow. Today's typical website is like a stained glass window, many small panels leaded together. There is no good way to change stained glass, and no one expects it to change. So it's not surprising that the Internet is now being overtaken by a different kind of cyberstructure.</EM></P> <P><EM>14. The structure called a cyberstream or lifestream is better suited to the Internet than a conventional website because it shows information-in-motion, a rushing flow of fresh information instead of a stagnant pool.</EM></P> <P><EM>15. Every month, more and more information surges through the Cybersphere in lifestreams — some called blogs, "feeds," "activity streams," "event streams," Twitter streams. All these streams are specialized examples of the cyberstructure we called a lifestream in the mid-1990s: a stream made of all sorts of digital documents, arranged by time of creation or arrival, changing in realtime; a stream you can focus and thus turn into a different stream; a stream with a past, present and future. The future flows through the present into the past at the speed of time.</EM></P> <P><EM>16. Your own information&nbsp;-- all your communications, documents, photos, videos&nbsp;-- including "cross network" information&nbsp;-- phone calls, voice messages, text messages&nbsp;-- will be stored in a lifestream in the Cloud.</EM></P> <P><EM>17. There is no clear way to blend two standard websites together, but it's obvious how to blend two streams. You simply shuffle them together like two decks of cards, maintaining time-order&nbsp;-- putting the earlier document first. Blending is important because we must be able to add and subtract in the Cybersphere. We add streams together by blending them. Because it's easy to blend any group of streams, it's easy to integrate stream-structured sites so we can treat the group as a unit, not as many separate points of activity; and integration is important to solving the information overload problem. We subtract streams by searching or focusing. Searching a stream for "snow" means that I subtract every stream-element that doesn't deal with snow. Subtracting the "not snow" stream from the mainstream yields a "snow" stream. Blending streams and searching them are the addition and subtraction of the new Cybersphere.</EM></P> <P><EM>18. Nearly all flowing, changing information on the Internet will move through streams. You will be able to gather and blend together all the streams that interest you. Streams of world news or news about your friends, streams that describe prices or auctions or new findings in any field, or traffic, weather, markets&nbsp;-- they will all be gathered and blended into one stream. Then your own personal lifestream will be added. The result is your mainstream: different from all others; a fast-moving river of all the digital information you care about.</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>In short:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir=ltr> <P><EM>To accomplish this, we merely need to turn the whole Cybersphere on its side, so that time instead of space is the main axis.</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>There is much more to his model for information in the "<EM>Cybersphere</EM>", but time-based lifestreams are&nbsp;his core starting point.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-5225146987873028146?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-78775103914802578372010-03-07T17:56:00.000-07:002010-03-07T17:57:13.764-07:00<P>I was reading an essay on <EM>Edge</EM> by noted computer scientist David Gelernter entitled "<A href="http://www.edge.org/documents/archive/edge313.html">Time to Start Taking the Internet Seriously</A>" and ran across a reference to the concept of information <EM>welling up</EM> in the context of his conception of <EM>lifestreams</EM>. He wrote:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir=ltr> <P><EM>Ten years ago I described the computer of the future as a "scooped-out hole in the beach where <STRONG>information from the Cybersphere wells up like seawater</STRONG>."&nbsp; Today the spread of wireless coverage and the growing power of mobile devices means that <STRONG>information does indeed well up </STRONG>almost anywhere you switch on your laptop or cellphone; and "anywhere" will be true before long.</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>That's an interesting concept. Rather than explicitly accessing data by going to its source or explicitly searching for it, all one need do is create the proper situation (the well)&nbsp;and the data simply <EM>appears</EM> or <EM>wells up</EM>, welcomed but not directly or explicitly bidden per se.</P> <P>So, we have a collection of concepts here, in my view:</P> <UL> <LI><EM>knowledge wells</EM> (or <EM>data wells</EM> or <EM>information wells</EM>) which are places&nbsp;where information can simply <EM>materialize</EM> (or the data equivalent)</LI> <LI><EM>knowledge welling</EM>, the incremental (or streaming or merely "seeping") <EM>appearance</EM> of data in a <EM>knowledge well</EM> (or <EM>data well</EM> or <EM>information well</EM>)</LI> <LI><EM>welled knowledge</EM> (or <EM>welled data</EM> or <EM>welled information</EM>), which is knowledge that appears in a knowledge well</LI> <LI><EM>wellable knowledge</EM> (or <EM>wellable data</EM> or <EM>wellable information</EM>), which is knowledge that is somehow prepared or packaged or published in a form that makes it readily distributable to knowledge wells.</LI></UL> <P>At a simplistic level, a knowledge well could simply be a search query directed at some data source, but to truly fulfill Gelernter's vision, something far more sophisticated is needed. What that something might be I cannot say at this time.</P> <P>Curiously, maybe there is a community collaboration angle there as well, since the term reminds me of the famous <EM><A href="http://www.well.com/">The Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link</A></EM> known as <EM>The WELL</EM>. Whether or not a connection between the two concepts would make sense would depend on how specific and narrow one wants to define the terms. One could define a simple RSS feed as an <EM>information well</EM>, I suppose. One could define the Twitter public timeline as an information well. Sure, one can tap into any "conference" on The&nbsp;WELL, but then that is a fairly narrow information stream. Somehow, a Gelernteresque knowledge well would have a more global, blended un-focus, I would think.</P> <P>Thinking about how information might <EM>well up</EM> reminds me of a concept I considered years ago, something I call <EM><STRONG>GMWIMW</STRONG></EM>,&nbsp;for <EM><STRONG>Give Me What I Might Want</STRONG></EM>, a mythical filter for information on topics that I do not even know about yet. That would be at least one <EM>type</EM> of knowledge well that I would be interested in.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-7877510391480257837?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-47551692407747407602010-02-26T10:21:00.000-07:002010-02-26T10:22:08.630-07:00<P>A <EM>software agent</EM> is a piece of computer software that exhibits the quality of <EM>agency</EM>, but that begs two more fundamental questions:</P> <OL> <LI>What is <EM>agency</EM>? <LI>What is the unit of <EM>agency</EM>?</LI></OL> <P>An alternative formulation would be:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir=ltr> <P><EM>How can we distinguish qualities of software that constitute agency from qualities that would not constitute agency?</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Ideally, we would like to identify sub-qualities of agency so that we ultimately can judge the <EM>quality</EM> of the agency qualities of a software agent.</P> <P>I actually do currently have a <A href="http://agtivity.com/def/agency.htm">definition&nbsp;of agency</A> on my web site:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir=ltr> <P><EM><B>Agency</B> is the capacity of an entity to continually sense its environment, make decisions based on that sensory input, and to act out those decisions in its environment without (in general) requiring control by or permission from entities with which the entity is associated.</EM></P> <P><EM>The hallmarks of agency are <B>reactivity</B> (timely response to changes in the environment), <B>goal-oriented</B> (not simply responding to the environment according to a pre-determined script), <B>autonomy</B> (having its own agenda), interactive (with its environment and other entities), <B>flexibility</B>, and <B>adaptability</B>.</EM></P> <P><EM>An entity which has the qualities associated with agency is referred to as an </EM><A href="file://C:\Documents and Settings\Jack Krupansky\My Documents\My Webs\agtivity\def\agent.htm"><EM>agent</EM></A><EM>.</EM></P> <P><EM>An agent which operates within the realm of software systems is referred to as a </EM><A href="file://C:\Documents and Settings\Jack Krupansky\My Documents\My Webs\agtivity\def\software_agent.htm"><EM>software agent</EM></A><EM>.&nbsp; Agency, being an agent, or having the qualities of agency do not imply anything to do with software.</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>But, I am not entirely happy with that definition and I am thinking about how to refine it.</P> <P>Another way of phrasing the headline question is to ask what the smallest and simplest agent would look like.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-4755169240774740760?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-52549487183429506802010-02-21T07:16:00.001-07:002010-02-21T07:16:50.366-07:00<P>A topic that I intend to do more thinking and writing about is the <EM>personal cloud</EM>, or more specifically, the <EM>personal data cloud</EM> or <EM>personal information cloud</EM>. As I was gathering my personal information to organize my FOAF profile page I began thinking about whether FOAF really was the best <EM>place</EM> to be the <EM>primary repository</EM> for this personal information of mine, or not.</P> <P>One of the things I quickly realized was that I had <EM>pulled together</EM> a variety of pieces of <EM>disparate information</EM>. In other words, my FOAF profile page was an <EM>aggregation of diverse data</EM>. I would not call my FOAF profile page itself a <EM>cloud</EM>, but I would call the un-aggregated data a cloud for sure.</P> <P>So, we have two distinct but related concepts: 1) a <EM>cloud of unaggregated data</EM>, and 2) a <EM>hub of aggregated data</EM>. We can consider aggregation or <EM>hub tools</EM> such as FOAF as <EM>cloud aggregation tools</EM>. I suppose we could speak of <EM>cloud hubs</EM> as well.</P> <P>Layered on top of that, we can consider an interconnected web of FOAF profiles (the basic original purpose of FOAF) as a <EM>FOAF cloud</EM>. A database built by crawling all or a portion of the FOAF cloud could be considered a <EM>FOAF hub</EM>. Any tool for displaying, manipulating, and navigating such a database could be considered a <EM>FOAF hub tool</EM>.</P> <P>So, this is another key concept: <EM>layering of clouds</EM>. A cloud can consist of a network or other clouds, and so on ad infinitum.</P> <P>Back to my own FOAF profile, sure, technically, my one small FOAF profile represents a small cloud itself. Technically. But what I really want to do is to represent and store each of those pieces of information as entities in their own right, separate from this <EM>specific aggregation tool</EM> of a FOAF profile. After all, there are other aggregation tools, such as vCard, LinkedIn, or just about any social networking site, or your address book or personal information manager application.</P> <P>So, this suggests that as important as aggregation tools are, we need to give a lot more consideration to how the underlying <EM>personal data cloud</EM> to conceptualized and represented. In theory, I should be able to pull my FOAF profile together 100% automatically with absolutely zero manual intervention required by simple granting a FOAF aggregation tool access to my personal data cloud. Obviously we are not there yet.</P> <P>There are two key questions here: 1) what does a personal cloud look like, and 2) where exactly does this cloud actually exist, besides in your head.</P> <P>Oh, sure, I know the conventional answer these days: It's just a <EM>Google app</EM>; Google owns all of your data - just get over it. But, to me, it seems that somehow there is something fundamentally wrong with that picture. There is a lot more to the problem, let alone the solutions, than just the one word, "Google".</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Opixia.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-5254948718342950680?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-42763571826479419452009-12-30T15:32:00.001-07:002009-12-30T15:32:52.924-07:00<P>I frequently receive conference announcements in my in-box and rarely do they inspire me much at all, but the announcement for a conference on "<STRONG><EM>Brain Informatics</EM></STRONG>" certainly caught my attention. The announcement for&nbsp;"<A href="http://www.wici-lab.org/amtbi10/amtbi.php?conf=bi&amp;here=cfp">2010 International Conference on Brain Informatics (BI 2010)</A>" or "Brain Informatics 2010" tells us that:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir=ltr> <P><EM>Brain Informatics (BI) has recently emerged as an interdisciplinary research field that focuses on studying the mechanisms underlying the human information processing system (HIPS). It investigates the essential functions of the brain, ranging from perception to thinking, and encompassing such areas as multi-perception, attention, memory, language, computation, heuristic search, reasoning, planning, decision-making, problem-solving, learning, discovery, and creativity. The goal of BI is to develop and demonstrate a systematic approach to achieving an integrated understanding of both macroscopic and microscopic level working principles of the brain, by means of experimental, computational, and cognitive neuroscience studies, as well as utilizing advanced Web Intelligence (WI) centric information technologies.</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>It goes on to say that:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir=ltr> <P><EM>BI represents a potentially revolutionary shift in the way that research is undertaken. It attempts to capture new forms of collaborative and interdisciplinary work. In this vision, new kinds of BI methods and global research communities will emerge, through infrastructure on the wisdom Web and knowledge grids that enables high speed and distributed, large-scale analysis and computations, and radically new ways of sharing data/knowledge.</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>And:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir=ltr> <P><EM>Brain Informatics 2010 provides a leading international forum to bring together researchers and practitioners from diverse fields, such as computer science, information technology, artificial intelligence, Web intelligence, cognitive science, neuroscience, medical science, life science, economics, data mining, data and knowledge engineering, intelligent agent technology, human computer interation, complex systems, and system science, to explore the main research problems in BI lie in the interplay between the studies of human brain and the research of informatics. On the one hand, one models and characterizes the functions of the human brain based on the notions of information processing systems. WI centric information technologies are applied to support brain science studies. For instance, the wisdom Web and knowledge grids enable high-speed, large-scale analysis, simulation, and computation as well as new ways of sharing research data and scientific discoveries. On the other hand, informatics-enabled brain studies, e.g., based on fMRI, EEG, MEG significantly broaden the spectrum of theories and models of brain sciences and offer new insights into the development of human-level intelligence on the wisdom Web and knowledge grids.</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>The announcement provides another summary for "<EM>Brain Informatics (BI)</EM>":</P> <BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir=ltr> <P><EM>Brain Informatics (BI) is an emerging interdisciplinary and multi-disciplinary research field that focuses on studying the mechanisms underlying the human information&nbsp; processing system (HIPS). BI investigates the essential functions of the brain, ranging from perception to thinking, and encompassing such areas as multi-perception, attention, memory, language, computation, heuristic search, reasoning, planning, decision-making, problem-solving, learning, discovery, and creativity.&nbsp; One goal of BI research is to develop and demonstrate a systematic approach to an integrated understanding of macroscopic and microscopic level working principles of the brain, by means of experimental, computational, and cognitive neuroscience studies, as well as utilizing advanced Web Intelligence (WI) centric information technologies.&nbsp; Another goal is to promote new forms of collaborative and interdisciplinary work.&nbsp; New kinds of BI methods and global research communities will emerge, through infrastructure on the wisdom Web and knowledge grids that enables high speed and distributed, large-scale analysis and computations, and radically new ways of data/knowledge sharing.</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Conference topics include:</P> <UL style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir=ltr> <LI>Thinking and perception-centric investigations of HIPS:</LI> <UL> <LI>Human reasoning mechanisms (e.g., principles of human deductive/inductive reasoning, common-sense reasoning, decision making, and problem solving)</LI> <LI>Human learning mechanisms (e.g., stability, personalized user/student models)</LI> <LI>Emotion, heuristic search, information granularity, and autonomy related issues in human reasoning and problem solving</LI> <LI>Human higher cognitive functions and their relationships</LI> <LI>Human multi-perception mechanisms and visual, auditory, and tactile information processing</LI> <LI>Methodologies for systematic design of cognitive experiments</LI> <LI>Investigating spatiotemporal characteristics and flow in HIPS and the related neural structures and neurobiological process</LI> <LI>Cognitive architectures; their relations to fMRI/EEG/MEG</LI> <LI>HIPS meets complex systems</LI> <LI>Modeling brain information processing mechanisms (e.g., neuro-mechanism, mathematical, cognitive and computational models of HIPS).</LI></UL> <LI>Information technologies for the management and use of brain data:</LI> <UL> <LI>Human brain data collection, pre-processing, management, and analysis</LI> <LI>Databasing the brain and constructing data brain models</LI> <LI>Data brain modeling and formal conceptual models of human brain data</LI> <LI>Multi-media brain data mining and reasoning</LI> <LI>Multi-aspect analysis in fMRI/EEG/MEG activations</LI> <LI>Simulating spatiotemporal characteristics and flow in HIPS</LI> <LI>Developing brain data grids and brain research support portals</LI> <LI>Knowledge representation and discovery in neuroimaging</LI> <LI>Multimodal information fusion for brain image interpretation</LI> <LI>Statistical analysis and pattern recognition in neuroimaging</LI></UL> <LI>Applications</LI> <UL> <LI>Neuro-economics and neuro-marketing</LI> <LI>Brain-Computer-Interface (BCI) </LI> <LI>Brain/Cognition inspired artificial systems</LI> <LI>Wisdom Web systems based on new cognitive and computational models</LI> <LI>MCI and AD diagnosis</LI> <LI>e-Science and e-Medicine</LI></UL></UL> <P>-- Jack Krupansky</P> <P>&nbsp;</P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-4276357182647941945?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-56027609454510079532009-12-08T12:06:00.000-07:002009-12-08T12:07:08.186-07:00<P>For future reference, if you ever run into laptop overheating problems and don't have a good solution, the solution that has worked for me with my Toshiba&nbsp;notebook PC&nbsp;is the <STRONG><EM><A href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000NWIOM6?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=finaxyz-20&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=9325&amp;creativeASIN=B000NWIOM6">Belkin Laptop Cooling Stand</A></EM></STRONG>. I bought mine for $29 at BestBuy, but you can get it for $19 on Amazon:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir=ltr> <P align=center><A href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000NWIOM6?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=finaxyz-20&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=9325&amp;creativeASIN=B000NWIOM6"><IMG border=0 hspace=0 alt="" align=baseline src="http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41I-vRtvnCL._SL500_AA280_.jpg"></A></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>(Note: The Amazon product title refers to it as a "<A href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000NWIOM6?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=finaxyz-20&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=9325&amp;creativeASIN=B000NWIOM6">Belkin F5L001 Laptop Cooling Pad</A>", but the detailed description makes clear that it is a "Cooling Stand", meaning mainly that it <EM>does</EM> have a powerful, built-in, USB-powered&nbsp;fan.)</P> <P>It adds space under your laptop, has a big cooling fan (USB-powered), and gives your laptop a more ergonomic angle (two choices). It is noisier than an overheating laptop, but it works a lot better than an overheated laptop.</P> <P>It keeps most of the bottom of the laptop cool to the touch, which is as much as you could hope for. It virtually eliminates the need for the fan inside your notebook computer to run at all.</P> <P>I almost tried a "cooling pad", but I went for broke to solve my problem. A cooling pad may be fine for some problems and may be better for people who travel a lot and do not want the bulky "stand".</P> <P>Incidentally, when I traveled last time I had no overheating problem with my notebook PC on the hotel desk. Maybe the hard Formica and construction of the desk and better air flow in the hotel room avoided the problem. So, you may not need the cooling stand when you go on the road even if you need it in your home "office."</P> <P>For reference, some coming symptoms of laptop overheating:</P> <UL> <LI>Keyboard "dies"</LI> <LI>Hard drive "dies"</LI> <LI>Some keyboard keys "die" or there are "phantom" repeating&nbsp;keystrokes.</LI> <LI>System slows down and maybe the screen dims</LI></UL> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Finaxyz.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-5602760945451007953?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-57043622491346558632009-11-01T18:36:00.001-07:002009-11-01T18:36:37.716-07:00<P>I just ran across an interesting conference announcement, <A href="http://www.hucc.hokudai.ac.jp/~k15696/home/sr10/">SOCREAL 2010: Second International Workshop on Philosophy and Ethics of Social Reality</A>. The conference summary is:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir=ltr> <P><EM>In the past two decades, a number of logics and game theoretical analyses have been proposed and combined to model various aspects of social interaction among agents including individual agents, organizations, and individuals representing organizations. The aim of SOCREAL Workshop is to bring together researchers working on diverse aspects of such interaction in logic, philosophy, ethics, computer science, cognitive science and related fields in order to share issues, ideas, techniques, and results.</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Topics will include:</P> <UL> <LI><EM>Language (or communication) as part of social reality</EM></LI> <LI><EM>Speech acts (or communicative acts) as what shape social reality</EM></LI> <LI><EM>Moral commitments (and conflicts) in social interaction</EM></LI> <LI><EM>Logic and game theory as tools for studying social reality</EM></LI> <LI><EM>(Organized) collective agency</EM></LI> <LI><EM>Norms and normative systems</EM></LI> <LI><EM>Social institutional facts and their dynamics</EM></LI></UL> <P>From my own perspective, presently, <EM>software agents</EM> operate at a rather primitive level with little more than basic data transfer and simple control, but eventually software agents will evolve into <EM>intelligent agents</EM> whose activity is more in the line of <EM>social behavior</EM>, including <EM>ethics</EM> and the behavior of groups and even <EM>organizations</EM> and <EM>institutions</EM> of software agents. And, of course, software agents are acting as <EM>agents</EM> for other entities, whether computational, or human. There certainly is a lot of ground to be broken. It is at least heartening that people are beginning to scratch the surface of the potential for <EM>social reality</EM> of computational entities.</P> <P>Eventually, somebody will realize that these <EM>social agents</EM> are communicating in a <EM>language</EM> and that language has <EM>semantics</EM> and that there is a potential for a great <EM>semantic abyss</EM> between the various <EM>communities</EM> of social agents, as well as a vast semantic abyss between these computational agents and their real world "masters".</P> <P>Great challenges and great opportunities.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-5704362249134655863?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-60522605528372688342009-10-16T12:00:00.000-06:002009-10-16T12:01:12.261-06:00<P>Just a note to myself to eventually look into the concept of <EM>quantum artificial life</EM>. Not sure what it really is. Doesn't even have a Wikipedia page yet. And a Google search yields little.</P> <P>Assuming that it really does have some basis in <EM>quantum mechanics</EM>, two questions pop up:</P> <OL> <LI>How can you model and "work" with a system at such a small scale that its characteristics are <EM>indeterminate</EM>.</LI> <LI>In theory, scaling up a quantum-scale system to a macro-scale system means that we flip from that absolute indeterminism to a <EM>relative statistical determinism</EM>.</LI></OL> <P>Hmmm...</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-6052260552837268834?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-62615393726028279462009-09-09T20:42:00.000-06:002009-09-09T20:43:22.705-06:00<P>I was just reading the call for papers announcement for a workshop entitled "<A href="http://www.aixia09.unimore.it/index.php/workshops/64">Workshop on Complexity, Evolution&nbsp;and Emergent Intelligence</A>"&nbsp;at the <A href="http://www.aixia09.unimore.it/">AI*IA 09&nbsp;Eleventh Conference of the Italian Association of Artificial Intelligence</A>&nbsp;scheduled on December 12, 2009 in Reggio Emilia, Italy&nbsp;which covers a variety of topics related to <EM>complex systems</EM> and "<EM>aims at bringing together scientists who work from different perspectives, from basic science to applications, on the common theme of <STRONG>systems composed by many components that interact non-linearly</STRONG>.</EM>"</P> <P>The focus is on complex systems which "<EM>very often exhibit interesting features, as self-organisation, robustness, surprising collective processes and occasionally intelligence</EM>."</P> <P>A workshop goal is to achieve closer interactions between the communities of Complex Systems Science (CSS) and Artificial Intelligence (AI):</P> <BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir=ltr> <P><EM>Recent developments&nbsp;-- for example in the context of agent-based modelling, distributed and/or evolutionary computation&nbsp;-- represent new opportunities for further exploring and strengthening these scientific interactions and connections.</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>The workshop will pay close attention to the combination of intelligence and complex interactions:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir=ltr> <P><EM>As already suggested, the contemporary presence of intelligence and complex interactions may not be casual but, instead, able to disclose deeper links between the two characteristics. Are there universal patterns of organization in complex systems, from pre-biotic replicators to evolved beings, to artificial objects? Do these structures allow effective computational processes to develop?</EM></P> <P><EM>Key questions are how robust structures which develop in such systems are, how information is incorporated into these structures and how computation emerges. The study of complex systems is also interested in determining the contributions of selection, chance and self-organization to the functioning and evolution of complex structures.</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Topics of interest for the workshop include:</P> <UL> <LI>Agent based models</LI> <LI>Cellular automata</LI> <LI>Evolutionary computation </LI> <LI>Information processing</LI> <LI>Network properties</LI> <LI>Self-organisation, emergent behaviours</LI> <LI>Tangled hierarchies, description levels, reciprocal causality</LI> <LI>Adaptation/exaptation</LI> <LI>Evolution and co-evolution</LI> <LI>Robustness, criticality</LI> <LI>Pattern formation, pattern recognition, collective intelligence</LI> <LI>Non linear dynamics, edge of chaos</LI> <LI>The emergence of mind</LI> <LI>Bio-inspired methods</LI></UL> <P>I am most intrigued with tangled hierarchies and the emergence of mind, but it is all quite fascinating stuff.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-6261539372602827946?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-59758519399065303002009-09-01T21:20:00.000-06:002009-09-01T21:21:01.353-06:00<P>I noticed the intriguing Op-Ed article in <EM>The New York Times</EM> by Lawrence M. Krauss entitled "<A href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/01/opinion/01krauss.html?th&amp;emc=th">A One-Way Ticket to Mars</A>" and was immediately reminded of similar thoughts I had and blogged about back on&nbsp;May 27, 2007&nbsp;in a post about being&nbsp;<EM>a Mars colonist</EM>&nbsp;entitled "<A href="http://basetechnology.blogspot.com/2007/05/one-way-trip-to-mars.html">One-way trip to Mars</A>".</P> <P>I would definitely consider signing up for one-way travel to Mars to be <EM>a Mars colonist</EM>. I might want to wait a few more years before going, but nobody is going yet anyway.</P> <P>Note that going one-way would not necessarily mean you could <EM>never</EM> come back, but simply that the return trip, if any,&nbsp;is completely decoupled from the outbound voyage. Some colonists might seek to return, but a majority would likely seek to stay on Mars.</P> <P>Another note is that the somewhat weaker gravity would be a blessing to those of more advanced age (such as aging Baby Boomers.)</P> <P>A final note is the prospect of children being born and raised on Mars.</P> <P>And beyond a final note is the prospect of genetic engineering of humans to be able to survive in the weak atmosphere of Mars.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Opixia.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-5975851939906530300?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-60352870754641831762009-09-01T06:09:00.000-06:002009-09-01T06:10:13.236-06:00<P>There is an interesting article from <EM>Wired</EM> by&nbsp;Robert Capps entitled "<A href="http://www.wired.com/gadgets/miscellaneous/magazine/17-09/ff_goodenough">The Good Enough Revolution: When Cheap and Simple Is Just Fine</A>" which expresses a concept that I have believed in... forever. Actually, I haven't finished reading the article yet, but just the first page was "good enough" for me to judge that the author was talking about one of my core philosophies about technology, products, and services.</P> <P>My own&nbsp;philosophy of "good enough"&nbsp;explains why I remain a diehard PC owner and user. Is the Mac better? Maybe, in some ways. Is the Mac superior enough to justify its price tag? To me: No way. To put it simply: To me, the PC is <STRONG><EM>good enough</EM></STRONG>.</P> <P>To me, <STRONG><EM>good enough</EM></STRONG> is... <EM>good enough</EM>. Why pay extra for what you do not really need?</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Finaxyz.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-6035287075464183176?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-35144976102320903062009-08-31T15:51:00.001-06:002009-08-31T15:51:33.510-06:00<P>Previously, I gave a rather lackluster mini-review of&nbsp;the new book&nbsp;<A href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1422146642/finaxyz-20"><EM>Wired for Thought: How the Brain Is Shaping the Future of the Internet</EM></A>&nbsp;by Jeffrey M. Stibel&nbsp;which claims that&nbsp;"<EM>The Internet is more than just a series of interconnected computer networks: it's the first real replication of the human brain outside the human body</EM>", but I have had a few more thoughts, in particular related to the concept of a "<EM>collective consciousness</EM>."</P> <P>My main regret is that I failed to note that the World Wide Web as a whole does to a fair extent <EM>represent&nbsp;a&nbsp;dynamic snapshot of the&nbsp;collective consciousness</EM> of the millions of people who use the Web. Blog posts and Twitter streams do in fact give a reasonably accurate sense of the topics that are at the front of our collective minds and the tip of our collective tongues.</P> <P>The Web itself does not <EM>sense</EM> or have <EM>consciousness</EM>, but <EM>users</EM> using the Web as a <EM>wall to write on and read from</EM>&nbsp;can convey their thoughts and reactions&nbsp;<EM>through</EM> the Web.</P> <P>But, I think that is about as far as I feel comfortable going on this idea of the Web being analogous to the human brain.</P> <P>After all, this <EM>collective consciousness</EM> is not really a consciousness per se in the way the human brain has a consciousness. There is no <EM>single voice</EM> of <EM>the collective</EM>. There is no <EM>I</EM>. There is no sense of <EM>self</EM>.</P> <P>We cannot have a true <EM>dialogue</EM> with the collective.</P> <P>We cannot ask <EM>a</EM> question and get <EM>an</EM> answer.</P> <P>The collective does not have <EM>a</EM> personality.</P> <P>You cannot have a <EM>one-to-one</EM> or <EM>one-on-one</EM> interaction with the collective.</P> <P>The collective never makes <EM>a decision</EM>.</P> <P>The collective does not have <EM>a responsibility</EM>. Nor does it have any <EM>obligations</EM>.</P> <P>The collective does not exhibit <EM>common sense</EM>.</P> <P>Nonetheless, the book does contain some interesting insights and is well worth a browse even if you do not purchase it.</P> <P align=center><A href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0385528264/finaxyz-20"></A></P> <P style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir=ltr align=center><A href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1422146642/finaxyz-20"><IMG border=0 hspace=0 alt="" align=baseline src="http://harvardbusiness.org/products/12005-HBK-ENG/thumbnail/thumbnail.gif"></A></P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Finaxyz.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-3514497610232090306?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-67861060767553732009-08-24T10:38:00.001-06:002009-08-25T10:41:48.993-06:00<p>Yesterday I was browsing through the new book table at Barnes &amp; Noble near Lincoln Center and found an interesting book entitled <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1422146642/finaxyz-20"><em>Wired for Thought: How the Brain Is Shaping the Future of the Internet</em></a> by Jeffrey M. Stibel that informs us that "<em>The Internet is more than just a series of interconnected computer networks: it's the first real replication of the human brain outside the human body</em>" and that a "<em>collective consciousness</em>" is being created. Sounds fascinating. The <em>Amazon</em> blurb tells us that:</p> <blockquote style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir="ltr"> <p><em>In this age of hyper competition, the Internet constitutes a powerful tool for inventing radical new business models that will leave your rivals scrambling. But as brain scientist and entrepreneur Jeffrey Stibel explains in "Wired for Thought", you have to understand its true nature. The Internet is more than just a series of interconnected computer networks: it's the first real replication of the human brain outside the human body. To leverage its power, you first need to understand how the Internet has evolved to take on similarities to the brain. This engaging and provocative book provides the answer. Stibel shows how exceptional companies are using their understanding of the Internet's brain like powers to create competitive advantage - such as building more effective Web sites, predicting consumer behavior, leveraging social media, and creating a collective consciousness.</em></p></blockquote> <p>The promise sounded truly compelling, but after five minutes of leafing through the book I was not able to isolate more than a few stray details that had any bearing on fulfilling the promise. There was was too much "pop puff" which may thrill the average reader ignorant of the relevant technology, but I simply was unable to find any substantive justification for the central thesis of the book. It may in fact be there since I did not read the book cover to cover, but if it is so compelling and presumably pervasive, how could I have missed it?</p> <p>Nonetheless, this book may have a solid position simply as a statement of "the state of the art", telling us not how close we are to real success, but simply where we happen to be today. Yes, we are getting closer to the mountain, but that does not automatically translate into closeness to the peak.</p> <p>There is a lot that we do not yet deeply compehend about the human brain, mind, consciousness, and intellect, so I am not sure how much mileage we can get out of comparing the Internet to the human brain. In fact, I have a hunch it might be an exercise in futility at this stage. Sure, we can paint a broad-brush picture and draw lots of fuzzy analogies, but none of that will necessarily result in true enlightenment.</p> <p>By all means, browse the book yourself and make up your own mind whether it meshes with your own expertise and interest levels. The book does have a <a href="http://www.wiredforthought.com/chapter_excerpts.html">web site with chapter excerpts</a>.</p> <p>For me, I put down the book pondering the question 'Where's the beef?".</p> <p>Oddly, Amazon does not have a picture of the book cover, but I was able to find it on the Harvard Business School Press web site since they are the publisher. Note: I get a small commission if you buy the book by clicking on any of my links to the book on Amazon.</p> <p align="center"><a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0385528264/finaxyz-20"></a></p> <p style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir="ltr" align="center"><a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1422146642/finaxyz-20"><img border="0" hspace="0" alt="" align="baseline" src="http://harvardbusiness.org/products/12005-HBK-ENG/thumbnail/thumbnail.gif" /></a></p> <p>-- <a href="mailto:Jack@Finaxyz.com">Jack Krupansky</a></p><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-6786106076755373?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-26536322472775825762009-08-20T18:21:00.001-06:002009-08-20T18:21:11.502-06:00<P>The current crop of hybrid electric&nbsp;vehicles depends on the gasoline engine (and braking)&nbsp;to recharge the batteries. The coming generation of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles can also recharge the batteries by plugging into a normal electric receptacle. My question is what the cost differential is between paying for gas to do the charging on the go versus the hit to your electric bill to recharge at home overnight.</P> <P>In the first case, you have the cost of gasoline and how much charging is accomplished per gallon of gasoline.</P> <P>In the second case you have the cost per kilowatt-hour of your residential electricity as well as the charging efficiency. How much of each kilowatt-hour actually end up in the batteries of your vehicle?</P> <P>I am not enough of an engineer to know the answer.</P> <P>My hunch is that at least overnight, charging from "the grid" will be cheaper, as well as having no local carbon-based emmissions.</P> <P>Any engineers out there?</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Finaxyz.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-2653632247277582576?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-24274845830708496552009-08-07T16:37:00.000-06:002009-08-07T16:38:13.703-06:00<P>I really enjoy getting John Brockman's monthly EDGE email newsletter. It is always filled with incredibly fascinating material and "big ideas." The latest issue, <A href="http://www.edge.org/documents/archive/edge296.html">EDGE 296</A> includes video for "<EM>A Short Course On Synthetic Genomics</EM>" by George Church and Craig Venter. The short course consisted of six sessions:</P> <OL> <LI>Dreams &amp; Nightmares</LI> <LI>Constructing Life from Chemicals</LI> <LI>Multi-enzyme, multi-drug, and multi-virus resistant life</LI> <LI>Humans 2.0</LI> <LI>From Darwin to New Fuels (In A Very Short Time)</LI> <LI>Engineering humans, pathogens and extinct species</LI></OL> <P>In his introduction entitled "<EM>Ape and Essence</EM>", George Dyson tells us:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir=ltr> <P><EM>Sixty-one years ago Aldous Huxley published his lesser-known masterpiece, Ape and Essence, set in the Los Angeles of 2108. After a nuclear war (in the year 2008) devastates humanity's ability to reproduce high-fidelity copies of itself, a reversion to sub-human existence had been the result. A small group of scientists from New Zealand, spared from the catastrophe, arrives, a century later, to take notes. The story is presented, in keeping with the Hollywood location, in the form of a film script.</EM></P> <P><EM>On July 24, 2009, a small group of scientists, entrepreneurs, cultural impresarios and journalists that included architects of the some of the leading transformative companies of our time (Microsoft, Google, Facebook, PayPal), arrived at the Andaz Hotel on Sunset Boulevard in West Hollywood, to be offered a glimpse, guided by George Church and Craig Venter, of a future far stranger than Mr. Huxley had been able to imagine in 1948.</EM></P> <P><EM>In this future&nbsp;-- whose underpinnings, as Drs. Church and Venter demonstrated, are here already -- life as we know it is transformed not by the error catastrophe of radiation damage to our genetic processes, but by the far greater upheaval caused by discovering how to read genetic sequences directly into computers, where the code can be replicated exactly, manipulated freely, and translated back into living organisms by writing the other way. "We can program these cells as if they were an extension of the computer," George Church announced, and proceeded to explain just how much progress has already been made.</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Interesting concept, <EM>programming</EM> DNA the way we program computers. New meaning for the term "<EM>base technology</EM>."</P> <P>The full text of the sessions is available online, including a PDF entitled <EM><A href="http://www.edge.org/documents/life/Life.pdf">Life: What A Concept!</A></EM></P> <P>A lot of amazing stuff there.</P> <P>No, I personally have not had a chance to dig through it myself.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-2427484583070849655?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-74713871744578280672009-08-06T10:39:00.000-06:002009-08-06T10:40:06.049-06:00<P>Twitter finally seems to be back, at least at this moment.</P> <P>I hit refresh and <EM><STRONG>Twitter came up just fine!</STRONG></EM></P> <P>I tried to tweet and&nbsp;<EM><STRONG>Twitter&nbsp;updated just fine!</STRONG></EM></P> <P>Let's see if this holds up. I would not place a bet on it, yet.</P> <P>Twitter's status blog&nbsp;(at <A href="http://status.twitter.com/">Status.Twitter.com</A>)&nbsp;still says:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir=ltr> <P><EM><STRONG>Update</STRONG>: the site is back up, but we are continuing to defend and recover from this attack.</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Anyway, as I said in my previous post... time for my usual midday walk up to Central Park.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Opixia.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-7471387174457828067?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-67675888948870863312009-07-09T08:59:00.001-06:002009-07-09T08:59:36.835-06:00<P>I had not been doing much with <EM><A href="http://www.facebook.com">Facebook</A></EM>, but since I was <A href="http://semanticabyss.blogspot.com/2009/07/whats-my-name-who-am-i.html">pondering issues with names</A>, I decided to go in and see what I had used for my name when I had claimed my Facebook profile (whenever that was, maybe a couple of years ago.)</P> <P>I had in fact claimed <EM>Jack Krupansky</EM> as my name in Facebook. No surprise there. That is how most people know me.</P> <P>But the more I thought about it, I decided that I needed some way to <EM>also</EM> be findable as <EM>John W. Krupansky</EM>.</P> <P>I browsed through all of the options and settings and found where <EM>Jack Krupansky</EM> was set as my "<STRONG>real name</STRONG>." Hmmm... <EM>real</EM> name. I hadn't paid attention before.</P> <P>While I was thinking about whether to change my "real" name in Facebook to <EM>John William Krupansky</EM>, I browsed some more and notice that Facebook also had an optional&nbsp;"<STRONG>Full Alternate Name</STRONG>." I went ahead and entered <EM>John William Krupansky</EM> as my <EM>full alternate name</EM>. Done.</P> <P>Oops... I thought about it for a few more seconds and realized that I had my names backwards. I should have used <EM>John William Krupansky</EM> as my <EM>real</EM> name and <EM>Jack Krupansky</EM> as my full <EM>alternate</EM> name. That actually makes more sense. Done.</P> <P>I would be more comfortable with just my middle initial when my name is used in general and then show the full spelling if someone looks at my profile, but Facebook does not give my any such option.</P> <P>Unfortunately, the entire Facebook UI refers to me as <EM>John</EM> rather than <EM>Jack</EM>. Too bad they don't recognize formal and nick names and let you pick whether to default to formal or nick names. Actually, I'd rather have Facebook refer to me as <EM>Mr. Krupansky</EM>, just to make it clear what a subservient role the software real has. Facebook <EM>serves</EM> me. Facebook is not my <EM>friend</EM>.</P> <P>Now that I have done all of this I realize another issue... <EM><STRONG>findability in Google</STRONG></EM>. My primary interest is professional in nature, so I would prefer that other professionals be able to find me as they know me, which is <EM>Jack Krupansky</EM>. But, by using <EM>John William Krupansky</EM> as my Facebook "real" name, my professional name on Facebook&nbsp;is not directly findable. Now I am thinking that I should set my "real" name to <EM>Jack Krupansky</EM> and my "alternate" name to <EM>John William Krupansky</EM>. But I'll think about this for more than a few seconds before changing it. Thinking... Done thinking. Changed. So, now my Facebook "real" name is back to <EM>Jack Krupansky</EM> and my "alternate" name is <EM>John William Krupansky</EM>. Logically that is backwards, but practically it should work better.</P> <P>My Facebook profile is <A href="http://www.facebook.com/jack.krupansky">here</A>: <A href="http://www.facebook.com/jack.krupansky">http://www.facebook.com/jack.krupansky</A>.</P> <P>Now, I need to&nbsp;go in and make sure I have <EM>LinkedIn</EM> set in a similar manner, if possible.</P> <P>Twitter? Now there's a lost cause. Maybe they'll let me set my name properly when they figure out what they want to do in life.</P> <P>Oh, and while I was at it, I found an <EM>Ivan Krupansky</EM> over in Slovakia to add as a friend. And he has a friend <EM>Jakub Krupansky</EM> (with an acute accent over the "y", which I do not know how to enter in an emailed blog post) who I also added as a friend. Whether either of them is even a distant relative is unknown. Do we really have the <EM>same</EM> last name if one uses a diacritical mark?</P> <P>Now, I need to think some more about a sensible model for formal and informal names in the <EM>Semantic Web</EM>. It will be awhile before I get to the stage of addressing cultural difference in how names are used. That is all the more reason to <EM>strip</EM> the textual representations of names out of Semantic Web data and use a URI to reference the person rather than a culturally-dependent textual representation.</P> <P>I need to take a look at the <A href="http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/">FOAF (Friend Of A Friend) vocabulary specification</A> to at least use that as a starting reference point for name handling in the Semantic Web. Ditto for the <A href="http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/">Dublin Core Metadata Element Set</A>. I do not think either will get me very far, but I at least need to cover those bases.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Finaxyz.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-6767588894887086331?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-10015912035937178292009-07-08T10:17:00.001-06:002009-07-08T10:17:42.106-06:00<P>They seem like such simple, obvious questions: What's your name? Who are you? In the "real" world the answers are easy, and online&nbsp;<EM>casually</EM> they are also easy, but in a hard-core semantic sense, boy are they tough problems. Sure, there is no problem if all you are using a name for is a text label or where the context provides qualifying information, but in a general, abstract sense names and identities are very hard problems.</P> <P>So, what is my name?</P> <P>Casually, as you see at the bottom of my blog posts, I am <EM>Jack Krupansky</EM>. Simple enough.</P> <P>But... <EM>Jack</EM> is just my nick name and not suitable for any <EM>legal</EM> documents. My driver's license and bills and credit cards and financial accounts&nbsp;all have my legal first name, <EM>John</EM>. So, I am "really" <EM>John Krupansky</EM>.</P> <P>Actually, I almost never use <EM>John Krupansky</EM>. In formal, legal contexts, including my driver's license, bills, voter registration, etc., I always use my middle initial: <EM>W</EM>. So, legally I refer to myself as <EM>John W. Krupansky</EM>, with the period.</P> <P>Actually, my driver's license says: <EM>KRUPANSKY, JOHN W</EM>, without the period.</P> <P>And&nbsp;my credit cards say <EM>JOHN W KRUPANSKY</EM>, also without the period.</P> <P>Personally, I never abbreviate my first name, but in some contexts my name could also be any of:</P> <UL> <LI>J. Krupansky</LI> <LI>J. KRUPANSKY</LI> <LI>J Krupansky</LI> <LI>J KRUPANSKY</LI> <LI>J. W. Krupansky</LI> <LI>J. W. KRUPANSKY</LI> <LI>J W Krupansky</LI> <LI>J W KRUPANSKY</LI> <LI>Krupansky, J.</LI> <LI>KRUPANSKY, J.</LI> <LI>Krupansky, J</LI> <LI>KRUPANSKY, J</LI> <LI>Krupansky, J. W.</LI> <LI>KRUPANSKY, J. W.</LI> <LI>Krupansky, J W</LI> <LI>KRUPANSKY, J W</LI></UL> <P>In some contexts, such as publication of a letter or comment, a publisher might abbreviate my last name as:</P> <UL> <LI>Jack K.</LI> <LI>John K.</LI> <LI>John W. K.</LI></UL> <P>Oh, I forgot to mention that my middle <EM>W.</EM> stands for <EM>William</EM>. So my birth certificate says <EM>John William Krupansky</EM>. My passport says:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir=ltr> <P>KRUPANSKY<BR>JOHN WILLIAM</P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Please note that "J. Krupansky", "J Krupansky" and "J KRUPANSKY"&nbsp;are <EM>not necessarily</EM> my name. In <EM>some</EM> contexts the "J"&nbsp;is really an abbreviation for <EM>Judge</EM>. There&nbsp;are&nbsp;only two examples I know of, but they are (were) real: <EM>Judge Robert Brazil Krupansky</EM> and <EM>Judge Blanche Krupansky</EM>. They are not relatives as far as I know. They might be <EM>distant</EM> relatives, but that is not known.</P> <P>Did I say that <EM>John Krupansky</EM> is my name? Well, yes, but it is not only <EM>my</EM> name. A Web search shows that there are at least two <EM>other</EM> people who "have" that name, so I cannot technically claim exclusive ownership. There is a <EM>John Krupansky</EM> from upstate NY or Kentucky and there is a <EM>John Joseph Krupansky</EM> out there somewhere.</P> <P>Almost forgot, there was another <EM>John Krupansky</EM>, even before I was born, a <EM>John F. Krupansky</EM> or <EM>John Frank Krupansky</EM>, my grandfather. That may be part of the reason I became <EM>known as</EM> "Jack". The rest of the reason was that in first grade of elementary school, there were <EM>four</EM> John's out of 20 kids.</P> <P>As far as I know, there are no other <EM>John W. Krupansky</EM>'s out there. But, that is not something that we can count on.</P> <P>You would think that with all of the "intelligence" and horsepower in modern computers that all of these variations could be sorted out with <EM>no effort </EM>required on our part, but that is not the case. Sure, various pieces of software do have varying degrees of <EM>smarts</EM> for dealing with names, but the emphasis is on <EM>varying</EM>.</P> <P>Each of the various <EM>John Krupansky</EM>'s does indeed have a distinct <EM>identity</EM> (probably at least social security number, driver's license state and number, and residential address), but automatically <EM>mapping</EM> from <EM>John Krupansky</EM> or <EM>J Krupansky</EM> or <EM>Krupansky, J.</EM> to each of us is as yet an unsolved problem (in general.)</P> <P>As far as I know, the Semantic Web and&nbsp;the various Semantic Web technologies as well&nbsp;as the various prototype semantic search engines&nbsp;do not even offer a <EM>proposed</EM> solution to this problem of mapping an informal&nbsp;textual name reference to a specific identity. In theory, on the Semantic Web there should be a specific <EM>concept</EM> or URI for each of us <EM>Johns</EM> or <EM>Krupansky, J.</EM>, for each of our identities.&nbsp;In fact, the situation is so complex that even Google does not offer a name search capability that is able to deal with the simple variations I have detailed here.</P> <P>Oops, I forgot another variation, back in Europe, there was an accent on the <EM>y</EM> of <EM>Krupansky</EM> and you can even use Google to find some of those European Krupansky's. Semantic search needs to be able to handle both the accented and unaccented forms as well as an option for whether to require the accents to match.</P> <P>The good news, for me personally, is that it does not appear that there is any other <EM>Jack Krupansky</EM> out there, at least right now.</P> <P>Oh, and who is <EM>Jack Krupanski</EM>? Well, it's actually me, but spelled wrong. What computer software knows <EM>that</EM>?</P> <P>To some people I am <EM>Mr. John Krupansky</EM>. Is the <EM>Mr.</EM> part of my name? Good question.</P> <P>Almost forgot... there are also people out there who insist that my name is <EM>jack krupansky</EM> without any capitals. In general, capitalization does not matter, but it can matter when text is being parsed to be indexed and software is attempting to recognize names.</P> <P>At this stage, I think we need to consider the following for any <EM>semantic</EM> web:</P> <OL dir=ltr> <LI> <DIV style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">Ultimately, each person needs to have a unique URI that represents <EM>their identity</EM>.</DIV></LI> <LI> <DIV style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">That identity needs to include all of the name components, such as first name, middle name, last name, suffix, title, nick name, etc. as attributes.</DIV></LI> <LI> <DIV style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">Each of the various forms of your name needs to have its own URI. That should include misspellings, for example, <EM>Jack Krupanski</EM>. That also includes variations in titles and suffixes.</DIV></LI> <LI> <DIV style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">There should be RDF for many-to-many mappings between the various identities for&nbsp;each name form and the potential identities that share that name form, so that given a name form the possible identities can be&nbsp;examined and given an identity the possible name forms can be examined.</DIV></LI> <LI> <DIV style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">Whether in a UI or an API, given a name form, it should be possible to examine the various name forms that <EM>might</EM> be <EM>equivalent</EM>.</DIV></LI> <LI> <DIV style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">Have the concept of <EM>preferred name&nbsp;form</EM>. But there could be multiple preferred forms, such as nick name vs. legal name.</DIV></LI></OL> <P>Back to the headline question, for any legal context I always use <EM>John W. Krupansky</EM>. But, sometimes, I actually run into a form that does not request a middle initial, so then I am <EM>John Krupansky</EM>. Even then, legal contexts tend to include one or more of social security number, drivers license state and number, and residential address. Still, it feels odd using a form of name that I know is not unique.</P> <P>In non-legal contexts, such as random social networking web sites, I almost always use <EM>Jack Krupansky</EM>. I do the same for business cards as well, although I have thought of switching to using my legal first name on business cards.</P> <P>My resume has <EM>John William Krupansky</EM> plus <EM>Jack Krupansky</EM> and happens to use <EM>John W. Krupansky</EM> in the copyright notice.</P> <P>The other answer to the question is that I respond by asking what field format you need my name in (and whether it is for a "legal" context.) Actually, I usually respond with <EM>Jack Krupansky</EM> and then optionally revise to <EM>John</EM> if it becomes clear that it is a legal context.</P> <P>In any case, I am dubious when I run into a single field such as <EM>name</EM>, <EM>author</EM>, or <EM>creator</EM> that doesn't seem to <EM>care</EM> what form a name is in. That is fine for famous names, but for everybody else it is a recipe for confusion. The solution is to require the <EM>identity URI</EM> for the person and to have a convenient UI for looking up names.</P> <P>If it was up to me, I would <EM>bad</EM> simple text <EM>name</EM> fields. Or maybe not ban them but require a validation rule that checks for uniqueness and then automatically maps to the true identity.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Finaxyz.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-1001591203593717829?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-21551524559013374392009-06-25T09:17:00.001-06:002009-06-25T09:17:58.348-06:00<P>Although it is tempting to posit that human-level intelligence might be the be-all and end-all for&nbsp;<EM>intelligent software agents</EM>, there is the possibility that more primitive levels of "intelligence" may have significant utility and other benefits, in much the manner that varying levels of intelligence are useful in human social organizations. Besides human-level intelligence, we could also consider non-human <EM>animal-level intellugence</EM>, especially for more primitive operations. After all, is "searching" that much different from "hunting", and are humans really that much better at hunting than many animal species? Taking this progression to the next (lower) level, does the plant kingdom have anything to offer in terms of capabilities that might be useful in software agents? My hunch is that the answer is yes, or at least maybe.</P> <P>I am not suggesting that plants could provide a model for matching or exceeding human-level intelligence, but there are plenty or lower-level operations and infrastructure needs that might in fact benefit from what we might learn from study of the plant kingdom. After all, plants root, grow, reproduce, disperse seeds, and co-operate with other plants in a fashion, suggesting forms of networking and distributed processing, at least at a primitive level. Besides, plant have mastered the process of harnessing the energy of the sun, a feat that we continue to struggle with.</P> <P>Whether plants have a human-like or animal-like&nbsp;"mind" or "brain" is debatable, but maybe irrelevant. What is relevant is the forms of <EM>processing</EM> that plants can perform and how that processing is <EM>controlled</EM>.</P> <P>The real potential may be not for the more "intelligent" of agent needs, but in the need for more robust, durable, and resilient "grunt" agent needs and needs within the infrastructure to support the intelligent agents.</P> <P>The plant kingdom may be able to provide some interesting <EM>metaphors</EM> for information processing.</P> <P>The more interesting angle might be that we could construct <EM>hybrid metaphors</EM> that combine aspects of human, animal, and plant "intelligence" that might not be possible or practical in the "real" world.</P> <P>Whether or not we are able to use plant-like capabilities in agents themselves, my hunch is that the infrastructure and environment in which agents operate could very well benefit from being more <EM>plant-like</EM>. Visualize that as agents as animals in a jungle.</P> <P>I have not dug too deeply into this area, yet.</P> <P>Here are a couple of references I have stumbled across:</P> <UL> <LI><EM>WIRED</EM>: <A href="http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2007/10/veggie_intelligence">Smarty Plants: Inside the World's Only Plant-Intelligence Lab</A></LI> <LI><EM>ScienceNews</EM>: <A href="http://www.sciencenews.org/view/feature/id/44327/title/No_brainer_behavior">No Brainer Behavior - Messages, memory, maybe even intelligence - botanists wrangle over how far plants can go</A></LI> <LI><EM>The Christian Science Monitor</EM>: <A href="http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0303/p01s03-usgn.html">New research opens a window on the minds of plants</A></LI> <LI><EM>The New York Times</EM>: <A href="http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9A0CE1D91439E733A2575BC2A9649C946897D6CF">Limits to Plant Intelligence</A> (vintage 1909!)</LI></UL> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Finaxyz.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-2155152455901337439?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-27078343313375531742009-04-20T16:26:00.000-06:002009-04-20T16:27:10.631-06:00<P>With so many places to go and so many things to see and do on the Web, it is getting almost impossible to keep up with the proliferation of interesting information out there. We need some help.&nbsp;A hefty productivity boost is simply not good enough. We need a lot of help. Browser add-ons, better search engines,&nbsp;and filtering tools are simply not enough. Unfortunately, the next few years holds more of the same.</P> <P>But, longer term we should finally start to see credible advances in <EM>software agent technology</EM> which help to extend our own minds so that we can engage in <EM>virtual browsing</EM> and have a <EM>virtual presence</EM> on the Web so that we can effectively reach and touch a far broader, deeper, and richer lode of information than we can with personal browsing and our personal presence.</P> <P>Twitter asks us what we are doing right now, but our online activity and presence with the aid of software agents&nbsp;will be a thousand or ten thousand or even a million or ten million times greater than we can personally achieve today. What&nbsp;are each of us interested in? How about <EM>everything</EM>?! Why not?</P> <P>The gradual evolution of the W3C conception of the <EM>Semantic Web</EM> will eventually reach a critical mass where even relatively dumb software agents can finally appear to behave in a relatively intelligent manner that begins to approximate our own personal activity and personal presence on the Web.</P> <P>It may take another five to ten years, but the long march in that direction is well underway.</P> <P>The biggest obstacle right now is not the intelligence of an individual software agent per se, but the need to encode a rich enough density of information in the Semantic Web so that we can realistically develop intelligent software agents that can work with that data. We will also need an infrastructure that mediates between the actual data and the agents.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Opixia.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-2707834331337553174?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-28997728926022300942009-04-13T09:30:00.000-06:002009-04-13T09:31:16.080-06:00<P>In order to facilitate the development of <EM>open garden social networks</EM> it is necessary to have a safe place for consumers to place their personal data, not just where it can be stored and accessed, but also to control access and to provide a reliable digital identity. Many years ago I thought up a scheme I called a <EM><A href="http://opixia.com/BaseTechnology/data_union.htm">data union</A></EM>, kind of a cross between a data bank and a credit union, which would provide exactly that form of reliable and safe storage for a consumer's personal data. I finally wrote up a <A href="http://opixia.com/BaseTechnology/data_union.htm">rough, summary description back in 2005</A>, but I have not yet pursued the concept any further.</P> <P>The intention is not so much to store a consumer's <EM>bulk</EM> data such as documents, photos, media, etc., but simply to store and control the <EM>attribute</EM> information that might be needed for online transactions and promotion of products and services, such as name, address, phone numbers, social security number, age and birth date, gender, interests, and whatever. The intention was to give the consumer great control over exactly what personal information is available to whomever.</P> <P>It would be a natural extension to have a <EM>data union safety deposit box</EM>, which would be a modest amount of digital storage, maybe in the megabytes or a "few" gigabytes, sufficient for documents, valuable images, etc., but not intended for full-blown personal storage.</P> <P>A&nbsp;data union would be an ideal repository for online digital identity credentials, or at least as a digital identity validation service. For example, the consumer could approve an entity with which they are willing to transact and then the consumer could provide a transaction code to that entity which the data union could verify.</P> <P>A data union would enable the consumer to be as open and visible and transparent&nbsp;or as closed and hidden and secretive as they wish.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Opixia.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-2899772892602230094?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-76475442578153270302009-04-12T18:31:00.000-06:002009-04-12T18:32:55.884-06:00<P>I am truly tired of social networking sites that are <EM>walled gardens</EM>, requiring some form of <EM>registration</EM> and holding my personal data <EM>hostage</EM> by maintaining it behind the walls of the "walled garden." What is the alternative? Is there an alternative? No, there is no alternative currently, but in the longer term we can hope that developers and entrepreneurs will recognize that <EM>open garden networks</EM> have distinct advantages over walled gardens.</P> <P>The esence of an <EM>open garden social network</EM> is that users maintain their data wherever they want as long as it can be crawled by whatever sites wish to aggregate that data. Since the data is maintained publicly, it can easily be shared by more than one <EM>social networking aggregator</EM>.</P> <P>The immediate technical obstacles are that: 1)&nbsp;the average consumer has no obvious public location to store their data and 2) we do not have a technology and public infrastructure in place for consumers to "sign" their personal data to associate it with their digital identity.</P> <P>Who knows, maybe <EM>open garden social networking</EM> will take off in another five or ten years.</P> <P>One of the key benefits of <EM>open garden personal data</EM> is that it will open up vast new opportunities for innovation in <EM>open garden social media</EM> since each innovator can piggyback on the existing (in the future)&nbsp;public <EM>open garden infrastructure</EM> rather than need to go through the time and expense of reinventing the wheel unnecessarily for each new social networking aggregator site.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Opixia.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-7647544257815327030?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-67283304473614081412009-03-14T07:48:00.001-06:002009-03-14T07:48:50.188-06:00<P>For some time I have wondered about the differences between plants and animals, two distinct "kingdoms." Maybe someday I'll have enough spare time to look into the matter (so to speak.) A variation of that question popped into my mind today: What are the <EM>biological requirements</EM> for intelligence? Man evolved intelligence in the animal kingdom. What specifically enabled that evolution of intelligence in man? Not the "pop", superficial explanations, but what exactly is it that permits man to exhibit intelligence? Put another way, why were plants unable to evolve in a parallel manner into "intelligent" individuals? Are there in fact <EM>biological requirements</EM> for intelligence that only the animal kingdom has to offer? Or, <EM>could</EM> intelligence, in theory, occur in plants through some path of evolution within the plant kingdom? In any case, in short, <STRONG>what exactly are the biological requirements for intelligence?</STRONG> And I do mean intelligence in the sense of human-level intelligence. That does beg the question of other forms of "intelligence" that may be wholly incomparable to human intelligence.</P> <P>Now, this also broaches on the question of machine intelligence, computational intelligence, or artificial intelligence. If in fact there are biological requirements for intelligence, can those requirements in fact be met by non-biological entities such as computers as we know them. Of course that does beg the question of whether we could simply develop a computer program which is a <EM>simulator</EM> for biological life. That then raises the question of whether plants could evolve a machine-like structure which in fact was such a simulator for animal life.</P> <P>In any case, we are left with the question of what the requirements would be for human-level intelligence in machines, and whether there may be biological functions that cannot easily (or maybe even possibly) be simulated in machines.</P> <P>By "machines", I mean computers as we know them today, a device which can execute what we call computer programs or computer software.</P> <P>That begs two questions. First, are there radically difference computer software architectures that might enable programming of human-level intelligence? Second, are there radically different device architectures which would permit software architectures that cannot easily (or maybe even possibly at all) be developed with computer devices as we know them.</P> <P>To phrase the initial question another way, could we in theory genetically engineer plants to develop forms of intelligence?</P> <P>More abstractly, could another "kingdom" develop which was neither plant nor animal, but capable of exhibiting human-level intelligence? Maybe in another solar system, another galaxy, or a parallel universe? Or, is there in fact some fundamentally <EM>basic</EM> requirement for intelligence which even in theory can only be satisfied within the animal kingdom?</P> <P>One final question... What biological requirements would need to be met for artificial devices, presumably capable of reproduction by themselves, to in fact be considered "biological" and a new "kingdom" paralleling the animal and plant kingdoms?</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Opixia.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-6728330447361408141?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-20107290738696092282009-03-08T16:34:00.001-06:002009-03-08T16:34:56.250-06:00<P><A href="http://blog.wolfram.com/2009/03/05/wolframalpha-is-coming/">Wolfram Research (Stephen Wolfram) is on the verge of unveiling a new project called "Alpha"</A> which is billed as a "<EM>computational knowledge engine</EM>." It combines the computational power of Mathematica with tools to "<EM>explicitly curate all data so that it is immediately computable</EM>" to be able to "<EM>take questions people ask in natural language, and represent them in a precise form that fits into the computations one can do</EM>" and "<EM>handle all the shorthand notations that people in every possible field use</EM>." Wolfram says:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <P><EM>... I'm happy to say that with a mixture of many clever algorithms and heuristics, lots of linguistic discovery and linguistic curation, and what probably amount to some serious theoretical breakthroughs, we're actually managing to make it work.</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P dir=ltr>He does add the caveat that:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <P dir=ltr><EM>And -- like Mathematica, or NKS -- the project will never be finished.</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P dir=ltr>But he triumphantly announces that:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <P dir=ltr><EM>... I'm happy to say that we've almost reached the point where we feel we can expose the first part of it.</EM></P> <P dir=ltr><EM>It's going to be a website: </EM><A href="http://www.wolframalpha.com"><EM>www.wolframalpha.com</EM></A><EM>. With one simple input field that gives access to a huge system, with trillions of pieces of curated data and millions of lines of algorithms.</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P dir=ltr>Having a simple Google-like search engine box is all well and good, but the real question is the extent to which the engine is "open", both in terms of programmatic API and Web Services access and integrating with external data.</P> <P dir=ltr>How it compares with and meshes with the Semantic Web remains to be seen.</P> <P dir=ltr>In any case, this does sound like a significant leap forward</P> <P dir=ltr>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Opixia.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-2010729073869609228?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-87875105733779740742009-03-01T17:41:00.000-07:002009-03-01T17:43:28.644-07:00<P>I was just thinking a little about my concept of <A href="http://opixia.com/BaseTechnology/dvpds.htm">Distributed Virtual Personal Data Storage (DVPDS)</A> and the issue of personal identity. Currently, online "digital" identity is typically accomplished with a valid email address, an "id", a password, and a display name. Sure, that works for many applications, but it has limitations. In particular, there is no way to determine whether the display name is "correct" and there is no way to determine if the display name matches the real person it names. For DVPDS to be truly robust, identity must be robust. Granted, there may be valid reasons for hiding the true identity of an online user, but ultimately there is a need to prevent identity theft as well as valid law enforcement and court access.</P> <P>I see personal identity as having several components:</P> <OL> <LI>Natural identity. Who you really are. At a philosophical level "how God knows you", or how other people know you.</LI> <LI>Legal identity. How government knows you.</LI> <LI>Your full legal name. Your literal name, but even that may not be unique.</LI> <LI>Your common name. What you might typially use as your display name. May use a nickname, leave out middle name and suffixes, etc.</LI> <LI>Other real identification. Including social security number, drivers license, address.</LI> <LI>Online identification. Including user name or id, password, email address, etc.</LI></OL> <P>It is perfectly reasonable to have aliases or multiple online identities, but some applications may require access to a robust personal identity as well, or maybe a link to a robust personal identity even if the user chooses to deny the application access to the details.</P> <P>In addition to personal identity, organizations, including businesses, can have their own identity, an <EM>organization identity</EM>.</P> <P>And, individuals can have <EM>roles</EM> within organizations. Multiple people can have the same role within a single organization. An individual can have multiple roles within a single organization. An individual can have roles in multiple organizations.</P> <P>We need methods for <EM>role identity</EM> which link individuals, organizations, and their roles. Role identity must be robust. There need to be validation processes for role identity.</P> <P>The point of all of this is that a Distributed Virtual Personal Data Storage solution needs to identify who controls and has access to data and it needs to be very robust and resistent to identity theft.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Opixia.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-8787510573377974074?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-56890151616359126302009-03-01T05:38:00.000-07:002009-03-01T05:40:12.863-07:00<P>The recent uproar over the read-aloud feature of the new Amazon Kindle book reading device has raised some fascinating questions related to the definition and interpretation of the concepts of a <EM>performance</EM> and a <EM>derivative work</EM>, as well as the concept of <EM>licensed use</EM>. I would add that this dispute also raises the issue of the role and status of <EM>software agents</EM>.</P> <P>An article in <EM>Ars Technica</EM> by Julian Sanchez entitled "<A href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/02/kindles-and-creative-machines-blur-boundaries-of-copyright.ars/2">Kindles and "creative machines" blur boundaries of copyright</A>" does a decent jobs of covering both the pros and cons and legal nuances of the "rights" for electronically reading a book aloud.</P> <P>I have read a lot of the pro and con arguments, but I am not prepared to utter a definitive position at this time.</P> <P>I would note that there is a "special" context for the&nbsp;entire debate: the ongoing "culture war" between the traditional world view of people, places, and things and the so-called "digital" world view, whether it be online with the Web or interactive within a computer system. Clearly there are parallels between the real and "virtual" worlds, but also there are differences. Rational people will recognize and respect the parallels even as they recognize and respect the differences. Alas, there is a point of view that insists that the virtual worlds (online and interactive) should not be constrained in any way by the real-world world view.</P> <P>The simple truth is that the real and virtual worlds can in fact coexist separately, but the problem comes when we try to blend the two worlds and pass artifacts between them. Then, the separateness breaks down. The Kindle is a great example, with real-world books being "passed" into the digital world and then the act of electronically reading them aloud passing back from the digital world to the real world.</P> <P>It is also interesting to note that many books are now actually created in the virtual world (word processing, storage, transmission, digital printing) even if not intended specifically as so-called e-books, so that physical books themselves in fact typically originated in a virtual world. Clearly the conception of the book occurs in the mind of the author and the editors, but the actual "assembly" of all of the fragments from the minds of authors and editors into the image of the book occurs in the virtual world.</P> <P>In any case, my interest is in the role of <EM>software agents</EM>. A software agent is a computer program which possesses the quality of <EM>agency</EM> or acting for another entity. The Kindle read-aloud feature is clearly a software agent. Now, the issue is <EM>whose</EM> agent is it. The consumer? Amazon? The book author? The publisher?</P> <P>The superficially simple question is who "owns" the software agent.</P> <P>We speak of "buying" books, even e-books, but although the consumer does in fact "buy" the physical manifestation, they are in fact only licensing the "use" of the intellectual property embodied in that physical representation. You do in fact "own" the ones and zeros of the e-book or the paper and ink of the meatspace book, but you do not own all uses except as covered by the license that you agreed to at the time of&nbsp;acquisition&nbsp;of the bits. Clearly not everyone likes or agrees with that model, but a license is a contract and there are laws related to contracts. Clearly there are also disputes about what the contract actually covers or what provisions are enforceable. That is why we have courts.</P> <P>So, the consumer owns the bits of the read-aloud software agent, and the consumer may have some amount of control over the behavior of that software agent, but ownership and interaction are not the same thing.</P> <P>I would suggest that the read-aloud software agent still belongs to Amazon since it remains a <EM>component</EM> of the Kindle product. A Kindle reading a book aloud is not the same as a parent reading a book to a child or a teacher reading to a class (or the reading in the movie <EM>The Reader</EM>), in particular because it is Amazon's agent that is doing the reading.</P> <P>An interesting variation would be an open source or public domain version of Kindle as downloadable software for the PC, or software with features different from Kindle for that matter. Who "owns" any software agents embedded in that software? Whose agent is doing the performance? Whose agent is creating derivative works? To me, the immediate answer is who retains the intellectual property rights to the agent. In the Kindle case, Amazon is not attempting to transfer all rights. Even if they did, there is the same question as with file-sharing software, whether there is some lingering implied liability that goes along even when ownership is transferred.</P> <P>Another open issue would be software agents which completely generate content from scratch dynamically, not from some input such as an e-book data stream. Who owns that content? I would suggest that the superficial answer is that the owner of the agent owns "created" (non-derivative)&nbsp;content, except as they may have licensed transfer of ownership of such content.</P> <P>Another issue is whether a "stream" can be considered a representation. I would think so. One could also consider it a performance of an implied representation. Whether each increment of data in the stream is stored may not be particularly relevant. The stream has most of the "effect" of a full representation.</P> <P>Another issue is trying to discover the <EM>intent</EM> or <EM>spirit</EM>&nbsp;of the law as opposed to the exact <EM>letter</EM> of the law. Sure, there are plenty of loopholes and gotchas that do in fact matter when in a courtroom, but ultimately I would think that it is the intentions that matter the most to society. Unless, you are a proponent of a "free" digital world that is unencumbered by any constraints of the real world and seeks to exploit loopholes simply because "they are there."</P> <P>In any case, my point is not to settle the matter, but to raise the issues of performances and creation of derivative works in the realm of software agents, both for developers of software agent technology and those who seek to deploy it. And we have this issue of what lingering liability tail connects software agents and their creators.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Opixia.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-5689015161635912630?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-68237386745964338042009-02-16T09:35:00.000-07:002009-02-16T09:37:11.670-07:00<P>I was just doing a little reading and stumbled across a document that discussed <A href="http://www.tinaja.com/glib/paradigm.pdf">paradigm shifts of technology</A>. Not that the concept is new or mysterious, but I was curious what the technical definition really is. More importantly, I was interested in the application of the concept to technology, commerce, and society in the context of the Internet, Web, Web x.0/social-computing, and how people will earn a living in the future (or even next week) in the New Economy.</P> <P>The Merriam-Webster online dictionary does not define the term <EM>paradigm shift</EM>, but does offer a reasonable definition for <EM>paradigm</EM>:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <P><EM>a philosophical and theoretical framework of a scientific school or discipline within which theories, laws, and generalizations and the experiments performed in support of them are formulated ; </EM>broadly :<EM> a philosophical or theoretical framework of any kind</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>The Wikipedia was far less useful than it usually is. It does have a reasonable explanation for paradigm shifts in science or even social science, but was not so helpful regarding technology and money in the New Economy. The <A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradigm_shift">lead for Paradigm shift merely says</A>:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <P><EM>Paradigm shift (sometimes known as extraordinary science or revolutionary science) is the term first used by Thomas Kuhn in his influential book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962) to describe a change in basic assumptions within the ruling theory of science. It is in contrast to his idea of normal science.</EM></P> <P><EM>It has since become widely applied to many other realms of human experience as well even though Kuhn himself restricted the use of the term to the hard sciences. According to Kuhn, "A paradigm is what members of a scientific community, and they alone, share." (The Essential Tension, 1997). Unlike a normal scientist, Kuhn held, "a student in the humanities has constantly before him a number of competing and incommensurable solutions to these problems, solutions that he must ultimately examine for himself." (The Structure of Scientific Revolutions). Once a paradigm shift is complete, a scientist cannot, for example, posit the possibility that miasma causes disease or that ether carries light. In contrast, a critic in Humanities can choose to adopt a 19th century theory of poetics, for instance, or interpret economic behaviour from a Marxist perspective.</EM></P> <P><EM>Thus, paradigms, in the sense that Kuhn used them, do not exist in Humanities or social sciences. Nonetheless, the term has been adopted since the 1960s and applied in non-scientific contexts.</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>There is very little mention of technology paradigms. The closest is an odd section entitled "<EM><STRONG>As marketing speak</STRONG></EM>":</P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <P><EM>In the later part of the 1990s, 'paradigm shift' emerged as a buzzword, popularized as marketing speak and appearing more frequently in print and publication. In his book, Mind The Gaffe, author Larry Trask advises readers to refrain from using it, and to use caution when reading anything that contains the phrase. It is referred to in several articles and books as abused and overused to the point of becoming meaningless.</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Granted, I agree that the term is overused, but I find it is still applicable and in that original scientific sense.</P> <P>I find it amusingly noteworthy that the Wikipedia article does not even mention the paradigm shift from books, encyclopedias, and libaries to the Wikipedia itself. Missed that one.</P> <P>I will offer my own brief definition:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <P><EM>A <STRONG>paradigm</STRONG> is a combination of a worldview and a collection of rules for operating in the context of that worldview. Opportunities are available and success can be achieved&nbsp;when individuals and organizations acknowledge the worldview and&nbsp;follow&nbsp;its rules.</EM></P> <P><EM>A <STRONG>paradigm shift</STRONG> is a relatively abrupt change that brings about a relatively radically new worldview with new rules, such that opportunities are accessible and success can be achieved only to the extent that individuals and organizations adapt their thinking to the new worldview and adapt their behavior&nbsp;to follow its new rules.</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Opixia.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-6823738674596433804?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-71549919495102259812009-02-03T17:27:00.000-07:002009-02-03T17:28:45.746-07:00<P>There is now a <EM><A href="http://singularity-university.org/">Singularity University</A></EM> that will offer training to professionals interested in pursuing Ray Kurzweil's vision of a "singularity." Their stated mission is&nbsp;"<EM>Preparing Humanity For Accelerating Technological Change</EM>":</P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <P><EM>Singularity University aims to assemble, educate and inspire a cadre of leaders who strive to understand and facilitate the development of exponentially advancing technologies and apply, focus and guide these tools to address humanity's grand challenges.</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>From <A href="http://singularity-university.org/news/2009/02/singularity-university-to-study-accelerating-technologies-launches-at-nasa-ames/">their press release today</A>:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <P><STRONG><EM>Singularity University to Study Accelerating Technologies, Launches at NASA Ames</EM></STRONG></P> <P><EM>February 3rd, 2009 – news<BR>Singularity University, Press Release</EM></P> <P><EM>MOUNTAIN VIEW and LONG BEACH, Calif. — (TED CONFERENCE) — February 3, 2009 – With the support of NASA, Google and a broad range of technology thought leaders and entrepreneurs, a new university will launch in Silicon Valley this summer with the goal of preparing the next generation of leaders to address "humanity's grand challenges." Singularity University (SU) (</EM><A href="http://www.singularityu.org"><EM>www.singularityu.org</EM></A><EM>) will open its doors in June 2009 on the NASA Research Park campus with a nine-week graduate-level interdisciplinary curriculum designed to facilitate understanding, collaboration, and innovation across a broad range of carefully chosen scientific and technological disciplines whose developments are exponentially accelerating.</EM></P> <P><EM>SU co-founders Dr. Ray Kurzweil and Dr. Peter Diamandis unveiled plans for the new university today at the annual TED (Technology, Entertainment and Design) Conference in Long Beach, Ca.</EM></P> <P><EM>"We are now in the steep part of the exponential trajectory of information technologies in a broad variety of fields, including health, nanotechnology, and artificial intelligence," said Kurzweil. "It is only these accelerating technologies that have the scale to address the major challenges of humanity ranging from energy and the environment, to disease and poverty. With its strong focus on interdisciplinary learning, Singularity University is poised to foster the leaders who will create a uniquely creative and productive future world."</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I am still not persuaded of the concept or practicality of the supposed singularity, but all of the component technologies make perfect sense and are in need of research, innovation,&nbsp;and dissemination. The release goes on to say:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <P><EM>"We are reaching out across the globe to gather the smartest and most passionate future leaders and arm them with the tools and network they need to wrestle with the grand challenges of our day," said Diamandis. "There is no existing program that will offer the breadth and intensity that SU will offer. During the year, between the Graduate Summer Programs, SU will offer a unique 3-day and 10-day program for CEOs and executives that will give them the forward-looking radar they need to determine how these key technologies might transform their companies and industries in the 5-10 years ahead."</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>That makes sense to me, but what CEO can afford to look out even two years let alone 5-10 years? Still, it is good to promote interest in the degree of research needed to tackle any of the "grand challenges" in front of us.</P> <P>The curriculum will provide a broad, interdisciplinary exposure to ten key fields of study:</P> <OL> <LI>future studies and forecasting</LI> <LI>networks and computing systems</LI> <LI>biotechnology and bioinformatics</LI> <LI>nanotechnology</LI> <LI>medicine, neuroscience and human enhancement</LI> <LI>AI, robotics, and cognitive computing</LI> <LI>energy and ecological systems</LI> <LI>space and physical sciences</LI> <LI>policy, law and ethics</LI> <LI>finance and entrepreneurship.</LI></OL> <P>Unless you have read Ray's book, you are probably wondering what the Singularity is all about. From the first chapter of the book:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <P><EM>Gradually, I've become aware of a transforming event looming in the first half of the twenty-first century. Just as a black hole in space dramatically alters the patterns of matter and energy accelerating toward its event horizon, this impending Singularity in our future is increasingly transforming every institution and aspect of human life, from sexuality to spirituality.</EM></P> <P><EM>What, then, is the Singularity? It's a future period during which the pace of technological change will be so rapid, its impact so deep, that human life will be irreversibly transformed. Although neither utopian nor dystopian, this epoch will transform the concepts that we rely on to give meaning to our lives, from our business models to the cycle of human life, including death itself. Understanding the Singularity will alter our perspective on the significance of our past and the ramifications for our future. To truly understand it inherently changes one's view of life in general and one's own particular life. I regard someone who understands the Singularity and who has reflected on its implications for his or her own life as a "singularitarian."</EM></P> <P><EM>...</EM></P> <P><EM>The key idea underlying the impending Singularity is that the pace of change of our human-created technology is accelerating and its powers are expanding at an exponential pace. Exponential growth is deceptive. It starts out almost imperceptibly and then explodes with unexpected fury -- unexpected, that is, if one does not take care to follow its trajectory.</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>That still does not adequately convey the full nature of the Singularity, but it is a start. In essence, the Singularity involves major breakthroughs in hard artificial intelligence, nanotechnology, and genetic engineering. The book calls this GNR for Genetics, Nanotechnology, and Robotics. When all of the related technologies come together and enable a new acceleration of knowledge and thinking, that is the Singularity. That is still an oversimplification, but will have to do for now.</P> <P>The interesting thing is that this is an interesting attempt to achieve revolutionary change rather than simply plod along at a pace at which we started the 20th century with automobiles for personal transportation, but ended there as well. So much of what we use computers (and robots)&nbsp;for today is simply the automation of traditional tasks, but not so much in the way of revolutionary new concepts.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Opixia.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-7154991949510225981?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-59273095721597463052008-06-30T09:09:00.000-06:002008-06-30T09:13:36.504-06:00<P>Danny Ayers has put out a query on a couple of the W3C email lists about the "State of the Semantic Web." I emailed him my current view:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <P><EM>I am personally interested in the "state" of the distinction between "Semantic Technologies" (or "Semantic Web Technologies") and the original vision of the Semantic Web. There is certainly a lot of usage of XML and RSS and even RDF, but how much of that is for relatively simply "data exchange" as opposed to allowing open-system intelligent software agents to make inferences on that data beyond the kind of processing that one word do in an object-oriented programming language, remote procedure call, relational database access, and old-fashioned business rules processing?</EM></P> <P><EM>The true Semantic Web was supposed to be a lot more than simply replacing proprietary data formats with some common data format, and a lot of the discussions on ontologies seem to headed more in the direction of a multiplicity of Towers of Babel rather than some form of common interchange of knowledge.</EM></P> <P><EM>That said, I think that this is a reasonable state of affairs for this stage of a bold, new technology venture and probably where we should be about now since a lot of the open-system and intelligent agent inferencing requires a lot more fundamental research and evolution towards de facto "standards" for even simple, common knowledge.</EM></P> <P><EM>We will be unable to achieve "brilliance" for the overall Semantic Web until we are at least able to easily construct "islands of brilliance" (specific domains or applications) and then and only then can we have even a remote chance of figuring out how to "bridge" between those islands to achieve truly impressive "archipelagos of brilliance", let alone&nbsp;some semblance of a "universe of brilliance" that has a sense of connectedness comparable to today's text and graphics Web.</EM></P> <P><EM>At least this is what I will claim for my own humble opinion.</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Agtivity.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-5927309572159746305?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-66331810631219804112008-02-24T12:06:00.000-07:002008-02-24T12:07:45.593-07:00<P>For future reference, Bernard Lun on the <A href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/">ReadWriteWeb blog</A> has a post entitled "<A href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/semantic_web_11_things_to_know.php">11 Things To Know About Semantic Web</A>" that makes a number of key points about the current state of affairs with the Semantic Web. One that stood out as far as potential for me personally was:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <P><EM>3. If you have a firm grasp of the theoretical underpinnings of the semantic web, things like RDF, tuples, Sparql and OWL that make my brain hurt, you will be able to charge a fat premium in consulting fees for a while, as not many people really understand this stuff. But make hay while the sun shines, as some entrepreneur will surely figure out how to abstract this stuff and make it accessible for the masses.</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Yes, that is what I aim to do: "<EM>make it accessible for the masses</EM>." I want to be that entrepreneur, or at least one of them.</P> <P>There is a lot of great research work going on with the Semantic Web, and some initial industrial and commercial uses (e.g., RDF for blog web feeds), but most of the true power of the Semantic Web is still very far from being ready for general consumption by <EM>"the masses</EM>."</P> <P>Consumers are the ultimate audience that I am really after, with software agents mediating the interface between consumers and Semantic Web data.</P> <P>I will have more to say about this once I start my new blog dedicated to Semantic Web technology.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Opixia.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-6633181063121980411?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-25904017894090672142007-12-24T13:39:00.000-07:002007-12-24T13:45:10.460-07:00<P>We are all familiar with the intro to the old Star Trek show, "Space, the final frontier", but in the virtual universe of the online "world" what is the nature of "space" and is it really a frontier?</P> <P>Most people would agree that linear distance is completely irrelevant in the online world, where computer systems thousands of miles apart might as well be in the next room and a click could take you to data less than an inch away or a world away. An&nbsp;exception is&nbsp;that once we start communicating outside of the physical earth (e.g., Mars or deep space probes), latency becomes a very real issue.</P> <P>Density of "space" (in terms of computing nodes or locations of files)&nbsp;is similarly completely irrelevant in the online world.</P> <P>Space in terms of quantity of bits and bytes and data fields and database records is also completely irrelevant in the online world, with the exceptions of 1) occasional lack of local storage space due to artificial "quotas", and 2) latency and access time.</P> <P>The next form of space is page layout. In print, writers have very hard and fixed boundaries for the amount of text and graphics that can be included in their stories. Getting an extra inch or page requires mighty effort.&nbsp;The Web page has no such limits. As such, space on web pages&nbsp;is effectively infinite and not a frontier at all.</P> <P>But, there is another form of space online, screen size. The client device, typically a PC, does in fact have a relatively limited amount of space available. Sure, you can scroll and page through your large web pages, but there is a usability factor at work as well. Most "readers" do not read sequentially at all, but scan and bounce around. Their attention span for "viewing" a web page is limited, so asking them to scroll and page and click to get to the rest of the content is frequently too much to ask. The average reader has an unlimited number of content sources and will migrate to wherever screen size&nbsp;limitations are&nbsp;most respected.</P> <P>Blogs and RSS readers introduce another layer&nbsp; of space constraint. Sure, you can still page and link to get to unlimited amounts of space, but there is a clear premium value given to terse and concise blog posts that convey the essential meaning of a post in a single "view" in a small subset of the total screen space&nbsp;without demanding extra effort on the part of the user.</P> <P>Finally, there is an even more intense constraint, or frontier if you will, imposed by accessing online content on a handheld mobile device such as a smartphone. Sure, you can certainly zoom and scroll and page and link to access an infinite amount of content, there is a clear premium value given to content providers who can format and express essential meaning in small-screen chunks.</P> <P>So, in some sense the online world frees us of the limits and frontiers of three-dimensional and print space, but our access devices and human perceptual limitations give us new frontiers to tackle. We can look forward to a wealth of innovation in&nbsp;how to express, chunk, format, view, and navigate within&nbsp;online content in the years to come. Even the vaunted iPhone only scratches the surface. Even Google has not yet&nbsp;mastered the small screen.</P> <P>Given the ease with which we can construct large computer networks with vast amounts of data storage and the vast, unlimited expanse of the Web, it certainly does feel as if the small screen of handheld devices is in fact a true frontier where opportunity is unlimited and existing solutions are quite limited.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Opixia.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-2590401789409067214?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-67693572549788626292007-10-07T17:55:00.000-06:002007-10-07T17:56:01.493-06:00<P>An article in <EM>The New York Times</EM> by Denise Caruso entitled "<A href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/07/technology/07frame.html">Securing Very Important Data: Your Own</A>" illustrates the benefits and downsides of sharing personal data on the Web:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <P><EM>This type of sensitive, sometimes proprietary information was once locked up on hard drives or in file cabinets far away from anything resembling a global or even a local distribution network. Yet none of the users flocking to these services seem perturbed that they have relinquished personal control over this data to companies that, even with the best of intentions, may not be able to keep it safe.</EM></P> <P><EM>The incidence of data theft -- from wallets to data breaches, computer viruses or Dumpster diving -- is soaring. This year alone, the security of nearly 77 million Americans' records has been breached, according to the Identity Theft Resource Center in San Diego, nearly a fourfold increase over 2006.</EM></P> <P><EM>Governments around the world are passing and enforcing laws that increasingly hold businesses financially accountable for avoidable data losses. Just last month, the </EM><A title="TJX Companies" href="http://www.nytimes.com/mem/MWredirect.html?MW=http://custom.marketwatch.com/custom/nyt-com/html-companyprofile.asp&amp;symb=TJX"><EM>TJX Companies</EM></A><EM>, which owns T.J. Maxx, Marshalls and other retail stores, made a settlement offer, subject to court approval, to victims of a huge data breach, in which 45.7 million customers' credit- and debit-card data was exposed to identity thieves. </EM></P> <P><EM>As a result, some security experts are starting to ask whether the "identity data-for-services" business model, which is the engine for virtually all e-commerce companies, is a fair trade -- not just for consumers, but for business as well. </EM></P> <P><EM>In response, they are coming up with new protocols and frameworks for collecting, using and governing identity data. Given that virtually all businesses today collect and use these kinds of data, they aim to shift the status quo in ways that could help companies both improve their reputations with customers and avoid the mounting legal liabilities that now face companies that lose control of customer data.</EM></P> <P><EM>"The myth is that companies have to know all this information about you in order to do business with you," said Drummond Reed, vice president for infrastructure at Parity Communications, an identity technology company in Needham, Mass. "But from a liability perspective, the less I know about my customers the better."</EM></P> <P><EM>Parity is sponsoring a number of open software projects to shift more control to the users whose identity data is at risk. One of the most intriguing is called the CloudTripper Project, which is developing a way for individuals to "take their data with them" as they traverse the Web, just as they keep their wallets and checkbooks with them as they move around in the real world.</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>My own solution is to propose a research&nbsp;effort for something I refer to as <EM><A href="http://agtivity.com/vision_of_consumer_applications_of_software_agent_technology.htm">The Consumer-Centric Knowledge Web</A></EM>. Cobbling together an ad-hoc approach in a piecemeal fashion is likely to cause more harm than good. OTOH, the more ad-hoc efforts that go forward and highlight the inherent problems in this area, the quicker people will warm up to the need for a hard-core research effort such as I have proposed.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Opixia.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-6769357254978862629?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-77320696400938026572007-05-27T21:52:00.000-06:002007-05-27T21:53:15.663-06:00<P>I had an idea a couple of years ago and neglected to blog about it and now I read that somebody else has proposed the same idea: one-way&nbsp;trips for human colonists&nbsp;to Mars. Writing in response to John Brockman's 2007 <EM>Edge</EM> question "What are you optimistic about?", physicist&nbsp;<A href="http://edge.org/3rd_culture/bios/iacoboni.html"><A id=davies name=davies></A></A><A href="http://edge.org/3rd_culture/bios/davies.html">Paul Davies</A>&nbsp;of Arizona State University and&nbsp;author of&nbsp;<EM>The Cosmic Jackpot</EM>, writes in his essay response entitled "<A href="http://edge.org/q2007/q07_10.html#davies">A One-Way Ticket To Mars</A>"&nbsp;about the significant logistical benefits of sending supplies and people to Mars withot the burden of returning them to Earth.</P> <P>There are a zillion interesting issues that crop up, but I find the concept quite appealing and would consider it myself. It's an opportunity to be a true pioneer, a real colonist.</P> <P>In truth, most of the early colonists and immigrants to America ame here knowing that going back was not an option.</P> <P>It would be interesting to contemplate a Mars Colony simulator. It wouldn't be practical to directly simulate the lower gravity, but it should be quite practical to simulate the isolation, the atmosphere, the sights and views, the sounds, the terrain, the delayed communication with Earth.</P> <P>As a starting point, do we have the necessary resolution to create a dome of hi-res display screens that would simulate the view from inside a dome on the surface of Mars as well as a "vehicle" (simulator) with displays for the windows viewing the landscape as the vehicle "moves". One issue is that current display technologies don't have the raw brightness to simulate the Sun. We do have the experience with <A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biosphere_2">Biosphere 2</A> for constructing a simulated environment to draw upon.</P> <P>To be honest, merely being an astronaut isn't&nbsp;that exciting to me, but being a <EM>Mars Colonist</EM> is an entirely different matter.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Opixia.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-7732069640093802657?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-52097885956871845212007-05-20T21:32:00.001-06:002007-05-20T21:32:57.061-06:00<P>One far out field that may have dramatic implications for computing and software design in the coming decades is the emerging research in <EM>quantum information technology</EM>.</P> <P>For example, from the <A href="http://www.rle.mit.edu/quantummuri/">Multidisciplinary University Research Initiative (MURI) program of Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and Northwestern University (NU)</A>, we read that:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <P>Quantum superposition and quantum entanglement are the bedrock on which new theoretical paradigms for information transmission, storage, and processing are being built. The preeminent obstacle to the development of&nbsp; quantum information technology is the difficulty of transmitting quantum information over noisy and lossy quantum communication channels, recovering and refreshing the quantum information that is received, and then storing it in a reliable quantum memory.&nbsp;&nbsp; </P> <P>With support from the Multidisciplinary Research Program of the University Research Initiative (MURI), we have assembled a truly interdisciplinary team from researchers at MIT and Northwestern University to overcome this obstacle. The focus of our program is an architecture we have established for long-distance, high-fidelity qubit teleportation. Its key elements are:</P> <UL> <LI>ultrabright, narrowband sources of polarization-entangled photon pairs;</LI> <LI>long-distance transmission of entangled photons over standard telecom fiber;</LI> <LI>qubit storage and processing in trapped atom quantum memories.</LI></UL></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Although some of these concepts may make more obvious sense down at the bit, byte, chip, and machine language levels, I suspect that the concepts may have even greater potential if they can be transplanted to the level of software, software components, and software agents.</P> <P>Try to imagine what quantum information technology might mean at the level of the Semantic Web and Web Services.</P> <P>Try to imagine a large number of swarms of software agents interacting via the exchange and sharing&nbsp;of quantum information and built upon the concept of quantum entanglement.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Opixia.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-5209788595687184521?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-15027291842592351612007-05-13T16:09:00.001-06:002007-05-13T16:09:31.433-06:00<P><SPAN class=eTicketContent>I am in the middle of reading <A href="http://www.edge.org/q2007/q07_index.html"><FONT color=#225588>John Brockman's <EM>Edge</EM> question for 2007</FONT></A>: <EM><STRONG>What are you optimistic about?</STRONG></EM>, and although it is all very interesting, it strikes me that almost all of these "visions" are rather dated and even somewhat <EM>stale</EM>, probably because these are the ideas that people of&nbsp;the "boomer"&nbsp;generation grew up with in the 1960's, 1970's,&nbsp;1980's, and even most of the 1990's. Enough of the stuff already. What I really want to know is: <STRONG>What are the kids up to?</STRONG> Not in the sense of what toys do they play with and what tools do they work with, but what ground are they beginning to break and what visions of the future do <EM>they</EM> have that are their own creation and not something that was spoon-fed to them or rammed down their throats by a well-meaning but misguided&nbsp;elite.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN class=eTicketContent>By "kids", specifically I mean young people who:</SPAN></P> <UL> <LI><SPAN class=eTicketContent>Grew up with the Internet and the Web as their earliest significant computing experience, or at least since they were juniors in high school</SPAN></LI> <LI><SPAN class=eTicketContent>Experienced 9/11 while in high school or freshmen in college, at a time when it had a chance to dramatically shape the way they <EM>started</EM> to&nbsp;view the geopolitical world</SPAN></LI> <LI><SPAN class=eTicketContent>Just assume that global warming and climate change are "real" since the concepts were not "new" to them even when they were juniors or seniors in high school</SPAN></LI> <LI><SPAN class=eTicketContent>Have been exposed to open source software&nbsp;in college</SPAN></LI> <LI><SPAN class=eTicketContent>Have had a cell phone since high school and most of their classmates in high school had cell phones</SPAN></LI> <LI><SPAN class=eTicketContent>Are no older than 25 (or maybe 26 or 27) and consider people who are 28 or 29 or 30 as already "too old" to "understand"</SPAN></LI> <LI><SPAN class=eTicketContent>Are not deeply attracted to and attached to traditional politics and political parties such as the Republicans and the Democrats, and have their own politics and world view</SPAN></LI> <LI><SPAN class=eTicketContent>Have been blogging since high school</SPAN></LI> <LI><SPAN class=eTicketContent>Since high school have had teachers and professors who are challenging traditional views of economics, politics, and social structures</SPAN></LI></UL> <P>What I am interest in is:</P> <UL> <LI>What fields of intellectual study are they most attracted to?</LI> <LI>What aspects of computing excite them the most?</LI> <LI>Are they breaking any new ground, or simply "refashioning the wheel"?</LI> <LI>What are examples of computing breakthroughs by the 20 to 25-year olds?</LI> <LI>What are some hard-core examples of great leaps that kids have made compared to Ray Kurzweil, Dan Bricklin,&nbsp;Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Steve Wozniak, Larry Ellison, Bill Joy, et al when they were of this same age (20-25)?</LI></UL> <P>Is it really true that "change is accelerating"? If so, we should see a much larger list of breakthroughs than for those "old-timers."</P> <P>I'd also like to see two lists: one for applications, but primarily one for underlying technological fundamentals. Applications like YouTube, Digg, and Facebook go on that first list, but what I am primarily interested in is what&nbsp;fundamental technology ground is being broken by "the kids"?</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Opixia.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-1502729184259235161?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-26275783102714692372007-05-06T11:58:00.000-06:002007-05-06T11:59:13.924-06:00<P>The open question of language level comes up when considering the open question of how to represent, access, manipulate, and otherwise use knowledge and meaning in the form of a distributed knowledge web or semantic web. I certainly do not have any&nbsp; immediate answer, but I was thinking that rather than envisioning one unified "knowledge" language, possibly we need a multi-level language model:</P> <OL> <LI><STRONG>Low-level "assembly" language</STRONG> - work with meaning and knowledge at a very <EM>atomic</EM> level</LI> <LI><STRONG>High-level language</STRONG> - a very expressive language that focuses on higher-level structured meaning, probably leveraging contextual meaning</LI> <LI><STRONG>Scripting language</STRONG> - a concise, terse, convenient method for working with knowledge that emphasizes broad expressive power rather than specific detail and nuanced meaning</LI> <LI><STRONG>Natural language</STRONG> - heavily dependent on context and very ambiguous, but very easy and natural to use. Appropriate for "display" of knowledge structures.</LI></OL> <P>One issue is whether natural language is really a separate level or can be used at all three of the other levels.</P> <P>Another issue is that we need to be able to work with <EM>meta</EM> knowledge, to treat packages of knowledge as black boxes and networks of interconnected black boxes to be manipulated in an abstract sense, separated from the actual, true meaning of the contents of those black boxes. Possibly this is a requirement at each of the four language levels.</P> <P>Another issue is multiplicity, the number of distinct languages at each level. Obviously we have many natural lanuages. Multiple scripting and higher-level languages makes sense. Having a single, common, foundation "knowledge assembly language" has a lot of appeal, but is it really viable and is it clearly really advantageous relative to having a multiplicity of low level knowledge and meaning paradigms? I don't see any clear answer at this point in time.</P> <P>Is the current Semantic Web at this assembly level or high-level or scripting level? I suspect that the answer is that it is not clear. Clearly there is some amount of scripting being done in XML. Clearly there is some amount of high-level semantics being done (e.g., RSS and web feeds). And clearly there is a fair amount of very low level semantic use. But is XML more of a lexical and syntactic language than a true semantic language? It seems to me that its only current power at the meaning level comes when the people and programs a priori <EM>agree</EM> on shared meaning representation conventions, and that is precisely what we would like to see inherently <EM>embodied</EM> within a true knowledge language at any of the levels that I have proposed. In short, it appears that there is very little in the way of meaning represented within the Semantic Web, and that the only real meaning is hard-coded into the user agents that communicate via the Semantic Web. In other words, at best, the Semantic Web is everything <EM>but</EM> semantics,&nbsp;and that&nbsp;the Semantic Web simply&nbsp;facilitates the exchange of information that user agents&nbsp;can interpret as meaning&nbsp;using hard-wired or agreed semantics.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Opixia.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-2627578310271469237?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-4412023033087650732007-04-21T21:51:00.000-06:002007-04-21T21:52:02.616-06:00<P>I was checking out <A href="http://personal.fidelity.com/planning/retirement/retirement_planning.shtml.cvsr?bar=c">Fidelity's retirement planner</A> and was once again confronted with the question of what I expected for my life expectancy. They suggested 92. I responded with 105. That seems to be a lifetime that feels "right" for me. It is nominally just more than twice my current age. I suspect what I will do is up it by two years every year so that I can always at least imagine that I still have half of my life in front of me.</P> <P>Anyway... if I live until I am 105, that means I will be alive in the year 2059, 52 years from now. That raises the obvious question of what life will be like in the year 2059. I have no immediate answers, but it is at least an interesting thought experiment. It begs the question of what events might have transpired between now and then, but mostly I'm focusing on what the world will be like when I finally "leave the scene." On the other hand, maybe I should back off and look at the year 2049 or 2050 so that I can contemplate a time when I still have a whole ten years to live. That seems to make more sense. Besides, 2050 is a nice round number.</P> <P>So, what will life be like in the year 2050? Some categories of thought:</P> <UL> <LI>Health, health care</LI> <LI>Nutrition, food</LI> <LI>Work</LI> <LI>Play, recreation, entertainment</LI> <LI>Housing, living spaces, living arrangements</LI> <LI>Transportation, travel</LI> <LI>Air quality</LI> <LI>Water quality</LI> <LI>Climate</LI> <LI>Politics</LI> <LI>Religion</LI> <LI>Sex</LI> <LI>Sports</LI> <LI>Culture</LI> <LI>Social relations</LI> <LI>Marriage</LI> <LI>Childrearing</LI> <LI>School, education</LI> <LI>Cultures</LI> <LI>Crime, violence</LI> <LI>Law</LI> <LI>Philosophy</LI> <LI>Economics</LI> <LI>Foreign Relations</LI> <LI>Nations</LI> <LI>Conflicts, wars</LI> <LI>Weapons</LI> <LI>Materials</LI> <LI>Buildings</LI> <LI>Communications, computer networks</LI> <LI>Tools and technologies</LI> <LI>What can computers do?</LI> <LI>What can computers still not do?</LI> <LI>Biology, genetics</LI> <LI>Space travel, space life</LI> <LI>Global, national, regional, and local financial systems</LI> <LI>Shopping</LI> <LI>Insurance</LI> <LI>What will money look like?</LI> <LI>What will the term <EM>wealth</EM> mean?</LI></UL> <P>Will life be radically different from today in a revolutionary sense, or&nbsp;more or an incremental evolutionary sense?</P> <P>From a finance and retirement planning perspective, how much of this might we have to make sense of to adequately prepare ourselves for a "comfortable" retirement?</P> <P>Will retirement planning be inherently a "moving target", with radical redeployment every five years?</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Finaxyz.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-441202303308765073?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-30773898505527886582007-03-27T09:00:00.000-06:002007-03-27T09:21:12.817-06:00For future reference, check out the topic of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developmental_robotics">Developmental Robotics</a>. From the Wikipedia:<br /><blockquote><em>Developmental Robotics (DevRob), sometimes called<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epigenetic_robotics">epigenetic robotics</a>, is a methodology that uses metaphors from <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developmental_psychology">developmental psychology</a> to develop <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controller"><em>controllers</a> for <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_robot">autonomous robots</a>. The focus is on a single robot going through stages of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_mental_development">autonomous mental development</a>. Researchers in this field study artificial emotions, self-motivation, and other methods of self-organization.<br /><br />DevRob is related to, but differs from, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_robotics">evolutionary robotics</a> (ER). ER uses populations of robots that evolve over time, whereas DevRob is interested in the organization of a single robot's control system develops through experience, over time.<br /><br />DevRob is also related to work done in the domains of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robotics">Robotics</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_Life">Artificial Life</a>.<br /></em></blockquote></em><br />For the record, I am personally far less interested in the "organization" of a single robot's control system than I am in the organization of multiple or many interacting robots. That is where the real development and "intelligence" lies: the group or population.<br /><br />-- <a href="mailto:Jack@Opixia.com">Jack Krupansky</a><br /><br /><br /><em></em><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-3077389850552788658?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-32170055745210214612007-03-27T08:37:00.000-06:002007-03-27T08:52:49.635-06:00Just a quick post to record a link to a topic of interest and relevance to software agent technology, machine intelligence, and knowledge management: <strong><em>autonomous mental development</em></strong>.<br /><br />An article in <em>Science</em> magazine by Juyang Weng, James McClelland, Alex Pentland, Olaf Sporns, Ida Stockman, Mriganka Sur, and Esther Thelen entitled "<a href="http://www.cse.msu.edu/dl/SciencePaper.pdf">Autonomous Mental Development by Robots and Animals</a>."<br /><br /><br /><em><blockquote><p><em>How does one create an intelligent machine? This problem has proven difficult. Over the past several decades, scientists have taken one of three approaches: In the first, which is knowledge-based, an intelligent machine in a laboratory is directly programmed to perform a given task. In a second, learning-based approach, a computer is "spoon-fed" human-edited sensory data while the machine is controlled by a task-specific learning program. Finally, by a "genetic search," robots have evolved through generations by the principle of survival of the fittest, mostly in a computer-simulated virtual world. Although notable, none of these is powerful enough to lead to machines having the complex, diverse, and highly integrated capabilities of an adult brain, such as vision, speech, and language. Nevertheless, these traditional approaches have served as the incubator for the birth and growth of a new direction for machine intelligence: autonomous mental development. As Kuhn wrote (1), "Failure of existing rules is the prelude to a search for new ones."</em></em></p></blockquote><em><em><blockquote><em><em>What is autonomous mental development? With time, a brainlike natural or an artificial embodied system, under the control of its intrinsic developmental program (coded in the genes or artificially designed) </em></em><em><em><strong>develops mental capabilities through autonomous real-time interactions with its environments</strong> (including its own internal environment and components) by using its own sensors and effectors. Traditionally, a machine is not autonomous when it develops its skills, but a human is autonomous throughout its lifelong mental development.</em></em><br /></blockquote></em></em><br />-- <a href="mailto:Jack@Opixia.com">Jack Krupansky</a><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-3217005574521021461?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-24445619387875122572007-03-25T20:54:00.000-06:002007-03-25T20:55:14.481-06:00<P>There is an article in <EM>The New York Times</EM> by Jason Pontin entitled "<A href="http://www.nytimes.com:80/2007/03/25/business/yourmoney/25Stream.html">Artificial Intelligence, With Help From the Humans</A>" about efforts to use web-based human workers to supplement artificial intelligence (AI) efforts. Noting that "<EM>Things that humans do with little conscious thought, such as recognizing patterns or meanings in images, language or concepts, only baffle the machines</EM>", the article goes on to tell us that:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <P><EM>The problem has prompted a spooky, but elegant, business idea: why not use the Web to create marketplaces of willing human beings who will perform the tasks that computers cannot? </EM><A title="More articles about Jeffrey P. Bezos" href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/b/jeffrey_p_bezos/index.html?inline=nyt-per"><FONT color=#004276><EM>Jeff Bezos</EM></FONT></A><EM>, the chief executive of <SPAN class=bold><A title=Amazon.com href="http://www.nytimes.com/mem/MWredirect.html?MW=http://custom.marketwatch.com/custom/nyt-com/html-companyprofile.asp&amp;symb=AMZN"><STRONG><FONT color=#004276>Amazon.com</FONT></STRONG></A></SPAN>, has created Amazon Mechanical Turk, an online service involving human workers, and he has also personally invested in a human-assisted search company called <SPAN class=bold><STRONG>ChaCha</STRONG></SPAN>. Mr. Bezos describes the phenomenon very prettily, calling it "artificial artificial intelligence."</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>The articles examines some of the practical and human issues with such "work", but this is still a wide open area with at least some potential. The technique is not without its problems and limitations:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <P><EM>THERE have been two common objections to artificial artificial intelligence. The first, confirmed by my own experiences searching on ChaCha, is that the networks are no more intelligent than their smartest members. Katharine Mieszkowski, writing last year on </EM><A href="http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2006/07/24/turks/index_np.html"><A href="http://salon.com/" target=_><FONT color=#004276><EM>Salon.com</EM></FONT></A></A><EM>, raised the second, more serious criticism. She saw Mechanical Turk as a kind of virtual sweatshop. "There is something a little disturbing about a billionaire like Bezos dreaming up new ways to get ordinary folk to do work for him for pennies," she wrote.</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>My personal view is that I am not a supporter of the "pennies" economic model. At a minimum, the prevailing federal minimum wage should be used. Encouraging servitude should not be considered socially or economically acceptable. AAI should not be built upon a financial foundation that relegates real people to being simply "slaves to the machines."</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Opixia.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-2444561938787512257?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-43426466761248926442007-03-20T08:52:00.000-06:002007-03-20T09:00:15.512-06:00There is a lot of interest in online and web-based data and applications, but there are a lot of disadvantages too. Working offline has disadvantages too, but has some clear benefits as well. I propose that we focus increasing attention on whatI call <em>nearline</em>, a hybrid of online and offline.<br /><br />The easy way to think of it is that you work online when you're online, but you work offline when it is not convenient to work online. Obviously you can do that manually, but the trick is to offer infrastructure support so that the on-to-off-line and off-to-on-line transitions are transparent and not a significant inconvenience.<br /><br />I would note that the term <em>nearline</em> has already been used to some extent, but not so widely, so maybe it is okay to repurpose it for this better purpose.<br /><br />-- <a href="mailto:Jack@Opixia.com">Jack Krupansky</a><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-4342646676124892644?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-18927971070447956432007-03-15T08:43:00.000-06:002007-03-15T09:00:25.115-06:00There is a great question, asked in an article on <a href="http://www.eweek.com/">eWeek.com</a> by Deborah Perelman entitled "<a href="http://www.eweek.com/article2/0%2c1895%2c2104047%2c00.asp">An Academic Asks: Is Computer Science Dead?</a>." In short, no it is not dead, but in my opinion so much of the "action" in information technology happens at higher, application levels with so many scripting languages and API interfaces, that most people don't need to really come in contact with the "science" aspect of computers to do a lot of interesting work.<br /><br />Computer science does have a bright future since so much of the progress of higher-level fluff depends on advances in lower-level algorithms and underlying computing infrastructure where hard-core engineering and science are critical. A lot of computer science now occurs at the chip level, with a fair amount of chip design being "soft" and resembling software more than hardware.<br /><br />Even in "the old days", there was a strong sense of <em>application software</em> versus <em>system software</em>, and that distinction is still quite relevant, although there is a lot more sophistication and programmability at the application levels these days.<br /><br />Interesting question: Is code that processes html and http "application" software or "system" software. In the old view, http was clearly at the application level, but these days it is almost considered as low level as old-fashioned assembly language.<br /><br />-- <a href="mailto:Jack@Opixia.com">Jack Krupansky</a><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-1892797107044795643?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-19286758926681727372007-03-14T23:18:00.001-06:002007-03-14T23:18:28.037-06:00<P>Danny Hillis has published <A href="http://www.edge.org:80/documents/archive/edge205.html">an addendum</A> to his May 2004 essay on <EM><A href="http://www.edge.org/">Edge</A></EM> that was entitled&nbsp;"<A href="http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/hillis04/hillis04_index.html">Arisotle: The Knowledge Web</A>" which summarizes his efforts at his new company Metaweb to produce a freely accessible universal knowledge database:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <P><EM>In retrospect the key idea in the "Aristotle" essay was this: if humans could contribute their knowledge to a database that could be read by computers, then the computers could present that knowledge to humans in the time, place and format that would be most useful to them.&nbsp; The missing link to make the idea work was a universal database containing all human knowledge, represented in a form that could be accessed, filtered and interpreted by computers. </EM></P> <P><EM>One might reasonably ask: Why isn't that database the Wikipedia or even the World Wide Web? The answer is that these depositories of knowledge are designed to be read directly by humans, not interpreted by computers. They confound the presentation of information with the information itself. The crucial difference of the knowledge web is that the information is represented in the database, while the presentation is generated dynamically. Like Neal Stephenson's storybook, the information is filtered, selected and presented according to the specific needs of the viewer.</EM></P> <P><EM>John, Robert and I started a project,&nbsp; then a company, to build that computer-readable database. How successful we will be is yet to be determined, but we are really trying to build it:&nbsp; a universal database for representing any knowledge that anyone is willing to share. We call the company Metaweb, and the free database, Freebase.com. Of course it has none of the artificial intelligence described in the essay, but it is a database in which each topic is connected to other topics by links that describe their relationship. It is built so that computers can navigate and present it to humans. Still very primitive, a far cry from Neal Stephenson's magical storybook, it is a step, I hope, in the right direction.</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>The original Aristotle essay is well worth reading.</P> <P>There is a related article in <EM>The New York Times</EM> by John Markoff entitled "<A href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/09/technology/09data.html">Start-Up Aims for Database to Automate Web Searching</A>" about Hillis, Metaweb, and Freebase.</P> <P>My own ruminations on the concept of a <EM>Knowledge Web</EM> can be found in my white paper entitled&nbsp;<A href="http://agtivity.com/vision_of_consumer_applications_of_software_agent_technology.htm">The Consumer-Centric Knowledge Web - A Vision of Consumer Applications of Software Agent Technology - Enabling Consumer-Centric Knowledge-Based Computing</A>.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Opixia.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-1928675892668172737?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-49762234614503914572007-03-04T11:24:00.000-07:002007-03-04T11:44:07.097-07:00<p>A couple of years ago I came up with a proposal for something I called a <a href="http://basetechnology.com/dvpc.htm">Distributed Virtual Personal Computer (DVPC)</a>, which was an attempt to abstract the user's data from their personal computer and have that virtual data live on the Internet, with the local storage of the PC simply being a cache of the distributed, virtual data. I have decided to rename the concept to <a href="http://basetechnology.com/dvpds.htm">Distributed Virtual Personal Data Storage (DVPDS)</a> to focus the emphasis on the user's data as distinct from the computing or processing capabilities of their PC.</p><p>I don't intend to pursue implementation of the DVPDS concept at this time, but I do want this proposal to be available so that others may contemplate the incorporation of its features into computing infrastructures that they may implement in the coming years.</p><p>Here is the preamble for the new DVPDS proposal:</p><p>This proposal for <b>Distributed Virtual Personal Data Storage (DVPDS)</b> supersedes my previous proposal for a <a href="http://basetechnology.com/dvpc.htm">Distributed Virtual Personal Computer (DVPC)</a>. DVPDS includes all of the concepts of my previous DVPC proposal, but simply changes the name to emphasize the focus on the <i>data storage</i> aspects of a <i>personal computer (PC)</i> as distinct from the computing or processing capabilities of a PC. In particular, it abstracts the user's personal data to give it a virtual form distinct from the actual storage used to store that virtual data.</p><p>The intention remains that all of a user's data would live in a distributed, virtual form on the Internet, and that the user's device (PC or phone or other computing device) merely <i>caches</i> the distributed, virtual data. The intention is that the user gets all of the performance and other benefits of local mass storage, with none of the downside, such as need for backup, anxiety caused by lost or mangled data, inconvenience of access from other machines, difficulty of managing archives, etc.</p><p>The intention is not that the user would "work on the Web", but to continue to emphasize higher productivity through rich client devices with instantaneous data access and full control of that data. In practice, users will frequently or usually work directly on the Web, but occasionally or sometimes frequently or for extended stretches of time they may work disconnected from the Internet, all seamlessly and with no loss of the positive aspects of the user experience.</p><p>With regard to the requirements for being <i>distributed</i>, the emphasis is on <i>maximum diversity</i> so that users can be <i>guaranteed</i> that their data will be both readily accessible and protected from loss due to even the most extreme of contingencies. Degrees of diversity include vendor, geography, communications backbone, and offline, so that neither human error, fire, flood, earthquake, explosion, vendor financial difficulties, sabotage, theft, or legal disagreements, can cause any of a user's data to become inaccessible for more than a shortest period of time. A particular emphasis is placed on avoiding vendor-specific solutions. Vendor "lock-in" is unacceptable.</p><p>One area that needs attention since my original proposal is the more-demanding storage requirements for media such as music, video, podcasts, and movies, as well as intellectual property issues such as DRM.</p><p><b><i>This proposal is in the public domain. It may be copied and modified -- provided that Jack Krupansky and Base Technology are credited and a link back to this original proposal is provided AND these same use and distribution terms are carried along.</i></b></p><p>Please note that DVPDS is only a <i><b>concept</b></i> right now, with no implementation or business plan to turn the concept into a product and service.</p><p>The rest of the document is unchanged since its creation to describe the DVPC concept, but should be read as referring to the DVPDS concept.</p><p>-- <a href="mailto:Jack@Opixia.com">Jack Krupansky</a></p><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-4976223461450391457?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-86754777951544517122007-03-04T10:14:00.001-07:002007-03-04T10:14:26.862-07:00<P>One of the issues that we need to confront as we design the computing architectures of the future is the question of which will be "smarter", the user's "device" (PC or "phone" or other object) or the applications on the Web.</P> <P>One route is that we continue to put a fair amount of intelligence on the user device and that the Web remain primarily relatively static data and "services". For example, the browser and browser "add-ons" would continue to get smarter, and Web Services would be primarily "utilities" to be used by browser-based applications.</P> <P>The complementary route is that the user device be relegated to being a relatively "dumb", "thin" client, strictly focused on UI implementation and that the real "smarts" of applications would live on Web servers. For example, the browser would support sophisticated AJAX-like UI support and a 3-D graphical environment, but little in the way of support for "intelligent" operations on the device itself.</P> <P>Obviously you can have a full spectrum of hybrids of dumb/smart, but then we will have to constantly be making tradeoffs about dumb/smart as we design each application. That might be optimal for specific applications, but raises the cost of designing, implementing, and supporting applications and it may be pure hell for poor "dumb" users who simply want some consistency between applications so that they don't need to figure out every new application and try to keep them all straight.</P> <P>This raises the next question, which is what criteria to use to decide where along the spectrum smartness and dumbness lie.</P> <P>It also raises the question of where software agents will live and operate. Do we want agents to live strictly on servers with only UI elements on the user device? Or do we want software agents to live and work on the user device as well or even primarily on the user device?</P> <P>More food for thought.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Agtivity.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-8675477795154451712?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-30444959865286624332007-03-03T17:42:00.000-07:002007-03-03T17:43:16.574-07:00<P><A href="http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/">TBL</A> has updated his commentary entitled "<A href="http://www.w3.org:80/DesignIssues/Fractal.html">The Fractal nature of the Web</A>" with some notes on how the Semantic Web can and must work with a combination of overlapping global and local ontologies. He discusses the importance of thinking about ontologies and domains from the perspective of <EM>agents</EM> that communicate with messages relating to ontologies and domains that they share.&nbsp;He concludes:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <P><EM>So the idea is that in any one message, some of the terms will be from a global ontology, some from subdomains. The amount of data which can be reused by another agent will depend on how many communities they have in common, how many ontologies they share.</EM></P> <P><EM>In other words, one global ontology is not a solution to the problem, and a local subdomain is not a solution either. But if each agent has uses a mix of a few ontologies of different scale, that is forms a global solution to the problem.</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>His overall "web fractal" commentary starts from this thought:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <P><EM>I have </EM><A href="http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Fractal.html#Berners-Le"><EM>discussed elsewhere</EM></A><EM> how we must avoid the two opposite social deaths of a global monoculture and a set of isolated cults, and how the fractal patterns found in nature seem to present themselves as a good compromise. It seems that the compromise between stability and diversity is served by there the same amount of structure at all scales. I have no mathematical theory to demonstrate that this is an optimization of some metric for the resilience of society and its effectiveness as an organism, nor have I even that metric. (Mail me if you do!)</EM></P> <P><EM>However, it seems from experience that groups are stable when they have a set of peers, when they have a substructure. Neither the set of peers nor the substructure must involve huge numbers, as groups cannot "scale", that is, work effectively with a very large number of liaisons with peers, or when composed as a set of a very large number of parts. If this is the case then by induction there must be a continuum of group sizes from the vary largest to the very smallest.</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>File this under "food for thought." This issue of how domains can interoperate and the respective role of global domains is key to developing a global knowledge web. How to achieve stability in the presence of diversity is a quite difficult problem. This will need some original thinking on the nature of&nbsp;<EM>equilibrium</EM>.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Finaxyz.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-3044495986528662433?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-69671333459860672982007-02-25T12:50:00.000-07:002007-02-25T13:00:03.166-07:00I use Outlook Express as my email client (and Outlook at work at The Evil Empire), but I am starting to conclude that I need to have my own totally customized email client to boost my personal productivity in a quantum leap. I don't want simply a "better" email client (there are plenty of those), but something radically different, that understands the context of each email communication.<br /><br />I don't know exactly what I need, or how it should be implemented, but I do feel that something is needed.<br /><br />I think I want it to be implemented fully within the web browser so that it is portable between platforms and doesn't require installation of client software. I suspect this means AJAX, but I also suspect that it means something that primarily runs on a server. So, in fact, I may want a fully customizable personal email server, that can in fact be "working" for me when I am not online.<br /><br />I also want to have high-productivity access from a smartphone or even a dumbphone (we call them "feature phones" here at The Empire.)<br /><br />I also want something that could be a starting point for <em>knowledge messaging</em>.<br /><br />-- <a href="mailto:Jack@Opixia.com">Jack Krupansky</a><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-6967133345986067298?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-89185051812875227962007-02-24T19:04:00.000-07:002007-02-28T08:48:47.421-07:00<P dir=ltr>Test.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Opixia.com">Jack Krupansky</A><BR></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-8918505181287522796?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-79101012456036209972007-02-24T11:15:00.001-07:002007-02-24T11:15:59.468-07:00<P>One interesting idea that I would eventually like to pursue is a concept I call <EM>knowledge mail</EM>. The basic idea is that rather than manually composing text messages for our online communications, we need tools to <EM>compose knowledge</EM> and to&nbsp;<EM>compose queries about knowledge</EM>. The twin goals would be to simplify communication and to enable intelligent software agents to participate at a high level in our online communications.</P> <P>I do not have any of the details worked out. I just know that so much of what I do via email in an ad hoc manner could be codified and structured and automated. I do belief that it is a very hard problem, but one worth pursuing.</P> <P>If anybody has reason to believe that my faith in this concept of knowledge mail is misplaced, lets hear it.</P> <P><STRONG>Open question: How might this blog post itself, which I submitted via an email message, be represented as machine-readable "knowledge" rather than ad hoc prose?</STRONG></P> <P>I suppose I should use the term <EM>knowledge blog</EM> or <EM>knowledge blog post</EM> to&nbsp;adapt the concept from mail to blogs.</P> <P>Or, maybe we should use the term <EM>knowledge message</EM> to generalize the concept to encompass email, blog posts, instant messages, etc. I think that makes sense.</P> <P><STRONG>Another open question: What problems would need to be solved to enable and provide support for online communications based on knowledge mail and knowledge&nbsp;messages?</STRONG></P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Finaxyz.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-7910101245603620997?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-1171253649242909612007-02-11T21:14:00.000-07:002007-02-11T21:14:09.323-07:00<P dir=ltr>I was thrilled to see the news that <A href="http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,128924-c,intel/article.html">Intel was testing an 80-core processor</A>. Not that such a chip by itself will be terribly useful for much more than research, experimentation, and niche applications, but it heralds a bigger leap into what I call <A href="http://opixia.com/techrants.htm">ultra-massively parallel computing</A> with thousands or even tens of thousands of simpler processors on a single chip, and a form of computing hardware that will finally be able to enable hard-core use of <STRONG>software agent&nbsp;technology</STRONG> where you have many thousands of lightweight processes running within a single system.</P> <P dir=ltr>The computing infrastructure of the future will be based not upon very complex cores, but <STRONG>very large numbers of simple cores</STRONG>.</P> <P dir=ltr>Nonetheless, this news of an 80-core chip is a truly exciting advance.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Opixia.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-117125364924290961?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-1166803154492769982006-12-22T08:59:00.000-07:002006-12-22T08:59:14.613-07:00<P>I'm sitting here in New York City on vacation (yes, Manhattan *is* relaxing for me) and may go see De Niro's new movie about the CIA, <EM>The Good Shepard</EM>. The motto in the movie is "Trust no one." That reminds me of one of the central, vital, and unsolved issues for software agent technology: <EM>trust</EM>. Sure, we have all manner of authentication and authorization <EM>identity</EM> systems, but ultimately they are extremely limited in scope and simply don't even come close to addressing the concerns of open software agent systems, let alone the issues related to integrating the online cyber world and the physical world and the human social world. Yes, it is true that ultimately there is no absolute trust, but in practice trust is a spectrum of degrees of trust, with a multitude of orthogonal spectrums of purposes of trust. Ultimately, we want to analyze the <EM>risk</EM> of engaging in any act&nbsp;based on&nbsp;trust. Even if all parties are absolutely honest, mistakes can be made and perceptions can be mistaken, so simply trying to authenticate identity and provenance of "facts" to the nth degree is insufficient to get to an absolute form of trust.</P> <P>Much of the technological interest in trust to date has focused on trust regarding identity, but a great looming problem for social computing is trust related to the truth of alleged facts and&nbsp;alleged knowledge claims. We talk about establishing <EM>contracts</EM> between software entities, but this presupposes that we trust that the parties are committed to honoring the terms of the contracts. Once again, it may not be so much a matter of judging sincerity of commitment, but judging the risk that the terms might not be honored due to mistakes or misperceptions or misinterpretation of the terms or ambiguous interpretation of the terms or a cascade of <EM>trust failures</EM> from other entities and other contracts, and also judging the risk of the consequences of failure modes for the contracts.</P> <P>We humans in our real physical and social worlds have massive difficulties with trust, either being too trustful, or not trustful enough, so one open question is whether our engineered social computing systems can do a much better job at the trust thing, even theoretically.</P> <P>We got ourselves into a global "war on terror" because we trusted the agenda of the Neoconservatives. Not to mention the fact that we trusted that previous administrations were "doing the right thing" on the counterterrorism front.</P> <P>We got ourselves into the quagmire of Iraq because we once again trusted the judgment of the Neoconservatives and we trusted their vetting of intelligence about Iraqi possession of weapons of mass destruction. We also trusted that WMDs were the actual motivation and agenda for the Neoconservatives.</P> <P>We are presently engaged in a stare-down contest and saber-rattling with Iran because we trust that the Neoconservatives are now right about Iran's commitment to turn a civilian nuclear energy program into a nuclear weapons development and deployment program. We also trust that the Neoconservatives are 100% correct in their assertion that Iran is&nbsp;the main source of funding and arms for Hezbollah in Lebanon.&nbsp;How likely is it that all of the "trust" at stake is likely to be found to be justified a few years from now? And so much more justified than the mistaken trust on the "war on terror" and Iraq?</P> <P>If we humans are capable of such lousy performance on the trust front in the real physical and social worlds when so many lives and no much money is at stake, how exactly do we expect to transcend these massive failures and incompetencies as we build trust systems in the online cyber world?</P> <P>This is a massive, open, unresolved issue.</P> <P>One technique is the statistical approach, such as used to address computer viruses and malware, but this is of no help when software agents are struggling with knowledge that is too limited to be statistically measurable, such as a contract between a pair of agents involving a small number of knowledge claims. Not to mention that the statistical approach is not 100% reliable. Although high statistical reliability can assure that large-scale systems can work overall, it is no solace for the statistically insignificant individuals who are greatly harmed by the statistically insignificant "errors". We need approaches that will simultaneously address the large-scale issues and the individual-level issues. Ultimately, we need systems that can work efficiently and reliably at the level of individual pairs of software agents and contracts.</P> <P>The <EM>Good Shepard</EM> approach of trusting no one does in fact have some merit and applicability to social computing, but just as the protagonist in the movie ran into difficulties by taking an absolute negative stance on trust, we need to assure that software agents in social computing systems are based on analysis of risk rather than assumption that truth and trust are binary on or off qualities.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Finaxyz.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-116680315449276998?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-1165195849528781362006-12-03T18:30:00.000-07:002006-12-03T18:30:50.113-07:00<P>There is an article in <EM>The New York Times</EM> by William Holstein entitled "<A href="http://www.nytimes.com:80/2006/12/03/jobs/03advi.html">And Now a Syllabus for the Service Economy</A>" which describes efforts by IBM to seed changes&nbsp;in academic information technology curricula to reflect the <EM>services</EM> aspect of systems, especially the "<EM>people aspect of businesses</EM>." Sounds like a great idea, but the proof is in the implementation.</P> <P>To my mind, this suggests an attempt to address the impedence mismatch between how information is stored in databases and how people actually <EM>use</EM> information. Computers deal with <EM>rules</EM>, while people have to <EM>cope with reality</EM>.</P> <P>My biggest concern is that this is in fact a huge research topic, and merely trying to <EM>teach</EM> it before the research has been done and before a sound infrastructure has been put in place is placing the cart before the horse.</P> <P>By all means, let's fund the basic research on the topic of a <EM>people-centric operating system</EM> and then try to implement such systems, and <EM>then</EM> we can build revamped information technology curricula around the concepts and infrastructure.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Opixia.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-116519584952878136?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-1163382810388723662006-11-12T18:53:00.000-07:002006-11-12T18:53:30.526-07:00<DIV> <P>It is nice to see that the NY Times in an article by John Markoff entitled "<A href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/12/business/12web.html">Entrepreneurs See a Web Guided by Common Sense</A>"&nbsp;is acknowledging the pursuit of <STRONG>Web 3.0</STRONG> as a successor to current Web 2.0 efforts. Alas, current efforts to leap forward from Wed 2.0 are far too vague, sketchy, halfhearted, and even ill-conceived or misguided to achieve even a fraction of my vision for <B><I><A href="http://agtivity.com/vision_of_consumer_applications_of_software_agent_technology.htm">The Consumer-Centric Knowledge Web - A Vision of Consumer Applications of Software Agent Technology - Enabling Consumer-Centric Knowledge-Based Computing</A></I></B>. Still, it is nice to see even a little forward progress.</P> <P>The Times article focused on <EM>data mining</EM> or <EM>knowledge mining</EM> of the existing Web, saying "<EM>computer scientists and a growing collection of start-up companies are finding new ways to mine human intelligence</EM>."</P> <P>The Times summarizes the whole Web 3.0 effort as:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <P><EM>Their goal is to add a layer of meaning on top of the existing Web that would make it less of a catalog and more of a guide — and even provide the foundation for systems that can reason in a human fashion. That level of artificial intelligence, with machines doing the thinking instead of simply following commands, has eluded researchers for more than half a century.</EM></P> <P><EM>Referred to as Web 3.0, the effort is in its infancy, and the very idea has given rise to skeptics who have called it an unobtainable vision. But the underlying technologies are rapidly gaining adherents, at big companies like </EM><A title=I.B.M. href="http://www.nytimes.com/redirect/marketwatch/redirect.ctx?MW=http://custom.marketwatch.com/custom/nyt-com/html-companyprofile.asp&amp;symb=IBM"><FONT color=#004276><EM>I.B.M.</EM></FONT></A><EM> and </EM><A title=Google href="http://www.nytimes.com/redirect/marketwatch/redirect.ctx?MW=http://custom.marketwatch.com/custom/nyt-com/html-companyprofile.asp&amp;symb=GOOG"><FONT color=#004276><EM>Google</EM></FONT></A><EM> as well as small ones. Their projects often center on simple, practical uses, from producing vacation recommendations to predicting the next hit song.</EM></P> <P><EM>But in the future, more powerful systems could act as personal advisers in areas as diverse as financial planning, with an intelligent system mapping out a retirement plan for a couple, for instance, or educational consulting, with the Web helping a high school student identify the right college. </EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Alas, nothing in the article really put any meat on the bones of the teaser from the title: <EM>guided by common sense</EM>. Sure, the Cyc effort does take a stab at "common sense", but falls far short of the kind of common sense that consumers expect from real people.</P> <P>Still, I welcome the Web 3.0 efforts, however meager they might be,&nbsp;since until we slog through them, most people won't have the mental frame of mind to grasp the full scope of what is needed for my Consumer-Centric Knowledge Web.</P> <P>Maybe I need to start calling my vision <STRONG>Web 4.0</STRONG> to make it clear&nbsp;what a long&nbsp;way we still really have to go to get to my vision for a <STRONG>Consumer-Centric Knowledge Web</STRONG>.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Opixia.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P></DIV><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-116338281038872366?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-1162666913758933192006-11-04T12:01:00.000-07:002006-11-04T12:01:53.806-07:00<DIV> <P>World Wide Web inventor Sir Tim Berners-Lee is one of the founding directors of a new joint research effort called the <A href="http://www.webscience.org/">Web Science Research Initiative (WSRI)</A> which will be a joint effort between the University of Southampton and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. As <A href="http://www.webscience.org/news/2006-11-02.php">the announcement</A> on Thursday, November 2, 2006&nbsp;states:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <P><EM>The University of Southampton and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology today announced the launch of a long-term research collaboration that aims to produce the fundamental scientific advances necessary to guide the future design and use of the World Wide Web.</EM></P> <P><EM>The Web Science Research Initiative (WSRI) will generate a research agenda for understanding the scientific, technical and social challenges underlying the growth of the Web. Of particular interest is the volume of information on the Web that documents more and more aspects of human activity and knowledge. WSRI research projects will weigh such questions as, how do we access information and assess its reliability? By what means may we assure its use complies with social and legal rules? How will we preserve the Web over time?</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>As Tim puts it, "<EM>As the Web celebrates its first decade of widespread use, we still know surprisingly little about how it evolved, and we have only scratched the surface of what could be realized with deeper scientific investigation into its design, operation and impact on society. The Web Science Research Initiative will allow researchers to take the Web seriously as an object of scientific inquiry, with the goal of helping to foster the Web’s growth and fulfill its great potential as a powerful tool for humanity.</EM>"</P> <P>There is a&nbsp;brief two-page description of "Web science" entitled&nbsp;"<A href="http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/313/5788/769?ijkey=o66bodkFqpcCs&amp;keytype=ref&amp;siteid=sci">Creating a Science of the Web</A>"&nbsp;in the August 11, 2006 issue of SCIENCE magazine.</P> <P>A much more elaborate description of the research issues can be found in the 130-page paper/treatise/book entitled "<A href="http://www.nowpublishers.com/product.aspx?product=WEB&amp;doi=1800000001"><SPAN class=cmssbx-10x-x-160>A Framework for Web</SPAN><SPAN class=cmssbx-10x-x-160>&nbsp;Science</SPAN></A>" (available free online) authored by Tim Berners-Lee of the Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CSAIL), Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Wendy Hall of the School of Electronics and Computer Science, University of Southampton, James A. Hendler of the Department of Computer Science, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Kieron O'Hara of the School of Electronics and Computer Science, University of Southampton, Nigel Shadbolt of the School of Electronics and Computer Science, University of Southampton, and Daniel J. Weitzner of the Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The abstract states the purpose concisely:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <P><EM>This text sets out a series of approaches to the analysis and synthesis of the World Wide Web, and other web-like information structures. A&nbsp;comprehensive set of research questions is outlined, together with a sub-disciplinary breakdown, emphasising the multi-faceted nature of the Web, and the multi-disciplinary nature of its study and development. These questions and approaches together set out an agenda for <SPAN class=cmti-10x-x-109>Web Science</SPAN>, the science of decentralised information systems. Web Science is required both as a way to understand the Web, and as a way to focus its development on key communicational and representational requirements. The text surveys central engineering issues, such as the development of the Semantic Web, Web services and P2P. Analytic approaches to discover the Web’s topology, or its graph-like structures, are examined. Finally, the Web as a technology is essentially socially embedded; therefore various issues and requirements for Web use and governance are also reviewed.</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>That's the simplified description:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <P><EM><STRONG><SPAN class=cmti-10x-x-109>Web Science -&nbsp;</SPAN>the science of decentralised information systems</STRONG></EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>This is a brand new effort and it is far too soon to judge its odds of success or the nature of its results, but I wholeheartedly welcome it and wish it well.</P> <P>For me personally, the big, big, big question is whether this new research initiative, as large and grand&nbsp;as it is,&nbsp;really will subsume and implement the goals that I put forth in my own "research manifesto" entitled "<A href="http://agtivity.com/vision_of_consumer_applications_of_software_agent_technology.htm">The Consumer-Centric Knowledge Web - A Vision of Consumer Applications of Software Agent Technology - Enabling Consumer-Centric Knowledge-Based Computing</A>." I'm sure there will be plenty of overlap, but at this early date I am actually not so hopeful that even TBL's grand WSRI will fulfill my vision for a Consumer-Centric Knowledge Web.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Opixia.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P></DIV><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-116266691375893319?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-1159152800456624492006-09-24T20:53:00.000-06:002006-09-24T20:53:20.570-06:00<DIV> <P>I was just thinking a little bit this weekend about the nature of communications and realized that what we really need to explore and exploit is the unification of computation, communication, and community. Each is worth exploration and exploitation on its own, but it is the various intersections of the three dimensions that hold the most promise.</P> <P>A few points:</P> <OL> <LI>Computation without communication is far less interesting.</LI> <LI>The potential for communications is far too limited without enhancing it with computation.</LI> <LI>Community can be dramatically turbocharged with advanced communications and advanced computing.</LI> <LI>Community gives a heart and soul to the raw technologies of computation and communication.</LI> <LI>To date, we have done a very poor job of integrating these three technological angles. Integration has always been an afterthought rather than a foundational concept.</LI> <LI>We need to rethink computation and assure that communication is handled at the same level as computation. Ditto for communication and computation.</LI> <LI>Maybe the hardest task is figuring out how to redefine computation so that community is a core foundation concept. The was part of my motivation with my thoughts on a <A href="http://agtivity.com/vision_of_consumer_applications_of_software_agent_technology.htm">Consumer-Centric Knowledge Web</A>&nbsp;and how to look at <EM>software agent technology</EM>.</LI></OL> <P>The key concept here is how to <EM>simultaneously</EM> think about compuation, communication, and community, rather than each on its own or the distinct pairings. I am not there yet, but it does seem like an interesting place to go. What might we even call the combination? I am tempted to continue to call it computing, or maybe Computing 2.0 or Computing 3.0 if you want to consider the Internet and Web as Computing 2.0.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Agtivity.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P></DIV><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-115915280045662449?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-1154286137341653142006-07-30T13:00:00.000-06:002006-07-30T13:02:17.353-06:00Since I am now a full-time employee of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft">The Evil Empire</a> and also looking to trim my expense budget a little, I have decided to terminate <a href="http://enteng.com/">EntEng.com</a> and moving it to <a href="http://basetechnology.com/EntEng">BaseTechnology.com/EntEng</a>. Most of the content remains intact and <a href="http://entengr.blogspot.com/">my Entrepreneurial blog</a> remains intact.<br /><br />I don't expect to do any regular updating of the entrepreneurial web site, but I will on occasion post commentary on the <a href="http://entengr.blogspot.com/">blog</a>.<br /><br />For email, please switch from <a href="mailto:Jack@EntEng.com">Jack@EntEng.com</a> to <a href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack@BaseTechnology.com</a>.<br /><br />Thanks, and sorry for the inconvenience.<br /><br />-- <a href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack Krupansky</a><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-115428613734165314?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-1153709561991924572006-07-23T20:52:00.000-06:002006-07-23T20:52:42.050-06:00<DIV> <P>There is a famous scene in the classic movie&nbsp;<A href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00079Z9VO/finaxyz-20">The Graduate</A> in which Dustin Hoffman's character is offered&nbsp;one word of&nbsp;career advice: "<EM><STRONG>plastics</STRONG></EM>." The field of plastics remains huge and will continue to be a huge part of our lives for many decades to come. But... but... the big challenge facing scientists and engineers and planners is how to redesign plastics and production processes so that plastics and related materials are not so heavily dependent on non-renewable fossil resources, particularly petroleum (crude oil)&nbsp;and natural gas. Plastics have been made from renewable materials in the past, but it turned out that petrochemicals had a lot of benefits as a feedstock. That needs to change, regardless of whether your reasoning is based on high oil prices, a belief in "Peak Oil", or simply a concern that we are overly dependent on the volatile Middle East. How many of us give even a second thought to tossing a plastic fork or Styrofoam box or plastic wrapper or plastic bag&nbsp;in the trash? But the simple fact is that every such act only adds to the future demand for production of crude oil and natural gas.</P> <P>Nanotechnology also has potential for the reengineering of renewable natural materials into replacements for the plastics that we use (and overuse) today.</P> <P>So, if you know anybody looking for a bright career future or who has the potential to be the kind of brilliant inventor who could kickstart a new billion-dollar industry, recycle that old advice given to "Ben" in <A href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00079Z9VO/finaxyz-20">The Graduate</A>: "<STRONG><EM>Plastics</EM></STRONG>", but expand it into "<STRONG><EM>reengineering of renewable natural materials as feedstocks for production of plastics</EM></STRONG>".</P> <P>Oh, and if you're curious about the kind of processes which&nbsp;<EM>could</EM> be involved, I'd offer one word: <STRONG><EM>algae</EM></STRONG>.There are plenty of other avenues of pursuit, but bio-engineering of plastic materials has much promise.</P> <P>And if you'd like to acquire the DVD for this classic film:</P> <P align=center><IFRAME style="WIDTH: 120px; HEIGHT: 240px" marginWidth=0 marginHeight=0 src="http://rcm.amazon.com/e/cm?t=finaxyz-20&amp;o=1&amp;p=8&amp;l=as1&amp;asins=B00079Z9VO&amp;fc1=000000&amp;IS2=1&amp;lt1=_blank&amp;lc1=0000ff&amp;bc1=000000&amp;bg1=ffffff&amp;f=ifr" frameBorder=0 scrolling=no></IFRAME></P> <P>Note: I do get a tiny commission if you purchase by clicking on the Amazon&nbsp;link (either the picture ad or the movie name in my text.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Finaxyz.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P></DIV><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-115370956199192457?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-1152417690253895802006-07-08T22:01:00.000-06:002006-07-08T22:01:30.303-06:00<DIV> <P>One of the big challenges in knowledge management and training software agents to learn is the concept of <EM>tacit knowledge</EM>, which encompasses that which we "know" and which can influence our thinking, and behavior, but which is difficult or even impossible to conciously communicate to others. Rather than conceptualize it as a binary state, <EM>is</EM> or <EM>is not</EM> tacit, it may make a lot more sense to look at it as a dimension, a spectrum of difficulty of conceptualization and communication.</P> <P>There are implicitly two&nbsp;aspects of&nbsp;tacit knowledge: our ability to conciously "think" about and contemplate knowledge, and our ability to convey or communicate that knowledge to others, including computational entities.</P> <P>Here are some of the degrees or levels of <EM>tacitness</EM> that immediately occur to me:</P> <UL> <LI>What we in principle or theory could <EM>never</EM> "know" or communicate, possibly due to the "computational" limits of our brains and minds.</LI> <LI>What is <EM>extremely difficult</EM> to "get our minds around" or articulate and then only with great effort or superior insight, but nonetheless can in theory be conceptualized and communicated.</LI> <LI>What is <EM>relatively difficult</EM> to conceptualize or communicate.</LI> <LI>What is relatively or moderately easy to "know" but much more difficult to <EM>communicate</EM>.</LI> <LI>What we believe or are sure that we know, but have great difficulty communicating.</LI> <LI>What we know, but can commincate only with&nbsp;individuals who "have been there" and already share a substantial amount of <EM>common knowldge</EM> or <EM>shared experience</EM>.</LI> <LI>What can be communicated easily only between individuals with a common culture.</LI> <LI>What can be communicated easily only within specific communities.</LI> <LI>What requires a <EM>shared expertise</EM>.</LI> <LI>What requires a shared <EM>world view</EM>.</LI> <LI>What can be conceptualized and communicated within a genetic species.</LI> <LI>What can be conceptualized and communicated with relative ease.</LI> <LI>What other entities may already know and a few clues or cues are all that are needed to "convey" understanding.</LI> <LI>What other entities already know and we simply need to reference.</LI> <LI>What others already <EM>knew</EM> before we even told them, what we didn't <EM>need</EM> to tell them and should have known that fact</LI> <LI>What we believe that others already know and believe need not be communicated.</LI></UL> <P dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">To communicate with people, software agents (computational agents) will need to have capabilities for coping with these and other aspects of <EM>tacit knowledge</EM>. In fact, <EM>intelligent software agents</EM> will need these capabilities even to interact with other computational entities.</P> <P dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">The eternal question is and will be: <EM><STRONG>What do you know and how can I know that I know what you know?</STRONG></EM> A deep&nbsp;understanding of tacit knowledge is essential to being able to answer that question.</P> <P dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Agtivity.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P></DIV><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-115241769025389580?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-1151563361290410922006-06-29T00:42:00.000-06:002006-06-29T00:42:41.340-06:00<DIV> <P>I'm finishing up my sixth week as a full-time employee at Microsoft this week as a Software Design Engineer in Test (or SDE/T or SDET)&nbsp;and still having a lot of fun at it. The work is interesting and challenging and gives me access to a lot of interesting people, technology, and toys, not to mention an interesting amount of money. It's not the same as working on your own or at a startup, but the energy level is still definitely "there".</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P></DIV><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-115156336129041092?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-1151390929536711522006-06-27T00:48:00.000-06:002006-06-27T00:48:49.646-06:00<DIV> <P>Sunday I finally took possesion of my new apartment in a brand new high-rise apartment building in Bellevue, Washington, which is the next town southwest of Redmond. Actually, it's more of a city. My building is 23 stories tall and isn't even close to being the tallest building in downtown Bellevue. The Westin hotel occupies the first 19 floors of a 42-story building and there are a bunch more tall building as well.</P> <P>I'm only on the fourth floor, but the building is on a slight hill and gives me a nice view of Mt. Rainier. There are plenty of restaurants and lots of shopping here in downtown Bellevue. It definitely has more of an urban feel, which I miss since I moved out of New York City.&nbsp;Downtown Redmond has more of a "sleepier", suburban&nbsp;feel.</P> <P>My apartment is so new that there are half a dozen unfinished work items including shelves and installation of a microwave oven.</P> <P>The rent isn't too bad. I only have a studio, but it is a decent size. It has built-in washer and dryer and air conditioning. There weren't many places that had studios when I was looking around, so I would have had to get a one-bedroom apartment and pay more than the brand new studio I got.</P> <P>I'm going to stick with dial-up Internet access until I pay off a big chunk of my back taxes. That may be another year, but I'm not into all the video and music stuff that forces many people to be dependent on broadband.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Agtivity.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P></DIV><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-115139092953671152?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-1150956861178667622006-06-22T00:14:00.000-06:002006-06-22T00:14:21.183-06:00<DIV> <P>The W3C now hosts the <STRONG><A href="http://www.w3.org/TR/wordnet-rdf/">RDF/OWL Representation of WordNet</A></STRONG> which is&nbsp;a standard conversion the Princeton WordNet&nbsp;to RDF/OWL:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <P><EM>WordNet [</EM><A href="http://www.w3.org/TR/wordnet-rdf/#fellbaum98"><EM>Fellbaum, 1998</EM></A><EM>] is a heavily-used lexical resource in natural-language processing and information retrieval. More recently, it has also been adopted in Semantic Web research community. It is used mainly for annotation and retrieval in different domains such as cultural heritage [</EM><A href="http://www.w3.org/TR/wordnet-rdf/#hollink03"><EM>Hollink et al., 2003</EM></A><EM>], product catalogs [</EM><A href="http://www.w3.org/TR/wordnet-rdf/#guarino99"><EM>Guarino et al., 1999</EM></A><EM>] and photo metadata [</EM><A href="http://www.w3.org/TR/wordnet-rdf/#brickley02"><EM>Brickley, 2002</EM></A><EM>]. It is also used to ground other vocabularies such as the FOAF schema [</EM><A href="http://www.w3.org/TR/wordnet-rdf/#brickley05"><EM>Brickley and Miller, 2005</EM></A><EM>], as background knowledge in ontology alignment tools and other applications (see </EM><A href="http://esw.w3.org/mt/esw/archives/cat_applications_and_demos.html"><EM>http://esw.w3.org/mt/esw/archives/cat_applications_and_demos.html</EM></A><EM> for a list). Currently there exist several conversions of WordNet to RDF(S) or OWL.</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I haven't looked at it myself, but this could be a major milestone in providing a starting point for shared vocabularies.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Agtivity.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P></DIV><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-115095686117866762?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-1150956711376730652006-06-22T00:11:00.000-06:002006-06-22T00:11:51.376-06:00<DIV> <P>The W3C now hosts the <STRONG><A href="http://www.w3.org/TR/wordnet-rdf/">RDF/OWL Representation of WordNet</A></STRONG> which is&nbsp;a standard conversion the Princeton WordNet&nbsp;to RDF/OWL:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <P><EM>WordNet [</EM><A href="http://www.w3.org/TR/wordnet-rdf/#fellbaum98"><EM>Fellbaum, 1998</EM></A><EM>] is a heavily-used lexical resource in natural-language processing and information retrieval. More recently, it has also been adopted in Semantic Web research community. It is used mainly for annotation and retrieval in different domains such as cultural heritage [</EM><A href="http://www.w3.org/TR/wordnet-rdf/#hollink03"><EM>Hollink et al., 2003</EM></A><EM>], product catalogs [</EM><A href="http://www.w3.org/TR/wordnet-rdf/#guarino99"><EM>Guarino et al., 1999</EM></A><EM>] and photo metadata [</EM><A href="http://www.w3.org/TR/wordnet-rdf/#brickley02"><EM>Brickley, 2002</EM></A><EM>]. It is also used to ground other vocabularies such as the FOAF schema [</EM><A href="http://www.w3.org/TR/wordnet-rdf/#brickley05"><EM>Brickley and Miller, 2005</EM></A><EM>], as background knowledge in ontology alignment tools and other applications (see </EM><A href="http://esw.w3.org/mt/esw/archives/cat_applications_and_demos.html"><EM>http://esw.w3.org/mt/esw/archives/cat_applications_and_demos.html</EM></A><EM> for a list). Currently there exist several conversions of WordNet to RDF(S) or OWL.</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I haven't looked at it myself, but this could be a major milestone in providing a starting point for shared vocabularies.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Agtivity.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P></DIV><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-115095671137673065?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-1150956577859559072006-06-22T00:09:00.000-06:002006-06-22T00:09:37.926-06:00<DIV> <P>The W3C now hosts the <STRONG><A href="http://www.w3.org/TR/wordnet-rdf/">RDF/OWL Representation of WordNet</A></STRONG> which is&nbsp;a standard conversion the Princeton WordNet&nbsp;to RDF/OWL:</P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <P><EM>WordNet [</EM><A href="http://www.w3.org/TR/wordnet-rdf/#fellbaum98"><EM>Fellbaum, 1998</EM></A><EM>] is a heavily-used lexical resource in natural-language processing and information retrieval. More recently, it has also been adopted in Semantic Web research community. It is used mainly for annotation and retrieval in different domains such as cultural heritage [</EM><A href="http://www.w3.org/TR/wordnet-rdf/#hollink03"><EM>Hollink et al., 2003</EM></A><EM>], product catalogs [</EM><A href="http://www.w3.org/TR/wordnet-rdf/#guarino99"><EM>Guarino et al., 1999</EM></A><EM>] and photo metadata [</EM><A href="http://www.w3.org/TR/wordnet-rdf/#brickley02"><EM>Brickley, 2002</EM></A><EM>]. It is also used to ground other vocabularies such as the FOAF schema [</EM><A href="http://www.w3.org/TR/wordnet-rdf/#brickley05"><EM>Brickley and Miller, 2005</EM></A><EM>], as background knowledge in ontology alignment tools and other applications (see </EM><A href="http://esw.w3.org/mt/esw/archives/cat_applications_and_demos.html"><EM>http://esw.w3.org/mt/esw/archives/cat_applications_and_demos.html</EM></A><EM> for a list). Currently there exist several conversions of WordNet to RDF(S) or OWL.</EM></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I haven't looked at it myself, but this could be a major milestone in providing a starting point for shared vocabularies.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Agtivity.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P></DIV><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-115095657785955907?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-1148759114548678952006-05-27T13:45:00.000-06:002006-05-27T13:45:14.616-06:00<DIV> <P>Someone asked in a blog comment what it feels like to be an employee again. I replied that my short answer is that it is too soon to tell. The "honeymoon" isn't yet over. I'll have a better answer in a few months.</P> <P>I'm really busy coming up to speed in the new job and waiting for my first pay check (not to mention my signing bonus).</P> <P>I'm also still in the process of moving my residence. I'll be looking at more apartments next Saturday and hoping to make a housing decision then or within another week as well. I may not be "settled" until late June. This process will consume a lot of my "spare" time and attention.</P> <P>All of this activity doesn't leave me with enough time to contemplate what I may be missing from the entrepreneurial world.</P> <P>In truth, my recent entrepreneurial efforts (past few years) were stalled, unsuccessful, unsatisfying, and distinctly unprofitable at the point where I contemplated employment anyway, so it's not like I had a very hard choice to make or a lot to regret.</P> <P>Two months ago I hadn't even imagined that I would consider working for my new employer as a full-time employee (known around here as a "blue badge FTE").</P> <P>If I had had some great entrepreneurial opportunity in my head two months ago I certainly would have pursued it, but I didn't, so there is nothing for me to "miss" there.</P> <P>My current plan is to spend the next five to ten years pursuing team-oriented opportunities at my new employer, and <EM>then</EM> consider my options going forward. I don't anticipate spending even two seconds of my time contemplating entrepreneurial opportunities over the next five years. I'll be too busy to do otherwise.</P> <P>I'll spend the next year just coming up to speed for my initial position. Then I'll spend another year or two after that in my current position, establishing as strong a performance track record and reputation&nbsp;as possible, and only then contemplate moving around in the company and what type of "career" development I might want to pursue, such as PhD, MBA, JD, or whatever, so that five years from now I'll have plenty of options to pick from. I have absoluetly <EM>no idea</EM> where I might be five years from now, either in terms or my nominal position or my career options.</P> <P>For now, I'll dedicate my personal time to assuring that my work life is extremely successful. Any "spare" time will be reserved for non-business pursuits (i.e., non-work and non-entrepreneurial).</P> <P>Whether I do any further blogging remains to be seen.</P> <P>As a final note, I'm not terribly happy with the overall state of the technology sector (my new employer excepted), including the dismal state of affairs with hardware architectures, new Web architecture and infrastructure&nbsp;and application development, the stumbling progress of the Semantic Web, the dismal state of Artificial Intelligence, and the lack of sufficiently robust and focused research programs in computer science and related disciplines.&nbsp;Far too much of what we're seeing as "entreprenurial" is incremental improvement, "me too", and re-hashing of existing products and services, with far too little significant innovation. Meanwhile so many real world needs go unmet&nbsp;because the technology simply isn't "there" yet.&nbsp;Maybe my "plan" is that if I wait another five (or ten) years, we might see some big enough technological advances that my entrepreneurial drive might once again be stimulated.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P></DIV><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-114875911454867895?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-1148198797798289622006-05-21T02:06:00.000-06:002006-05-21T02:06:37.846-06:00<DIV> <P>I've now finished my first week as a full-time employee of <STRONG>Microsoft</STRONG>, so it's now safe to say that my entrepreneurial and blogging efforts are now suspended indefinitely.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P></DIV><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-114819879779828962?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-1147847273999140662006-05-17T00:27:00.000-06:002006-05-17T00:27:54.060-06:00<DIV> <P>My entrepreneurial and blogging efforts are another day closer to being over as I finished my second day as a full-time employee at <STRONG>Microsoft</STRONG>. Most of the day was taking up with a second day of <STRONG>NEO</STRONG> (New Employee Orientation). I got my official "blue" badge, a free bus pass, my email "alias", unpacked my Dell computer, enrolled in Direct Deposit for my paycheck, and drank some free chocolate milk (one of the free beverage selections).</P> <P>The remaining step before I'll feel like a "real" employee is to attend my first work meeting (besides the new employee orientation). I'd rather&nbsp;get my first paycheck as well, just to be sure.</P> <P>Oh, and I need to read the <STRONG><EM>corporate blogging policy</EM></STRONG>.</P> <P>It was a short day since I arrived at 8:30 a.m. and left at 8:30 p.m. I'm going to try to get in by 6:30 a.m. on Wednesday and stay till about 8:00 p.m. I've got a lot of catching up to do before I'll be ahead of the curve.&nbsp;My manager&nbsp;assigned me <EM>two</EM> "peer mentors" to help me come up to speed even quicker.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P></DIV><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-114784727399914066?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-1147758760079853922006-05-15T23:52:00.000-06:002006-05-15T23:52:40.150-06:00<DIV> <P>My entrepreneurial and blogging efforts are almost over since today was was first day as an employee at <STRONG>Microsoft</STRONG>. I say "almost" bcause I won't consider myself to be a "real" and "official" employee until I have a badge (SmartCard cardkey with picture), an email address, direct-deposit is set up for my paycheck, and I have attended my first meeting (other than the formal new employee orientation). <EM>Then</EM> I'll consider that all of my entrepreneurial bridges have been burned.</P> <P>Tuesday is the second day of <STRONG>NEO</STRONG> (New Employee Orientation) and then I wander off to find my team.</P> <P>I'll&nbsp;be&nbsp;a <STRONG>Software Design Engineer in Test (SDE/T)</STRONG>, developing tests and software tools for testing in the <STRONG>Cellular Core team</STRONG> of the <STRONG>Mobile and Embedded Devices Product Group (MEDPG)</STRONG>&nbsp;in Redmond. That includes the low-level software that goes into smartphones and other gadgets based on Windows CE.</P> <P>I'm in temp housing, a nice apartment in a complex named <EM>The Trails of Redmond</EM>, for three weeks or so until I get my first paycheck so that I can afford to pay the first month of rent and the deposit. I've checked out a dozen apartments and found a cheap studio in downtown Bellevue that is good enough for my needs and is only a 20-minute bus ride, but I remain undecided and cannot commit to a lease until that first paycheck is in the bank (May 31 or June 1).</P> <P>I may eventually resume some amount of blogging in some form, but probably not for some time since I expect it will take 250% of my effort just to come up to speed and get at least slightly ahead of the curve over the next six months.</P> <P>Oh, and since I'll be joining "The Evil Empire", please... <EM>pray for my soul</EM>! The world may no longer be safe with me on Microsoft's side.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P></DIV><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-114775876007985392?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-1146758421106134782006-05-04T10:00:00.000-06:002006-05-04T10:00:21.116-06:00<DIV> <P>I've updated my concept paper entitled "<EM><A href="http://agtivity.com/vision_of_consumer_applications_of_software_agent_technology.htm">The Consumer-Centric Knowledge Web - A Vision of Consumer Applications of Software Agent Technology - Enabling Consumer-Centric Knowledge-Based Computing</A></EM>" which discusses a conceptual framework for knowledge-based applications that keep the consumer at the center&nbsp;using software agent technology. This is more than simply consumer-oriented, which means that vendors at least pay lip service to consumers,&nbsp;but consumer-centric means that the consumer is placed at the center and has full ownership of all of their data and is in full control, and where vendors are not in a position to dictate <EM>any</EM> terms.</P> <P>This concept paper is now <EM>frozen</EM> since I have accepted an offer for full-time employment with Microsoft (unrelated to anything in the paper) and will not be working on this concept as long as I am employed.</P></DIV> <DIV> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@Agtivity.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P></DIV><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-114675842110613478?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-1146678458804652262006-05-03T11:47:00.000-06:002006-05-03T11:47:38.856-06:00<DIV> <P>I've just posted an updated version of my proposal for a <STRONG><A href="http://basetechnology.com/dvpc.htm">Distributed Virtual Personal Computer (DVPC)</A></STRONG>.</P> <P>I still have no intention of personally designing or implementing the details of such a product or even developing a business around the concepts, but I would like <EM>somebody</EM> to do it so that one of these days I can buy a new PC and it will come with <A href="http://technorati.com/tag/DVPC" rel=tag>DVPC</A> right out of the box.</P> <P>This concept paper is now <EM>frozen</EM> since I have accepted an offer for full-time employment with Microsoft (unrelated to anything in the paper) and will not be working on this concept as long as I am employed.</P></DIV> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-114667845880465226?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-1146349733229484202006-04-29T16:28:00.000-06:002006-04-29T16:28:53.323-06:00<DIV> <P>My current entrepreneurial and blogging efforts will be drawing to a close over the next two weeks since I have accepted an offer from <STRONG>Microsoft</STRONG> to&nbsp;be&nbsp;a <STRONG>Software Design Engineer in Test (SDE/T)</STRONG>, developing tests and software tools for testing in the <STRONG>Cellular Core team</STRONG> of the <STRONG>Mobile and Embedded Devices Product Group (MEDPG)</STRONG>&nbsp;in Redmond. That includes the low-level software that goes into smartphones and other gadgets based on Windows CE.</P> <P>I may eventually resume some amount of blogging in some form, but probably not for some time since I expect it will take 250% of my effort just to come up to speed and get at least slightly ahead of the curve over the next six months.</P> <P>Oh, and since I'll be joining "The Evil Empire", please... <EM>pray for my soul</EM>! The world may no longer be safe with me on Microsoft's side.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P></DIV><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-114634973322948420?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-1145057320654193462006-04-14T17:28:00.000-06:002006-04-14T17:28:40.750-06:00<DIV> <P>I'm just clearing off my desk as I prepare to finish up with my last day at my current client, so I am now <EM>available</EM> for new assignments.</P> <P>My <A href="http://basetechnology.com/resume.htm">resume</A> can be found at: <A href="http://basetechnology.com/resume.htm">http://basetechnology.com/resume.htm</A>. I can <A href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">email</A>&nbsp;it in&nbsp;Word document format upon request.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P></DIV><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-114505732065419346?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-1144627091338423712006-04-09T17:58:00.000-06:002006-04-09T17:58:11.410-06:00<DIV> <P>I've just posted an updated version of my proposal for a <STRONG><A href="http://basetechnology.com/dvpc.htm">Distributed Virtual Personal Computer (DVPC)</A></STRONG>. Let me know what you think or if you know of competing proposals or products. Thanks.</P> <P>I still have no intention of personally designing or implementing the details of such a product or even developing a business around the concepts, but I would like <EM>somebody</EM> to do it so that one of these days I can buy a new PC and it will come with <A href="http://technorati.com/tag/DVPC" rel=tag>DVPC</A> right out of the box.</P></DIV> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-114462709133842371?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-1144517135405873712006-04-08T11:25:00.000-06:002006-04-08T11:25:35.456-06:00<P>If you're serious about sinking your teeth into the Java programming language, check out "<A href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0131872486/finaxyz-20">Thinking in Java (4th Edition)</A>" by Bruce Eckel.</P> <P align=center><A href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0131872486/finaxyz-20"><IMG alt="" hspace=0 src="http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/P/0131872486.01._AA240_SH20_SCLZZZZZZZ_.jpg" align=baseline border=0></A></P> <P>BTW, I get a commission from Amazon if you buy the book after clicking through <A href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0131872486/finaxyz-20">my link here</A>.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-114451713540587371?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-1143501993824716852006-03-27T16:26:00.000-07:002006-03-30T09:53:00.236-07:00<p>I'll be finishing up with my current client by the middle of April and working half-time until then, so I am now available to consider new engagements.</p><p>I am open to considering software development work, but I'd prefer to do some work related to blogging or venture capital (e.g., due diligence), possibly helping technology startups get off the ground.</p><p><a href="http://basetechnology.com/resume.htm">My resume</a> can be found here: <a href="http://basetechnology.com/resume.htm">http://basetechnology.com/resume.htm</a><br />Or, just Google my name.</p><p>-- <a href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack Krupansky</a></p><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-114350199382471685?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-1143501941270550292006-03-27T16:25:00.000-07:002006-03-30T09:52:35.230-07:00<p>I'll be finishing up with my current client by the middle of February and working half-time until then, so I am now available to consider new engagements.</p><p>I am open to considering software development work, but I'd prefer to do some work related to blogging or venture capital (e.g., due diligence), possibly helping technology startups get off the ground.</p><p><a href="http://basetechnology.com/resume.htm">My resume</a> can be found here: <a href="http://basetechnology.com/resume.htm">http://basetechnology.com/resume.htm</a><br />Or, just Google my name.</p><p>-- <a href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack Krupansky</a></p><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-114350194127055029?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-1143484154383919482006-03-27T11:29:00.000-07:002006-03-30T09:51:26.000-07:00Everybody is talking about (and experiencing) <a href="http://agtivity.com/def/asynchronous_javascript_and_xml.htm">Asynchronous JavaScript and XML</a>, otherwise known <a href="http://agtivity.com/def/ajax.htm">Ajax</a>. Now, my question is whether the proper term is AJAX or Ajax. I consulted the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ajax_%28programming%29">Wikipedia article</a> and it says "Ajax" and has an explicit discussion that undid attempts to change that to AJAX. Personally, I'll stick with Ajax, until the authoritative Wikipedia says otherwize. Besides, I HATE having to type all-caps terms.<br /><p>-- <a href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack Krupansky</a></p><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-114348415438391948?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-1142879686912775182006-03-20T11:34:00.000-07:002006-03-20T11:34:46.973-07:00<DIV> <P>I've&nbsp;posted an updated version of my&nbsp;14-page&nbsp;<A href="http://agtivity.com/consumer_centric_knowledge_web.ppt">PowerPoint presentation</A> that summarizes my thoughts&nbsp;for research&nbsp;efforts on&nbsp;what I've been calling <A href="http://agtivity.com/consumer_centric_knowledge_web.ppt">The Consumer-Centric Knowledge Web (CCKW)</A>.</P> <P>My updated, more-detailed, but still far from complete, white paper and idea notebook can be found at <A href="http://agtivity.com/vision_of_consumer_applications_of_software_agent_technology.htm">The Consumer-Centric Knowledge Web - A Vision of Consumer Applications of Software Agent Technology - Enabling Consumer-Centric Knowledge-Based Computing</A>. My "to do" list at the end of that paper now has 1,510 items on it, and I'm sure that list&nbsp;will continue to grow as I continue to do more background research.</P> <P>My next step, eventually, after tuning the PowerPoint presentation, is to write a 5-page summary paper.</P> <P>Note: CCKW is a proposal for a <EM>research</EM> project is is unlikely to exist as a usable product or service for years to come.</P></DIV> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-114287968691277518?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-1142094964302974932006-03-11T09:36:00.000-07:002006-03-11T09:36:04.340-07:00<DIV>Back on <A href="http://basetechnology.blogspot.com/2006/02/2006-oreilly-emerging-technology.html">February 10th I wrote about wishing that I could attend</A> the <A href="http://conferences.oreillynet.com/etech/">2006 O'Reilly Emerging Technology Conference (ETech)</A> held March 6-9, 2006 at the Manchester Grand Hyatt in San Diego, California, which was to&nbsp;focus on what is called the <EM><STRONG><A href="http://technorati.com/tag/Attention+Economy" rel=tag>Attention Economy</A></STRONG></EM>. Well, as expected, I was not able to attend the conference, but we can all now attend it retrospectively in a virtual manner by <A href="http://www.oreillynet.com/conferences/blog/etech/">reading and viewing a lot of the commentary about the conference</A>, which just ended two days ago. See O'Reilly's <A href="http://www.oreillynet.com/conferences/blog/etech/">ETech Conference News</A>.</DIV> <DIV> <P>Alas, I can still claim that I personally don't know anybody who attended the conference. It's a whole different world from the one that I live in.</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P></DIV><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-114209496430297493?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-1141758829092241922006-03-07T12:13:00.000-07:002006-03-07T12:13:49.140-07:00<DIV> <P>I've just posted an updated version of my proposal for a <STRONG><A href="http://basetechnology.com/dvpc.htm">Distributed Virtual Personal Computer (DVPC)</A></STRONG>. Let me know what you think or if you know of competing proposals or products. Thanks.</P> <P>I still have no intention of personally designing the details of such a product or even developing a business around the concepts, but I would like <EM>somebody</EM> to do it so that one of these days I can buy a new PC and it will come with DVPC right out of the box.</P></DIV> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-114175882909224192?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-1141609617777297482006-03-05T18:46:00.000-07:002006-03-05T18:46:57.806-07:00<DIV> <P>I've&nbsp;developed a 12-page&nbsp;<A href="http://agtivity.com/consumer_centric_knowledge_web.ppt">PowerPoint presentation</A> that summarizes my thoughts&nbsp;for research&nbsp;efforts on&nbsp;what I've been calling <A href="http://agtivity.com/consumer_centric_knowledge_web.ppt">The Consumer-Centric Knowledge Web</A>&nbsp;(CCKW).</P> <P>My more-detailed (but still far from complete) white paper and idea notebook can be found at <A href="http://agtivity.com/vision_of_consumer_applications_of_software_agent_technology.htm">The Consumer-Centric Knowledge Web - A Vision of Consumer Applications of Software Agent Technology - Enabling Consumer-Centric Knowledge-Based Computing</A>. My "to do" list at the end of that paper now has 1,286 items on it, and I'm sure that list&nbsp;will continue to grow as I continue to do more background research.</P> <P>I considered calling this effort COW, but I just don't like the uninspiring connotations of that acronym, so I'll stick with CCKW (Consumer-Centric Knowledge Web) for now. BTW, It turns out that CCKW is the abbreviation for counterclockwise.</P> <P>My next step, after tuning the PowerPoint presentation, is to write a 5-page summary paper.</P></DIV> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-114160961777729748?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-1141506545860496082006-03-04T14:09:00.000-07:002006-03-04T14:09:08.740-07:00<DIV> <P>Here's a detailed document, entitled "<A href="http://www.springer.com/sgw/cda/pageitems/document/cda_downloaddocument/0,11855,0-0-45-72797-0,00.pdf">Lecture Notes in Computer Science: Authors’ Instructions for the Preparation of Camera-Ready Contributions to LNCS/LNAI Proceedings</A>",&nbsp;that describes how you can go about organizing a&nbsp;<STRONG><EM>technical paper</EM></STRONG>, such as for a technical conference.</P></DIV> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-114150654586049608?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-1141498654373134742006-03-04T11:57:00.000-07:002006-03-04T11:57:34.870-07:00<DIV> <P>Here's a PowerPoint presentation, entitled "<A href="http://www.gmu.edu/departments/writingcenter/ppt/POSTER.PPT">Developing a Poster Presentation</A>",&nbsp;that describes how you can go about organizing a <EM><STRONG>poster presentation</STRONG></EM>, such as for a technical conference.</P></DIV> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack@BaseTechnology.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-114149865437313474?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10923155.post-1140895035730706882006-02-25T12:17:00.000-07:002006-02-25T12:17:15.920-07:00<DIV> <P>Every year there is a small but loyal group of former readers of the former <STRONG>Midnight Engineering</STRONG> magazine who gather in the Denver, Colorado area for a conference known as <STRONG>Entrepreneurial Connections</STRONG>, or <STRONG>EntConnect</STRONG> for short. These are people who have a background or interest in technology and are either running their own businesses or would <EM>like</EM> to be running their own businesses. Some attendees don't have quite the depth of technical background, but are simply interested in the special angle on business that the conference offers.</P> <P>This year's conference is being held on March 23-26, 2006.</P> <P>The conference is run by John Gaudio. Details on the conference can be found on his official conference web site at <A href="http://www.EntConnect.org">www.EntConnect.org</A>, or you can check out descriptions of past conferences at&nbsp;my <A href="http://enteng.com/">Enrepreneurial Engineers</A> web site.</P> <P>So, if you're in the Denver, Colorado area, or you live in a galaxy that is within teleportation range, and you're a technical entrepreneur or have entrepreneurial aspirations, consider checking out <STRONG>EntConnect</STRONG> this year. Even if it sounds as if you might not fit the profile of a typical attendee, you might consider the conference anyway. Sure, a lot of technology gets discussed, but the focus is running&nbsp;your own&nbsp;business and thinking like an entrepreneur.</P> <P>Tell John that I sent you. [Really -- I get a commission!]</P> <P>-- <A href="mailto:Jack.Krupansky@gmail.com">Jack Krupansky</A></P></DIV><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/10923155-114089503573070688?l=basetechnology.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Jack Krupanskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17254264642831755180noreply@blogger.com0