[topicmaps-comment] a comment

[psp <beadmaster@ontologystream.com>]

A short comment.

One must assume that the world has a rational form and that things that
ought to be will be.  However, we see all the time that this is NOT the
case.  What is generally involved is some type of social power... and often
this is cultural or economic.

OSI is putting it's work into the public domain because OSI can not find a
normal way to pay it's two salaries.  We had planned in July to put the
algorithms in patent applications, but the person who was to write the
patents, failed to see that this was important.  So this process was
aborted...  out of necessity.  The work had to be developed anyway and
expressed without the patent protection.

So the basic design work will go into a book form the notes at:

http://www.ontologystream.com/SLIP/files/LinksandAtoms.htm

We are looking for a publisher now (anyone?)

BUT this is not a problem exclusive to OSI. Now is it?

Our strategy is set out in:

Part 2: The use of capital to shift the paradigm

of:

http://www.ontologystream.com/aSLIP/files/stratification.htm

***

If you care to join in a new type of innovation to technology adoption
process, then please consider joining the BCNGroup.org or perhaps the KMPro
group recently being developed by Doug Weidner.  (Doug is not part of OSI or
BCNGroup... but I just regard his recent efforts to be noteworthy).  I also
note here that Ed Swanstrom's work has developed, since his leaving KMCI, in
a way that successfully engages both the cognitive scientists at several
leading cognitive science departments and the ANSI standards process.

But if you wish to criticize OSI, or me, please reflect on what the problem
is that I face.

The innovation that I have clearly developed and that can be openly
evaluated is promising.  So the "system" should make available the proper
amount of investment so that this promise becomes actually achieved.  Right?
What is wrong with this "logic"?

One of my advisors recently told me that I should hire a full time fund
raiser.  Sigh... but this is part of the problem...  after creating a new
technology, developing tutorials on how to use the technology, grounding
this technology in linguistics, logic, neuroscience, and systems theory;
someone has the nerve to suggest that OSI has also the responsibility to
court venture capital.

There is no money to hire a full time fund raiser.  If anyone here is one of
those, then please consider working of 10% of the company if funding is
found.

Well, OSI is me and Dr. Murray (very part time) and Don Mitchell.  We have
no debt, and no money.  What we have is software and innovation and an
understanding of how to solve the cyber warfare problem (that we may soon
face big time).  We can also develop other verticals for the same software:

http://www.ontologystream.com/aSLIP/home.htm


Where is the mind of those who need to make good investments?  Can they not
see for themselves?  Does this capital system work or just appear to work
(if one does not look closely?)  But "work" I mean NOT the preservation of
the technology of the past, but the integration of innovation into the
present.

Is an reasoned expectation of huge profit sufficient?

with respects..

and with hope for the New Year.


Dr. Paul Prueitt
Founder (1997) BCNGroup.org
President, OntologyStream