[topicmaps-comment] FW: [eventChemistry] on where eventChemistry is now

[psp <beadmaster@ontologystream.com>]

-----Original Message-----
From: psp [mailto:beadmaster@ontologyStream.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2002 10:33 AM
To: eventChemistry
Cc: Richard Linger; Kumar Nochur; Inc. Fourth Wave Group; Edward C.
Swanstrom; Douglas Weidner; Dgrey25
Subject: [eventChemistry] on where eventChemistry is now




I am preparing to move over the heads of industry and financial managers and
appeal directly to the White House.

I understand Dick Ballard's warning about once creditability is lost.
However, I have long ago lost the ability to find creditability with a
system of thought that is focused on financial arguments about short term
gain.

At one point, the philosophical position can be made that the technology
funding system has (or should have) lost creditability and that the
BCNGroup.org has been warning about this funding system consistanty since
our (from Georgetown Univesity) proposal to the White House in 1992 to map
the intellectual property of the FSU.  Such a mapping would show that
sufficient information technology of a totally different type than
Artificial Intelligence was developed and demonstrated.  But such a mapping
would also upset the funding ecosystem that companies like SAIC, (etc etc.)
and others grow fat on.

It is about a false paradigm on what machine intelligence can do, and the
absolute grip that this paradigm has on the public purse.  The second part
of the BCNGroup history is here:

http://www.bcngroup.org/area3/manhattan/sindex.htm

The third part of the history is here:

http://www.ontologystream.com/SLIP/index1.htm



The issue of one of National Security.

As I have warned, Windows XP and the .NET revolution opens our Informational
Infrastructure up to a learning process that leads quickly to the disruption
of Western financial activities.  (And yet, the OSI IMID system can not be
deployed in the CERTs  .... and for what reason?)

It is not private and it is not covered by non-disclosure.  It is not
business and it is not about profit.  It is not classified.   It is about
our economic system surviving 2002 and it is about principle.


***

There is two parts to this problem.

First, the blocking problem is the strangle hold that stong AI has on the
funding sources that has held the power of the public purse for four or five
decades.

Second, the emerging problem is that hacking the Internet will be done more
and more by the terrorism cells as they understand that our (society's)
central vulnerability (the central vulnerability of Western commericalism)
is this notion that computing is a natural process.


So the New War could become not only a haves against have nots, but also a
natural systems against artificial systems.

The natural systems will win, guys...........  The natural systems will win.
Even if they are Islamic fundamentalists.  It is hands down.  We will be
catch believing in the myth of Artificial Intelligence and in our technology
procurement systems (DARPA, NSF and NIST).

Our trouble will be not biological terrorism, but economic collapse......
if the Internet becomes a place of even greater instability.



****

We can still act to bring to our technologists the fact that computing is
NOT a natural system.  We can fund a project that develops "Informational
Transparancy with Selective Attention" over the Internet transactions.

This Project should be called "The Manhattan Project for Knowledge Science",
and will be directed at protecting the Informational Infrastructure of the
Western world.

The humans that currently work in the Regional CERTs just need the tools to
"see" what is occuring in critical parts of the infrastructure.  Artificial
Intelligence and "computing" can not and will not do this by itself.

***

For my part, I am faced when the question of when I give up on the
procurement system, and recognize that (as Dick points out) creditability is
lost.  It is not creditability about my understanding of the problem of
Incident Management of AI or IA.  It is about my loyality to a system the
covers each and every true advance.

I am happy if the system "works".  But if the system does not work, then a
group has to form around the concept of moving to the top of the policy
ladder with the proof that the procurement of technology process does not
work in the case where we need machines to help us see into the machine
world.









------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Tiny Wireless Camera under $80!
Order Now! FREE VCR Commander!
Click Here - Only 1 Day Left!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/WoOlbB/7.PDAA/ySSFAA/0EHolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
eventChemistry-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/