Re: [topicmaps-comment] Genetic PSIs [Re: Topic Map domain,paradigmatic PSIs ...]

["Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@comcast.net>]

[Bernard Vatant]


> The idea of the day, for what it's worth :)
>
> "Who should publish our core PSIs?" "Under what domain?" etc ...
>
> This has led and will lead to endless debate and conflicts until we'll get
to understand
> and apply a very simple principle that has allowed complex information to
maintain itself
> on Earth against - so far - all possible disasters. Think about genetic
information.
>
> 1. It has to stay stable over the time.
> 2. But its supports are very fragile and bound to short-term destruction.
>
> Pretty much like PSIs information, right? I want my subject to stay
identified in the
> future - say a hundred years from now, not to hope for billions - but can
figure the risk
> that the current URI will be dead at some point in the near future is
quite high, whatever
> the trust I put on it right now. In fact, I've better assume that it will
be dead. Given
> the elusivity of technology, many Cretaceous-Trias crises are likely to
occur during the
> next century. But remember - good PSIs should never die!
>
> What is the solution proposed by life? Duplicate, replicate, distribute
all over the
> place. The essential genetic information is everywhere. This solution has
proven
> scalability and efficiency for over 3 billion years.
>
> So, if we figure PSIs like genetic material, supporting the identity of
subjects and able
> to deliver it to the external word, we should think about it, and push the
problem from:
>
> "What preferential URI should this PSI live under?"
> to
> "How should we distribute this PSI over so many equivalent URIs that the
life or death of
> any of them is without importance"
>

You know, this is frighteningly like Joseph Reagle's think piece about
security he posted to the RDF Interest list a week ago or so.  His paper is
at

http://www.w3.org/2002/03/key-free-trust.html

Take a look.

Cheers,

Tom P