Anonymous Feedback on Robert Steele’s Appraisal of Analytic Foundations — Agreement & Extension

Corruption, Government, Ineptitude, IO Impotency, IO Sense-Making, Military, Officers Call
Got Crowd? BE the Force!
Got Crowd? BE the Force!

Robert,

I read your appraisal over several times. Essentially, in my opinion,  your understanding of the problems continues to be on the mark and remarkably consistent over the last twenty or so years.  Yet your work on both the process and products of intelligence is very high level and in this latest appraisal, as in your previous works, you leave it up to the imagination of the reader to figure out how to actually implement the ideas you so eloquently express. This I think is a mistake in that potential employers, impressed with you macro ideas, would be interested in how these ideas could be brought to the implementation stage. Attached is a supplement to your appraisal on collection and analysis.

In any event I hope that this finds you well and upbeat. You deserve a position that would reflect both your knowledge and your commitment to saving the IC from itself.

A Fan

Robert Steele
Robert Steele

ROBERT STEELE: The time has indeed come to create an alternative to the existing system. I have started to work with a select group across the emergent M4IS2/OSE network, on a firm geospatial foundation. While many of my ideas have been mis-appropriated and corrupted over the past 20 years, no one has actually attempted to implement the coherent vision — sources, softwares, and services all in one, and this time around, all open source, all multi-everything. The PhD thesis, the School of Future-Oriented Hybrid Governance, and the World Brain Institute — and perhaps even the Open Source Agency as a non-US international body — are the beginning of my final twenty-year run.  Intelligence with integrity. Something to contemplate.

Extention of Appraisal Details

Continue reading “Anonymous Feedback on Robert Steele's Appraisal of Analytic Foundations — Agreement & Extension”

Berto Jongman: Why “Big Data” Cannot Find Malaysian Airlines Aircraft

07 Other Atrocities, IO Impotency
Berto Jongman
Berto Jongman

Why ‘Big Data' Can't Find the Missing Malaysian Plane

The ongoing search for Flight 370 exposes the world's serious information gaps.

Isaac R. Porche III

US News & World Report, 1 May 2014

How can a commercial airliner vanish and remain lost for weeks in an age in which data on virtually everything is collected and maintained either publicly or secretly? The answer is “quite easily.” It is one thing to collect huge amounts of information, but it is another to be able to fuse it quickly and meaningfully.

Click on Image to Enlarge
Click on Image to Enlarge

Much has been made about the reluctance of countries involved in the search for Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 to share sensitive aircraft tracking data that could help locate the doomed plane. But that is not the only issue.

The inability to quickly connect the dots is largely a technical problem. The sensed data of the world aren’t inherently organized or co-located or structured to be interoperable, semantically or otherwise. Even if all the data were being shared openly, it is simply not easy to marry disparate, dispersed data stores and perform timely searches to find connections, coincidences or errant commercial aircraft.

Read rest of article.

See Also:

Big Data @ Phi Beta Iota

Malaysian Airlines @ Phi Beta Iota

Mini-Me: Google Hurting

Commerce, IO Impotency
Who?  Mini-Me?
Who? Mini-Me?

Huh?

A Personal Reflection On Google+

EXTRACT

The product that became Google+ developed over a lengthy gestation period. Key to its evolution was a model known as circles, which was popularized internally by Paul Adams and in a never published book called Social Circles. The idea as eventually implemented was simple: allow users to define how they relate to people by putting their contacts into different groups. That way, you could choose how you wanted your content to be shared, and complicate the limited sharing options offered by competitors like Facebook and Twitter.

In many key ways, Google+ was ahead of its time. Its internal product focus was on choice and privacy, which Google felt was the competitive advantage needed to beat the incumbents. It was reaching out to a demographic of users who had been turned off by the news about personal information leaking on Facebook, yet who were still interested in engaging socially online. The product leadership correctly predicted the trend in social that has made 2014 a banner for ephemeral communication.

What few understood, though, is that Google itself was part of the problem.

Continue reading “Mini-Me: Google Hurting”

Stephen E. Arnold: “Business Intelligence” aka Data Mining Marketplace Imploding — “Everything Must Go!”

Data, IO Impotency
Stephen E. Arnold
Stephen E. Arnold

Tibco, Business Intelligence, and Open Source—Not Search

I read “Consolidation Looms in Business Intelligence, as Tibco Buys Jaspersoft for $185M.” The write up is interesting, but not exactly congruent with my views. May I explain?

The article points out:

Enterprise software vendor TIBCO has acquired Jaspersoft, an open source business intelligence company, for approximately $185 million. It’s not an earth-shaking deal, but it could be a sign of things to come in an analytics software market full of companies and products that have a hard time standing out from the crowd.

MBAs will drooling at the thought of business intelligence deal making if the article’s premise is correct.

But there are several other angles in this Tibco Jaspersoft tie up.

Continue reading “Stephen E. Arnold: “Business Intelligence” aka Data Mining Marketplace Imploding — “Everything Must Go!””

Berto Jongman: Net Neutrality — Guide to and History of a Contested Idea

Corruption, Government, Idiocy, IO Impotency
Berto Jongman
Berto Jongman

Net Neutrality: A Guide to (and History of) a Contested Idea

If net neutrality is so important, why is it so controversial? It’s complicated.

Alexis C. Madrigal and Adrienne LaFrance Apr 25 2014

EXTRACT

But this debate isn't just about the specific wording of the possible FCC rules (though those are important). People have been talking about the principle of net neutrality, in one way or another, for more than 15 years, since Monica Lewinsky dominated the headlines.

This idea of net neutrality—this cherished idea, even, among Internet entrepreneurs and activists—has a long history, roughly as long as the commercial world wide web. It is, Harvard law professor Lawrence Lessig has argued, what makes the Internet special.

He used to call the principle e2e, for end to end: “e2e. Not b2b, or b2c, or c2b, or b2g, or g2b, but e2e. End to end. The core of the Internet, the core value that defined its power, the core truth that made innovation around it possible, is this e2e,” Lessig said in a 1999 talk. “The fact – a fact – that the network could not discriminate in the way that AT&T could.”

. . . . . . .

A decision by the FCC in 2002 to classify companies like Comcast as “information service providers” instead of “telecommunications carriers” ultimately undermined the agency's efforts to regulate those companies the way a telecommunication carrier would be regulated.

. . . . . . .

By common law, common carriers were 1) required to serve upon reasonable demand, any and all who sought out their services; 2) held to a high standard of care for the property entrusted to them; and 3) limited to incidental damages for breach of duty. The concept of common carriage crossed the Atlantic and became part of the American legal system. Common carriage was broadly applied to railroads and later other transportation as well as communications media. In 1901, following many state courts, the U.S. Supreme Court held that at common law– i.e., even without a specific statute– a telegraph company is a common carrier and owes a duty of non-discrimination. 

Read full article.

Continue reading “Berto Jongman: Net Neutrality — Guide to and History of a Contested Idea”

Stephen E. Arnold: IBM PR in Overdrive — IBM Substance Completely Lacking

IO Impotency
Stephen E. Arnold
Stephen E. Arnold

Watson and Shopping: No Service, Just an Assertion

I read “Make IBM’s Watson Your Personal Shopping Assistant.” IBM wants to leapfrog www.pricewatch.com, www.amazon.com, and the aging www.mysimon.com, among other shopping services.

Now quite a few people have embraced Amazon’s flawed, yet popular, recommendations service. I am trying to remember when I first noticed this somewhat annoying feature of the digital WalMart. I cannot recall. I am reminded of the weaknesses of the system each time I log in and see recommendations to my wife’s book selections. Undoubtedly she and I are not following Amazon’s best practices. My wife is pretty familiar with my user name and password, Amazon, and the ease with which she can order products (dog vitamins), novels (wonky mysteries infused with herring), and oddments I know won’t plug into my computer systems; for example, something for a faux soft drink machine.

My view is that for some folks, an Amazon habit is going (note the present progressive)  to be difficult to modify. Even though Amazon is struggling to deliver profit joy, the Amazon online shopping thing has quite a following.

Well, just in the nick of time–is it years too late?—IBM says it will apply the billion dollar baby to meet my shopping needs. Oh, yeah. Here’s what I learned from the write up:

Continue reading “Stephen E. Arnold: IBM PR in Overdrive — IBM Substance Completely Lacking”