<html><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">
I will make specific replies to Danny's comments.<div><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div><div><br><div><div>On Mar 27, 2008, at 8:27 AM, Danny Ayers wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite">On 18/03/2008, <b class="gmail_sendername">Sandy Klausner</b> <<a href="mailto:klausner@coretalk.net">klausner@coretalk.net</a>> wrote:<div><span class="gmail_quote"></span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> Danny,<br> <br><br> "What does your vision look like?"<br> <br> <br>Again: <a href="http://www.coretalk.net">www.coretalk.net</a></blockquote><div><br>Interesting!<br><br>I've a lot of time for the mind map paradigm - in fact a few years ago spent a lot time working on a personal knowledgebase system [1] with this as the main view of a chunk of the Giant Global Graph. Cubicon sounds great!<br> <br>But -<br>[[<br>Cubicon consists of a <em>new infrastructure</em> that gives form to a <em>community viewpoint</em> where all knowledge systems are constructed from a common set of executable design components. This <em>commonality</em> enables recombinant components to be globally represented in a language neutral expression medium. <br> ]] <br></div><br>- that bit I'm not so sure about. The thing is, everyone already has their own approach to building executable components - LAMP setups, scrappy bits of Python, J2EE monstrosities, MS/OS X/Linux desktops. How might one achieve a decent level of adoption of a new infrastructure? Surely it'll be better to look for existing common interfaces, and build against them, thereby reusing what's already out there..?</div></blockquote><div><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div>The notion of being unsure about a "complete solution" may be contrasted with the mess we have with the current generation of "stuff". </div><div><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div><div>Any proposed move-ahead, like Cubicon, reality should be questioned, but with an open mind that realizes we, and venture capital, have become numb with the false advertising that is now characteristic of the IT sector. Being open in mind means looking objectively at what Cubicon is and why it is the way it is.</div><div><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div><div>The key here is that recombinant components are produced from a framework having a power to factor processes and data into specific dimensions, and thereby provide commonality that arises from user use patterns, rather then from programmer behavioral patterns. We free the marketplace from extra and non-useful (from the users side) control and entitlements. The programmer community has to adjust, but the over all value to the world, or information systems, economic systems etc is huge.</div><div><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div><div>The first round of development is provided with IP protection, and thus will benefit a small portion of the programmer community, and then after this the demand for "programming" should go down radically. Reuse means reuse, yes?</div><div><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div><div>This is what is new, the shift from programmer oriented IT to user oriented communication in an infrastructure that empowers collective real time behavior and thus "collective intelligence".</div><div><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div><div>We are, as a world civilization, just beginning to see this phenomenon with the popularity of Obama being captured by a growing community of new voters in the US, perhaps to change forever the nature of politics and the mass media. (This is just one example.)</div><div><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div><div><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div><div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div><br> <br>In other words -<br>[[<br>This automated service infrastructure will enable heterogeneous systems to effectively communicate and initiate rapid adoption of Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA).<br>]]<br>- something like that, only my bet would be on using (RESTful) HTTP+RDF to leverage the existing Web infrastructure, in other words go for the Semantic Web.<br><br>For my own stuff I've been gravitating towards an (almost) lowest-common-denominator kind of abstraction based around simple agents which will typically be comprised of a HTTP client, (access from) a HTTP server, a local RDF model and local behaviour. The common interface is the (Semantic) Web. Coincidentally I've recently been looking over the old IdeaGraph code with a view to seriously componentizing it so I can refactor it more closely to this approach. </div></blockquote><div><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div>Yes, the lowest common denominator approach. This is often seen. But like in a college mathematics class, if one teaches to the lowest common denominator, the students evolve the instruction in the director of having less and less capability.</div><div><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div><div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div><br><br>Cheers,<br>Danny.<br><br>[1] <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20031008162716/www.ideagraph.net/2003-06/screenshots.htm">http://web.archive.org/web/20031008162716/www.ideagraph.net/2003-06/screenshots.htm</a><br> </div>(oops, didn't realise it'd slipped off the Web)<br><br>-- <br><a href="http://dannyayers.com">http://dannyayers.com</a><br>~<br><a href="http://blogs.talis.com/nodalities/this_weeks_semantic_web/">http://blogs.talis.com/nodalities/this_weeks_semantic_web/</a></blockquote></div><br></div></body></html>