Re: [unrev-II] Reception at SRI Honoring Doug's Award

Date: Mon Dec 25 2000 - 14:49:22 PST

  • Next message: Garold L. Johnson: "RE: [unrev-II] Reception at SRI Honoring Doug's Award"

    Doug spoke to the audience about historical and personal experiences,
    recognizing several individuals and contributions. One compelling set
    of sentences showed bootstrapping paradyms to augment evolutionary
    knowledge solutions, while utilizing revolutionary changes.

    Attention was brought to the idea of estimating the rate at which
    knowledge is increasing and the related topic of accelerating returns.
    OHS/DKR as a tool for distributed cooperative creating, recognizing,
    developing, processing, and utilizing human and machine knowledge, is
    needed to produce the needed accelerated returns to help us cope.

    From related work I remain convinced that the basic tools we need to
    provide a view of Doug's vision are there. Open Standards-track XML,
    XSL, DOM, Java, ECMA Script (and related tools), along with standardized
    approaches to developing km-oriented onologies and behaviors, provide
    the platform. Doug's definitons of interactor interfaces and system
    functionality provide the model. In this way OHS/DKR synergizes human
    sytems/tool system co-evolution to exploit the opportunity created by
    our our investment in computing.

    Doug, Thank You and everyone for the opportunity to attend this historic

    Best Wishes,

    -------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
    It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!

    Community email addresses:
      Post message:
      List owner:

    Shortcut URL to this page:

    attached mail follows:

    Your work of incorporating a detailed review of Doug's reception at SRI, honoring
    his award for the National Medal of Technology, into the SDS record is greatly

    I'm hoping other guests can contribute additional info about Augment/NLS and the
    launching of OHS/DKR, including some pictures of Doug and all of his colleagues,

    Rod Welch wrote:

    > Team,
    > Eric's ear for detail on our discussion yesterday about Paul's ideas on
    > fostering a climate of values to guide project objectives, is unmatched, per
    > below. Will work it into the record shortly.
    > In the meantime, here is a scant flavor of the proceedings for those near and
    > far, who could not attend the reception honoring Doug's award for the National
    > Medal of Technology....
    > Rod
    > Eric Armstrong wrote:
    > >
    > > First
    > > -----
    > > I'm glad to see a discussion centered around values,
    > > because I suspect that a statement of values has
    > > important implications for selecting a direction.
    > >
    > > At yesterday's well-attended reception for Doug's
    > > National Medal of Technology, this thread came up
    > > over and over again. In discussing it with Rod
    > > Welch and one other fellow, we identified several
    > > salient points:
    > > a) Given a wide range of options from which
    > > to choose, a statement of values may well
    > > narrow the selection.
    > >
    > > b) It would be good to know for sure that the
    > > direction we are choosing is within the
    > > set of "desirable" directions, according
    > > to those values.
    > >
    > > c) On the other hand, even a tool as simple
    > > as an ax can be used for good or for bad.
    > > So its not totally clear that a statement
    > > of values is much help when it comes to
    > > making tools.
    > >
    > > d) On the other other hand, there may well be
    > > tools which are hard to use for bad ends,
    > > and others which are hard to use for good
    > > ends.
    > >
    > > Second
    > > ------
    > > I was recently reminded of the dictum of unintended
    > > consequences. Basically, a drought-likely environment
    > > will only support so many people, and every time a
    > > drought occurs, some percentage dies off. This keeps
    > > the herd small that attempts to live there.
    > >
    > > When well-meaning attempts to avoid that consequence
    > > prevent the natural thinning, the herd grows large.
    > > At the next drought, the number of potential deaths
    > > is many times greater than it was, raising the sense
    > > of urgency and the importance of "doing the right
    > > thing" to prevent the consequences, because now,
    > > thousands are affected, rather than hundreds.
    > >
    > > As a result, the herd grows dramatically. The land
    > > now holds many times more people than it can
    > > comfortably support. Come the next drought, millions
    > > will die. Now the situation is truly desparate, and
    > > something simply has to be done.
    > >
    > > But during the NEXT drought...
    > >
    > > You see where this is heading. We're caught between
    > > our natural impulse to help individuals, and the
    > > counter-intutitive affects of our intervention.
    > > We reach a point where only by keeping up a
    > > constant stream of aid can the population continue
    > > to be supported. And sooner or later, we reach a
    > > point where we can't continue that level of
    > > assistance. What happens then?
    > >
    > > eGroups Sponsor
    > > [Click Here!]
    > >
    > > Community email addresses:
    > > Post message:
    > > Subscribe:
    > > Unsubscribe:
    > > List owner:
    > >
    > > Shortcut URL to this page:
    > >
    > Community email addresses:
    > Post message:
    > Subscribe:
    > Unsubscribe:
    > List owner:
    > Shortcut URL to this page:

    Community email addresses:
      Post message:
      List owner:

    Shortcut URL to this page:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Dec 25 2000 - 15:00:04 PST