Re: [unrev-II] Community Networking (beyond OHS & towards a wireless device Bill of Rights for extra bootstrapping leverage: B boosting A and C boosting B)

From: John J. Deneen (
Date: Mon Jul 02 2001 - 12:34:37 PDT

  • Next message: Jack Park: "[unrev-II] Making cyberspace collaboration work"

    Here's an interesting set of high-leverage CoDIAK capabilities. E.g.,
    DNA as IP for wireless sensor webs linked to Cognitive Radios for extra
    bootstrapping leverage of "onto-diversity knowledge" for the Global

    Bernard Vatant ( says:
    ... "If we do not want to feed the totalitarian and colonialist soil,
    the tools we are now thinking about and develop have to preserve and
    sustain what I like to call *ontodiversity*. But we have learnt from
    nature that biodiversity is grounded on a single strong and versatile
    information code. That is the most amazing discovery of the past
    century. DNA is without contest the better information standard so far,
    allowing very subtle information interchanges between very different
    organisms. So what we have to invent is something like DNA for knowledge
    technologies. Some minimal common standard toolkit, able to support and
    help develop a large scope of views of the world and knowledge
    communities, allowing them to live independently but to share whatever
    they want anytime they want, and not forcing them to share everything
    all the time (we have to admit there is over 90% of human knowledge that
    you and I really don't care to share)." ...

    Jack Pack ( says:
    "Is there a dna in there? I don't know. I rather think that the tool
    itself is the dna -- a convenient way to hang the particles of
    understanding that the learner evolves onto a picture frame (a map of
    the phenotype?)."

    The flowthrough MEMS-based DNA chip Genosensor project at ORNL
    ( says:
    The porous substrates have several important advantages over the flat
    surface DNA chips

       * greatly improved hybridization kinetics
       * superiour detection sensitivity
       * ability to analyze dilute solutions of nucleic acids
       * direct detection of heat-denatured PCR fragments without prior
         isolation of single strands

    Prof. Bob Feanza ( says:
    MetaGraph/Labscape is a collaborative effort to produce a framework and
    set of tools for modeling, storing, and querying biological information.


    Paul Saffo (Dir. Institute for the Future) suggests potential
    CoDIAK-Activities in the future are:
    “In the next decade, we are going to add sensory organs to our devices
    and networks. Processing plus sensors will set the stage for the next
    revolution—interaction. We mean the interaction of electronic devices
    with the physical world on our behalf. Sensors do not just have to stop
    at mere sensing. The sensor decade will really be a sensor/effector
    decade, where devices will not only observe things; they will also
    manipulate them.”
    < >

    BusinessWeek says:

       * "In the next century, planet earth will don an electronic skin. It
         will use the Internet as a scaffold to support and transmit its
         sensations. This skin is already being stitched together. It
         consists of millions of embedded electronic measuring devices:
         thermostats, pressure gauges, pollution detectors, cameras,
         microphones, glucose sensors, EKGs, electroencephalographs. These
         will probe and monitor cities and endangered species, the
         atmosphere, our ships, highways and fleets of trucks, our
         conversations, our bodies--even our dreams.

       * Ten years from now, there will be trillions of such telemetric
         systems, each with a microprocessor brain and a (Cognitive) radio.
         Consultant Ernst & Young predicts that by 2010, there will be
         10,000 telemetric devices for every human being on the planet.
         They'll be in constant contact with one another. But the
         communication won't be at our plodding verbal pace. ''Fifty
         kilobits per second is slow,'' huffs Horst L. Stormer, a Nobel
         prize-winning physicist employed by Lucent Technologies Inc.'s Bell
         Laboratories and Columbia University. Machines will prefer to talk
         at gigabit speeds and higher--so fast that humans will catch only
         scattered snippets of the discussion.

       * What will the earth's new skin permit us to feel? How will we use
         its surges of sensation? For several years--maybe for a
         decade--there will be no central nervous system to manage this vast
         signaling network. Certainly there will be no central intelligence.
         But many scientists believe that some qualities of self-awareness
         will emerge once the Net is sensually enhanced and emulates the
         complexity of the human brain.

       * Sensuality is only one force pushing the Net toward intelligence.
         An eerie symbiosis of human and machine effort is also starting to
         evolve. The Internet creates a channel for thousands of programmers
         around the world to collaborate on software development and
         debugging. That has produced an evolutionary leap in software: The
         ''open source'' movement that spawned the Linux operating system.
         The Linux world behaves as an ecosystem--''a self-correcting
         spontaneous order,'' as open-source pioneer Eric Raymond describes
         it in his Net manifesto, The Cathedral and the Bazaar. Through
         collaboration, this community can push past the technical barriers
         to machine intelligence." -- 21 Ideas for the 21st Century
         < >

    In a bootstrapping perspective, Doug Engelbart says:
    [Figure 3 shows an organization with activity A representing the core business activity (i.e. product R&D, manufacturing , marketing, sales, operations...), supported by activity B representing the activity of improving A. B should be a permanent continuous improvement activity. Note that B is improving A''s Human-Tool Augmentation System.]

    [Figure 3 shows an organization with activity A representing the core
    business activity (i.e. product R&D, manufacturing , marketing, sales,
    operations...), supported by activity B (e.g, internet browser/email)
    representing the activity of improving A. B should be a permanent
    continuous improvement activity. Note that B is improving A''s
    Human-Tool Augmentation System.] 4A1
    < >

    Executive efforts to assess and improve B-Activity funding, staffing,
    and high-level approach would qualify as a C Activity. C Activities
    would also include introducing new knowledge and skills into the B
    Activity, providing better means for participatory interaction with its
    A-Activity clients, or improving how pilot operations are managed. 4B

    Doug says C-Activities provide "extra bootstrapping leverage" for
    multi-payoff capability:

    [Figure 5 shows the same organization with B boosting A and C boosting B. Added are two feedback loops to illustrate B''s output boosting itself as well as A, and C''s output boosting itself as well as B. C''s output highlighted with the text: Investment criteria: going after the point of greates leverage--a high-performance knowledge-work capability launched by C boosts A, B, and C.]

    [Figure 5 shows the same organization with B boosting A and C boosting
    B. Added are two feedback loops to illustrate B''s output boosting
    itself as well as A, and C''s output boosting itself as well as B. C''s
    output highlighted with the text: Investment criteria: going after the
    point of greater leverage--a high-performance knowledge-work capability
    launched by C boosts A, B, and C.] 5D1
    < >

    Over the years I have tried various ways to label and characterize the
    above-mentioned key knowledge capabilities. For lack of an established
    term, I have settled on an acronym that embraces the main concepts of
    this cluster of high-leverage capabilities - CODIAK: 6A

    The COncurrent Development, Integration and Application of Knowledge.

    As complexity and urgency increase, the need for highly effective CODIAK
    capabilities will become increasingly urgent. Increased pressure for
    reduced product cycle time, and for more and more work to be done
    concurrently, is forcing unprecedented coordination across project
    functions and organizational boundaries. Yet most organizations do not
    have a comprehensive picture of what knowledge work is, and of which
    aspects would be most profitable to improve. 6B

    The CODIAK capability is not only the basic machinery that propels our
    organizations, it also provides the key capabilities for their steering,
    navigating and self repair. And the body of applicable knowledge
    developed represents a critically valuable asset. The CODIAK capability
    is crucial in most A Activities across the organization, whether in
    strategic planning, marketing, R&D, production, customer support, or
    operations. It is also crucial in the B and C Activities, whether
    identifying needs and opportunities, designing and deploying solutions,
    or incorporating lessons learned - which of course is also used in key
    A-Activity work. As such, the CODIAK capability should be considered a
    core business competency in the organization's capability
    infrastructure, and is an ideal candidate for early improvement to
    achieve the extra bootstrapping leverage discussed above in Figure-5. 6C

    For best exposure to full CODIAK issues, it helps to consider heavy
    knowledge-intensive activities such as a large, complex project.
    Figure-6 represents the high-level core of such a CODIAK process. In the
    center is a basic organizational unit, representing the interactive
    knowledge domains of a single individual, or of individuals or groups
    within a project team, department, functional unit, division, task
    force, committee, whole organization, community, or association (any of
    which might be inter- or intra- organizational). 6D

    Each organizational unit is continuously analyzing, digesting,
    integrating, collaborating, developing, applying, and re-using its
    knowledge, much of which is ingested from its external environment
    (which could be outside of, or within, the same organization). 6E

    B boosting A?
    Dave Hughes (NSF PI, Biological Science by Wireless Projects,, < >) says:

    On the day after his 72 nd birthday, Dave Hughes described his latest
    wireless communication project with the enthusiasm of a 12 year-old. The
    National Science Foundation has granted him one million dollars to spend
    the next three years developing ways for field scientists to wirelessly
    retrieve and access data collected at remote locations, via the

       * “My self appointed mission is to hook up all the environmental
         scientists in the whole damn world,” he says, which comes under the
         umbrella of his larger goal: “To connect up all 6 billion brains on
         this planet individually, each with the other, through all the ways
         that information goes in - the eyes, the ears, the mouth and the
         fingers. That’s what I’m zeroed in on.”

       * "Anyone connected to the Internet in laboratories, science classes
         in schools, or even at home, can listen in real time to the rare
         tiny frogs. ... Other applications will link sensors measuring such
         things as chemistry, effects of light, growth, weather, and water
         properties in multiple environments." <

       * "I said every damn Cocqui frog's going to have an IP number. We may
         be putting something around his neck or embedding in its ear. Or if
         we're really sophisticated, we'll read it out of his DNA. DNA as IP
         numbers." < >< >< >

    C boosting B?
    Kevin Delin, leader of the sensor web project at NASA’s Jet Propulsion
    Laboratory ( says:

       * "The sensor web allows you to make measurements on a large scale,
         like in remote sensing, but with the sensitivity of in situ
         instruments. ... A major thrust of our current effort is to develop
         a sensor web that can detect, identify and monitor any biological
         activity. For example, trace biosignature gases are very important
         if you are a biogeochemist trying to understand the carbon cycle on
         Earth or searching for microorganisms living beneath the surface of
         a planet. ... Consequently, the sensor web "can perform intelligent
         autonomous operations in uncertain environments, respond to
         changing environmental conditions and carry out automated diagnosis
         and recovery. Sensor webs can have as much of an impact on the uses
         of sensors as the Internet did on the uses of computers."

       * "Sensor webs are developmental collections of sensor pods that
         could be scattered over land or water areas or other regions of
         interest to gather data on spatial and temporal patterns of
         relatively slowly changing physical, chemical, or biological
         phenomena in those regions. Each sensor pod would be a node in a
         data-gathering/data-communication network that would span a region
         of interest. Each sensor pod would contain two modules: (1) a
         transducer module that would interact with the environment to
         gather the desired data and (2) a communication module. ...

       * The use of intraweb, node-to-node communication would reduce the
         power needed to transmit data out of a web. It would also make it
         possible to reduce the energy consumed by power-hungry sensors: Web
         nodes could query each other to track the movements of
         microclimatic or other fronts over the web, so that power-hungry
         sensors could be activated only when a front is known to be
         passing. In other words, intraweb communication enables a nonlinear
         increase in the value of the local data collected in much the same
         way that an aggregate of neurons exhibits more intelligence than
         does a single neuron. Moreover, the synergistic interaction among
         many separate node transducers would increase the value of the
         collected data by providing instantaneous correlation across the

       * A sensor web would be a relatively cheap instrument because sensor
         pods could be mass-produced, taking advantage of economies of
         scale. Because of this cheapness, individual sensor pods could be
         regarded as expendable. As a further consequence, it would be
         possible to "reseed" a sensor web with fresh nodes to replace ones
         that have failed; thus, the sensor web could be repeatedly renewed,
         enabling it to operate for an indefinitely long time.

       * A sensor web could be made as redundant and/or as dense as desired
         by simply distributing as many nodes as desired over a given survey
         area. Redundancy would, of course, render the sensor web tolerant
         to failures of individual pods. High density could be utilized to
         achieve high spatial resolution and/or to obtain statistically
         significant numbers of data when surveying biological or other
         phenomena that are inherently stochastic.

       * Sensor webs could be useful in almost any endeavor in which there
         is a need for low-power, low-bandwidth, long-term monitoring over
         large areas. For example, they could be used to monitor
         microclimates and concentrations of nutrients for agricultural
         purposes, to track flows of toxins in ground water, to monitor
         traffic, or to monitor seismicity in a survey area." <

    B boosting A and C boosting B?
    Meanwhile, Dave Hughes (NSF PI, Biological Science by Wireless Projects)
    is helping Dewayne Hendricks (CEO at gain more visibility
    within the FCC by using his very high profile for acquiring $6 Million
    from NSF and EDUCAUSE grants for experimenting with the RF-Cognitve
    Radio in the Mt. Diablo Open R&D Wireless Testbed.

    Hughes says that he and Hendricks share insight into the FCC and have
    both been wrestling with the same problem - the FCC rules for power and
    frequencies. According to Hughes, the most significant decision that the
    FCC could make is to lower the frequencies through which unlicensed
    radios can operate, thereby enabling spread spectrum transmissions to
    pass through buildings. He also advocates an increase in available
    power, believing that with sufficient power and low enough frequencies,
    remote rural areas can readily use spread spectrum radios to join an
    Internet network. “The problem is that they stuffed these no license
    radios up into the garbage bin bands - the part 15 bands - and that’s up
    there where microwave ovens are, and cordless phones,” he says.

    But Hughes is optimistic that change will come. Both he and Hendricks
    talk in terms of “revolutionary” and “paradigm shifting” when describing
    the impact on the communications industry of digitally modified data
    being transmitted by radio waves. “We’re in this messy period of a
    revolution in radio communications,” says Hughes. “This industry is only
    15 years old. But the processors during that time have gotten faster,
    better and cheaper; and the faster, better and cheaper they are the
    higher the bandwidth, the lower the cost and the less the interference.
    And that is a revolution.”
    < >
    < >

    In an in-depth interview, Dave Hughes says:
    The steps here is that National Environmental Observatory Network (NEON)
    is a proposed project and they're having workshops, (this was the
    second) for which they bring in scientists. The focus is across
    disciplines from biological through environmental networking and
    computational. And the concept is interconnecting the scientists, the
    data and the databases and the visualizations and the standardization of
    data across disciplines. All of which requires a step up in data
    collection and reporting infrastructure.

    Hughes: I'll mention NEON, which everybody seems to know about. National
    Environmental Observatory Network. And the word
    'observatory' is kind of key here, because what they're doing is
    gathering huge amounts of data from remote monitors.

    COOK Report: So you're seeing a huge movement under foot in
    environmental science and in other parts of the science world to use
    wireless monitors.

    Hughes: I would describe it as a sudden awareness that wireless is a big
    piece of the answer - data collection - to what they want to do.

    COOK Report: And it's now economically feasible to do it and, if they
    get out and do it, it's going to be another huge input of bandwidth into
    the Internet?

    Hughes: Yes. Because you must also understand the observatory concept
    here, the observatory means it isn't just the scientists getting data,
    it means that you and I can look at the damn thing. Everybody. Citizen
    science, said Larry Smarr. Meaning you can't afford to have high paid
    university researchers going out and getting all the data. This is a
    direct quote from him - you need to train 9-year-olds to collect data.

    But that's, of course, fundamental to the Internet. And it's fundamental
    to the IP flow that's there and the wireless just permits
    this in places that are inconceivable. And it's going to be extremely
    important to biologists and environmental scientists, because their
    problem is dealing with data and sensing and knowing what's going on in
    the most remote ways, way beyond where any commercial wire line is ever
    going to go.

    Well, in closing, everything I am doing with wireless, from remote
    cabins in the mountains to frogs in the rainforest, is laying down the
    techniques for using wireless to every human being on this planet,
    wherever they are. And at data rates up to full motion real
    time video, affordably. There is a revolution coming for the Internet,
    thanks to terrestrial, no license wireless, digital signal processors,
    smart software, IP servers, satellites and the universal connectability
    of the entire global net.

       * Software Defined Smart (Cognitive) Radios

    COOK Report: So what are they doing at the FCC?

    Hughes: There's a Notice of Inquiry out and it will be discussed next
    week at the recently formed FCC Telecommunciations Advisory Council -
    TAC. - The NOI is brand new and that is on the subject of a Software
    Defined Radio (SDR). One where smart software controls the radio - its
    power, its frequency spread, and other technical characteristics.

    That's what Dewayne and I recommended back in April of '98 in our
    Scientific American article. We must permit the manufacture of smart
    radios which set their frequencies. And set their own power levels.
    Keeping the power to the minimum. It's a very, very important idea. We
    are moving away from the idea that radios have to be dumb and fixed and
    made for one set of emission rules. The radios now can be smart,
    intelligent and self-regulating, like the Internet. But that's another
    way to get not only more bang for the buck, but also to minimize
    interference in congested areas.

    If you have smart radios, built to FCC specifications so the
    'self-regulation' really works, then the FCC could raise the power
    rules! To 10, 20 watts! Then in the really rural areas, where distance
    is the problem, but where interference in those bands is
    minimal or non-existent, they could run full power - 20 watts, with
    higher gain antennas. 50, 100, 250 miles. But at shorter distances and
    in urban areas where interference is, or can be, a problem, the radios
    set themselves to, say, a quarter watt. Cause that's all they need! But
    it has to be approved by the regulators, the FCC, which is way behind
    the power curve on approving these new possibilities. Maybe the recent
    creation of the Telecommunications Advisory Council to the FCC will help
    speed up change. My colleague Dewayne Hendricks is on it. And he is
    doing through his Dandian company on the island of Tonga, in the South
    Pacific. There, as they strive to link hundreds of islands, the Crown
    Prince sets the spectrum rules, not the FCC.

    I submit the principle of 'smart radios' (and smart antennas) is a very
    fundamental answer to lots of 'scarce spectrum' issues
    nationally, and internationally, when coupled with digitally massaged
    data across wide bands of spectrum. George Glider talks about these
    things theoretically. We are doing them in the field, practically.

    And remember that most of these radios also have sub channels that you
    can jump to. That's one way that they can it make so that
    everybody doesn't have to be in the same sub set. For example, in the
    Freewave radio, you can have 15 different settings within 902 to 928Mhz.
    And what does that mean? That means you can have this radio sitting here
    and communicating with a distant radio while you can place a radio right
    next to the first, operate it on the same general frequencies, and not
    have it interfere with the first radio.

    Now, that can be set manually, of course, or they can even be set by
    being logged into. Now you're starting to talk about having about the
    little buggers scan their operating environment where they might find
    other Breezecoms in the area with some potential interference. Having
    done this, they make sure they do not interfere by setting themselves to
    operate in a different part of the authorized spectrum. And the FCC with
    the NOI (Notice of Inquiry, where it is asking 'the industry' to
    comment) has thrown the possibility of a world with such capabilities
    out there. There's going to be a debate, both technical and regulatory,
    because technology that operates under these premises makes it possible
    change the very way that the FCC regulates spectrum.

    It's not just the dumb hardware of the past, grand fathered in forever,
    and it's not just the fact that it's no license and it's
    spread spectrum. But now we're getting into the area with the software
    defined radios, where, if the FCC is smart, they will also
    shorten the life of licenses. Manufacturers must upgrade their
    capabilities or lose their certification for their unsold radios. For
    we know greater capabilities are coming along in software, radios,
    modulation, and antenna design. We are in an era of accelerating
    progress of digital radio design and operation.

    Joseph Mitola III ( says:
    "Cognitive radio is the path along which the control systems of software
    radio are migrating. Location-aware research, especially in Europe
    marked the beginning of the move towards cognitive radio. As radios
    embed increasingly complex and realistic models of their environments,
    users, and networks, they begin to approach what an outside observer
    might call rational, or common-sense behavior. … The benefits of a
    standard reference ontology for radio have been argued [2], and the SDR
    Forum began work in February, 2000, on the use of XML for radio domain
    management "
    < >

    Kalle R. Kontson, IIT RESEARCH INSTITUTE, ( says for
    CoDIAK apabilities need a wireless device Bill of Rights:

       * Article 1: Any intelligent wireless device may, on a
         non-interference basis, use any frequency, frequencies or
         bandwidth, at any time, to perform its function.
       * Article 1, Tenet 1: To exercise rights under this Article,
         intelligent devices must be mentally competent to accurately
         determine the possibility of interference that may result from
         their use of the spectrum, and have the moral character to not do
         so if that possibility might infringe on the rights of other users.
       * Article 1, Tenet 2: To exercise rights under this Article,
         intelligent devices must actively use the wireless spectrum within
         the minimum time, spatial and bandwidth constraints necessary to
         accomplish the function. Squatting on spectrum is strictly
       * Article 2: All users of the spectrum shall have the right to
         operate without harmful electromagnetic interference from other
       * Article 2, Tenet 1: Priority of rights under this Article may be
         determined by the proper authorities only in cases of National
         emergency, safety of life or situations of extreme public interest.
       * Article 2, Tenet 2: Rights under this Article may be exercised
         only when the systems exercising the rights are designed , as
         determined by the state of the practice, to be reasonably resistant
         in interference.
       * Article 3: All licensing, auctioning, selling or otherwise
         disposition of the rights to frequencies and spectrum usage shall
         be subordinate to , and controlled by Articles 1 and 2, above.

    Grant Bowman wrote:

    > Local examples are SFLan and
    > The term community networking can also mean many different things.
    > Silicon Valley Public Access Link is a Free-net(sm) that began
    > operation
    > in Santa Clara County in 1994. There is also a national organization,
    > the Association for Community Networking that has been involved with
    > community and some economic development for almost as long. They just
    > finished up an annual meeting in San Diego where the president gave a
    > compelling closing plenary speech.
    > --
    > -- Grant Bowman <>
    > * Jack Park <> [010701 12:49]:
    > >
    > >
    > > "ink and several others sent in the latest Cringely column where he
    > > discusses creating a long-range 802.11b network using high-tech
    > tools like
    > > a telescope and bribery. Sean Clifford sent in guide to creating
    > your own
    > > long-range antenna: "Have some old PrimeStar hardware laying around?
    > Do
    > > something useful with it by turning it into an IEEE 802.11 wireless
    > > networking antenna. This electrical engineering professor uses an
    > Airport,
    > > but any access point should work fine." If you're at all interested
    > in this
    > > sort of stuff, get involved with one of the community wireless
    > networks
    > > springing up"
    > Community email addresses:
    > Post message:
    > Subscribe:
    > Unsubscribe:
    > List owner:
    > Shortcut URL to this page:
    > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jul 02 2001 - 12:47:58 PDT