Architected Futures™

Tools and strategies ... for boiling the ocean

Joe's World

Knowledge Architecture driven Futures Insights

<one marketing oriented sales pitch>

Warning - Very Strange Reading Ahead

Material from here down to the blog posting stuff is part of the "needs help" part of the thought experiment. You may want to skip it. It's trying to write to a possible audience of a later version of the software. When and if EATS is upgraded to the competencies I'm describing in the architecture and design parts of the website documentation, then that EATS, or Annie, needs to be introduced to people for them to be able to use it. Some of the following elements are ideas that are "time advanced" projections of how that might occur. To make it even more problematic, it is written as one stream for everybody. 

I need to warn you (whoever is reading this), that this is currently a chaordic scattering, of a stream of consciousness, organized as a web site, to force myself to commit to writing a system description, for an idea. And to open the idea for collaborative evaluation and discussion.

Your head may not hurt as much if you approach some of it like a strange form of science fiction novel. One option would be strange new version of an Orson Wells radio drama production of H.G.Wells' War of the Worlds; updated to time synchronize between the storyline and the story-telling; for at least part of the story. That will make it a lot easier to handle my multi-stream commentary coming at you. If you try to read it all as a story, it probably sucks (The time gets all screwed up.). It's not a technical specification like you've ever seen before, the language is way off, and some is probably gibberish because they are notes to myself. But, there are clearly portions that I am writing that are meant to be technical specifications. They should be some what self-evident. Consider them some form of pseudo-specification in a Game Manual kind of book, for fans. Ultimately, the system will need a whole set of manuals. The intention is to be able to service that need from facilities like whatever it is that you are using to read this web page, a browser kind of thing on a computer, a tablet, a phone, whatever. How Does the Real World Work? A version of "How Things Work in Your Home, and How To Repair Them," but for real world stuff which the components know how to research or model.

I did a version of a procedure manual generator like that back in the 80's, to demonstrate compliance with regulations in the financial industry. The issues were more on the data maintenance side than on the manual generation, which tends to be the case, I think. Anyway, there are a lot of "two or more parts" to the story.  And a lot of changes of perspective. In the "time" perspective, one is right now, as I write. And then there are time references in terms of "real world" (the one we live in) and various virtual worlds, one of which is called "Real World."  Points of View and Points of Reference may get confusing. I've tried to keep that in mind. 

There is also a lot of jargon. Sometimes I just let loose with a stream of buzz words or initials. Like VSM (Stafford Beer's Viable System Model) without bothering to explain them. They initials come from multiple disciplines, so whether or not you get them will be whether you "speak" various technical specialties. I've tried to soften that with a lighter language and Sci-Fi references, analogies, metaphors, etc to make the reading easier for non-specialists. I hope I haven't destroyed it for both parties. 

I felt I had to just "stream it" for a period of time and try to lay it out as a web site, with a due date for publication. I was trying to put down stuff that shoots out and comes back from a confluence of vectors and intersecting spaces, and make it orderly and easy to read. Well, this is the first pass at that, due date 1/1/2017. It's a "sketch." A beginning, for opening discussion. Hopefully, by the end of the year, it will make sense to more than just me.

Cook's Corner - Tech World (Service Entrance)

Mechanics (theory guys), repairmen (consultants), cooks (architects, technicians) and some others may be interested in a different approach to the site. What I would term a form of "service entrance." General members are also free to use that "portal"  if they desire, as hobbyists, makers or just interested parties. But it's a different, technical climb into the arena. This is where we will do some more "direct" talking about things like those pictures at the bottom of this page.

Systems Thinking, Upside Down

Systems thinking drives to a conclusion of "E pluribus unum" out of many, one; the whole of a well designed system is not only more than any one part, it is greater than the sum of its parts1. In systems, "the one" has "emergent" properties and/or characteristics and/or features, that do not exist in the individual parts. It's only when they "come together" in certain patterns that these features emerge, and become useful. If that's true, which I think it is, why do we as a society value the beneficial care and feeding of the few over the many. Usually, that defines a system with one or more of the following characteristics: It's broken, inefficient, poorly designed, a startup, or a prototype which you can afford to throw away and rebuild. We've built a lot of prototypes since we left that Garden of Eden savanna. We have had a couple of tens of thousands of years practice to prepare for where we are today, maybe more. (Human history is based on writing, and wall paintings of the ancients, but we also know about Lucy2 and others. I doubt we'll ever get a single date for our awakening event.) We need to think about how to get this stuff right. We only have one planet, at least that's the current situation. Not knowing what we're doing, not doing it fully cooperatively, and not having a game plan on where we are going is getting dangerous. We're disturbing stuff in the living room with games that should be "played out in the school yard." Instead, it's happening in board rooms. Bad for business folks. We are winning battles and losing the war. We're making money, some of us, and losing our values, the ones that are more important than dollars, because we're losing focus. Truth, in its various forms, is more important than power. The happiest and probably smartest people on the planet are not an identity set with the financially rich ones. (Look at the smile on a child's face as they go about "discovering" things. All of them. The rich ones, and the "poor" ones. Discovery, and the use of human intelligence to create things, and solve problems, and wonder. That's priceless.) At least that's one person's viewpoint.

Pardon the Clutter - Shared Knowledge Building In Process

If you are here early, and it's all confusion and nonsense, don't just go away, but don't write me any notes either. Come back in January 2017. January 1st will be opening day. If it doesn't make sense then, write me a note. In fact, if it makes sense then, write me a note too! I'd like to hear your opinions. Personal acknowledgements will be a function of time and resources, but maybe I can post all comments, which based on today's politics will probably need to be moderated, as a section of the web site. Any volunteers for moderators?

There is a word used below, ChaordicGoogle it. You have to keep it in mind when using this site. Hopefully less so as time goes by, but it's going to be a factor of life around here. It basically means organized chaos. That word has a lot to do with understanding how things work, and why, and solving extreme problems, wicked problems. Reading some of this stuff will be like drinking from the proverbial fire hose. But I want a lot of it to be more like sipping tea, or enjoying a fine wine. But it needs some work to get there. In some cases a lot of work. And I'm working as fast as I can. I want to move this site, and the world I live in (and will leave to my grandson), further along the scale from Chaos, to a Chaordic enterprise, to a structured, highly effective, chaordic tool. Like Dee Hock did for BankAmericard, now VISA. "It's a journey."

Here's another item to keep in the back of your mind. The content on this site could use an editor, and some technical writing assistance. I'm a one man shop right now and can't afford that level of help. Readers can help me help you by making comments about how the writing can be improved. 

A Better Way To Do Stuff

Have you ever wondered, how realistic was the Jetsons3? In the future, is it realistic to have a job where all you have to do is push a button once in a while, and get paid a good salary for doing only that? And that's pretty much what most people get paid to do. And everybody's living reasonably well, in their own unique styles. Well, ... you'll probably need to choose between at least two buttons; and, oh, when you aren't trying to decide which button to push, your employer would appreciate it if you'd play some computer games. So, the Jetson's may have exaggerated a little, but I think that's exactly where we're headed, and I know how it's going to happen, ... and why George was worth every credit that he was paid. (Don't tell anyone; but, "He was a knowledge worker!" He got paid for what he knew, not how it did it.)

Would you like to know how to create a balanced portfolio in a regulated economy such that you can accurately ensure economic growth and vitality over extended periods of time, with "full employment," free enterprise, and real quality of life delivery for the global population? I think there's a way, and it doesn't have a 1% problem.

Are you tired of adversarial politics that are so poison that we immediately choose up sides before we even understand what the issue is, and almost nothing gets accomplished, or stays accomplished, especially if it was the other guys who did it in the first place? I sure am. And, I think I've got some tools to help put people, real human beings, back in the driver's seat. And, cut down on bureaucracy at the same time, reduce the cost of government, balance the budget, assure First Class services, and give everyone in the world a paid vacation every year. Well, maybe not that last one, ... unless they all really want it, or a significant majority wants to pay for it.

How do you like the way the world is working today? Would you like to think, do you hope, that we might be able to change it so it gets better in the future? Do you think that, with the right changes, we could pretty much guarantee, with reasonably accurate certainty, what it can be made to look and operate like, "in the future." (Insurance companies might be willing to give you low rate insurance for any slip ups, because they won't have to pay out very often.) Ever wonder how Nostradamus was able to make those predictions? I used to, but I think I figured out his secret.

Would you like to know? Would you like to be able to apply it to your own circumstances? Would you like to be able to plan to guarantee a better environment for your grandchildren? I think I know the formula. I'm willing to share it. But it takes some involvement on your part too. Nothing you can't or won't be able to do, unless you don't want to, which is okay. But there's no free lunch. Not really. For anybody. "Join now and be a first adopter." Ever hear that one before? Ever hear of "the bleeding edge?" (You know why it's called "bleeding" right?)

Would you like a personal assistant, an AI, that runs on your phone and can help you solve thorny problems, or explain how and why things work? The same assistant that can make accurate predictions about what's going to happen if ... ? The same assistant that can help you make tough decisions, about complex things, personalized to your needs, wants, circumstances and value systems? I think that this form of technology is right around the corner, as in "real soon now." And it will work for you personally, or you collaborating with others for joint problem solving, decision making, or prognostication.

Can you be in two places at the same time? How about three? or 35? Quite possibly! But what do you mean by "being in multiple places?" What is "a place?" What is that "makes you be there?"

Maybe I'm crazy, maybe I'm wrong. But what if I'm not? Maybe this represents my having moved wholesale into a science fiction (fantasy?) dream land (the Matrix?), but maybe its a real reflection of the engineering state of the art we've reached as a species, and maybe it's already been done, or maybe it hasn't, but it could be. I know large pieces of it have been done, because I can see them all around. But you can't just throw bigger and bigger pieces in a bag, shake it, and have something coordinated drop out. For one thing, when the bag breaks, and the pieces fall on people, it hurts. A lot! (Bigger pieces hurt more. But you knew that. But it's good to remember, because some pieces are like icebergs and you can't really "see" how big they are.) That works (the bag thing) in fiction, fantasy actually, where the monkey writes the Pulitzer Prize winning great American novel. Not so much, not at all in fact, in the real world. However, there are fiction, and fantasy stories that are useful for understanding of real world stuff. (See foot notes below.) There were some every bright, insightful people who wrote most of that. That creativity and insightfulness may be a critical facility that's part of being human, I don't know. But the ability to dream, and then rationalize those dreams into action is one heck of a kick that I know separates us from the rest of the species on this planet. And, as far as I can tell, people all over the planet have got it. But we aren't making use of it as a shared resource. Tragedy of the Commons.

Look here for an article on the benefits of modeling

If they were real, how would the Borg have worked? Would you like to learn more? <<<<<< Click the link!

Web Site Navigation

The organization of this web site, like everything else in this "realm," is multi-dimensional. But it does have enough organization to provide a top level organization to the seeming chaos of the site. (It's just like my physical desk. There are piles and piles and piles. Ask anyone I've worked with. It's always been like that. They see piles. I see knowledge grouped into organized, disorganized clumps.) It's called chaordic organization. Organized chaos. (I need an assistant; but they better not mess with those piles or I'm going to be in a world of hurt for a bit.)

This web site is trying to become a portal to a collaborative working and learning environment, a systems architecture description (specification, developer's manual, etc.), science-based {{fiction} novel}, interactive game design plan for an MMORPG (Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game), and personal soapbox4). Try saying that MMORPG thing even 1 time, quickly. (Use the link to see what that is if you don't already know.) It is at different stages of development on each of those "axes" (plural of axis, a "dimensioning" term, like x/y/z coordinates). Anyway, the mix of that is chaotic when it's not organized in a comprehensible pattern. I'm trying to bring some organization to the stuff that fills my office and my head. So that I can share it with you and allow you to better comprehend me, and what I'm talking about. And, so I can finally clean up my office and throw the papers and notes away (the books probably stay). I know some of you, but not that many. I'm a kind of hermit that way. Anyway, this is a shot at communication with the potential for collaboration. I've received valued input from many. I've processed that input, formed conclusions, and produced ideas. I want to share those ideas, and, if you wish, collaborate on further ideas. That's why I'm here. A semi-retired, hermit, architectural engineer with an "Aha!" You're welcome to browse, and interact.

You may notice that some of this is written in the present tense, and when you look, that's not quite what you found. Stop. Go back to the top of the page. Did you see anything about "under construction," or words to that effect. I'm an architect. It's done when I have a model that demonstrates to me that it works. After that it's a contractor responsibility. And I'm here to consult and ensure that its done correctly. I don't swing a hammer anymore. Except for fun. And to do some serious experimentation to prove a solution, or develop an abstract facility. If this actually works for you, and you want more of it to work better, you need to get involved. No free lunch without paying. Free as in dollars, paying as in whatever contribution your talents provide. (You could even earn a badge.)

Perspectives

The web site is organized into three major groups that are "views" of subsets or full sets of the same information, approached from three points of view, or frameworks of utilization. What does that mean?

You can probably get to anything on the website using any one of the three major menu sets by "drilling down" from any set. You don't have to pick the "right" group to "start" in the "right place" and trace a tree. Pick the scheme that feels the most familiar. Or, you can ignore the groups and just "search." But, if you are task oriented, you will probably find it easier to find or do whatever you want by using one of the menu sets.

The major views are:

  • Field of Study (Subjects) Fields include the full compendium of the fields of education and research, since that is the superset that would define "subjects" in the real world. Particular, but not exclusive, early focus will be devoted fields related to cybernetics, since that is the focal of the relationship to systems thinking and AI.
  • Community, which is predefined to include, and be limited to, the human race. Community is both the modelers (game builders), and the subject of the models (games), the human population. Community members are "stakeholders" and holders of "points of view" regarding architectural products. You go to "community" to interact with: other members, the models, model architecture materials, etc. (Which you might also find from within Cybernetics.)
  • Content, which is more conceived of a a "direct interface" with the Architected Futures technology, rather than the other two interfaces, which is more modelers talking about the technology and what they want to do with it. Content is where you just do it, whatever it is. Build an app. Whatever. Think of Wikipedia. The other two "views" involve talk about editors, and the wiki tools and language, and moderation, and whether "portals" are somehow different from regular pages. Content just deals with the content of the page. Use that page to do something. For AF, using "content" is using AF to "do something." (Content has both a "human" UX and can also be accessed as a "computer-to-computer" interface. Hypothetically, your computer could read, and maybe be authorized to update, content.)

Subjects (Fields of Study)

Subjects specify hazy boundaries around "fields of study." There can be overlap, but there is also defined distinction between groups. Ultimately, all subjects in all groups are related. (You could trace your way from "airplane" to "fish" through a portal called "fluid dynamics.") The organization of these groups within Architected Futures is an internally decided organization. It is decided by the membership (currently a very beneficial democratic autocracy of one), hopefully based on reason and logic. If it needs to change, it does. But stability is a good thing. If it needs change, the sooner that is identified and done the better off everything is. Because it's much easier to update a database index than it is to re-orient your head. For the "shared knowledge" in the knowledgebase, It would be a "quick fix." Call it out. This is probably the second most day-to-day useful point of view, after word/phrase search.

It implements James Martin's encyclopedia concept, the knowledge warehouse, a form of structured Wikipedia describing in an organized, standardized way (including free form text), everything the system knows, or can derive about all of the systems that have been defined to it. A Watson. A knowledge library. It defines the system's awareness of the real and hypothesized world(s). While it's part of a "database" stored inside a computer, parts of it can only really be interpreted by people. Both other parts, working your way through millions of relationships in milliseconds, that a job for a computer. Creating harmony between those two "points of view," that is Augmented Intelligence, AI.

Subject is designed for browsing. If you are interested in cosmology, drift out to that section. Artificial Intelligence, off to the left of Religion. You are more likely to bump into things like "Hot Topics" or "New Information" within a subject area being highlighted using this approach. (As opposed to Content approach described below.)

Community

Also hazy boundaries for organization, but around "Real People." Corporate affiliations etc. can be defined, announced, broadcast, etc.; but corporations can not be members. They are AIs. They are constructs. They are models that "real people" program to collectively interact in the world. At least I suspect that was the base theory when they were first created a long time ago by the Dutch. (Whom I appreciate very much. Partly because I'm of Flemish extraction.) Anyway, corporations are out, and governments are out, and NGOs are out as members. But they should feel very, very free to support the effort that I hope gets started here. That support can come in the form of supporting one or more of your own employees or volunteers on your dime, but having them dedicate some amount of their time to our effort. Those folks can be members. We'll even let you try to stack the deck by giving us lots of help. But, be forewarned, the architecture is designed to be rationale for the people, You got to be an individual Homo Sapiens to get a card. It's "our" project plan we want to work on. But we'll do it "open book" because it's more effective that way. (Note, for the sake of not getting into stupid arguments, families are people, okay. A "Family Business" can be a member if it wants to be recognized by assignment to head of family as a member. One vote per member is still one Homo Sapiens. 1 Borg would also be 1 member if we invite them in.)

This menu set accesses the same knowledgebase as Subject and Content, but from the point of view of one or more "users" that want to "do something" with the content. It is primarily organized around concepts put forth by Etienne Wenger and Amy Jo Kim, This is primarily an "activity" oriented view port into what a human user of the system wants to do with it in an "active involvement" manner. For example, build a model or play a simulation or game. How they want to interact with the system. (There is also a robot substrata to this orientation which is how the system would talk to your phone, etc. The device owner get involved from that view when the configure the interconnections.)

This is also the space where humans interact with humans, using the system as a facilitator. (A high level version of what you are doing with texts, Twitter feeds, Facebook posts, etc.) Again, without corporations or other entities, except by having a member carry their badge for them, and be fully identified as their agent. (Organizational badges may be carried by more than one member.) Member communications and content can be secured if desired, the architecture supports it; but it is not a feature of the current implementation.

Content

Content is like going to the library, when you know what you want, and you just want to use the catalog system to find it. The assumption in this organization is that you are looking for knowledge about a particular thing. To "find" stuff, you are going to need to be familiar with our catalog systems. (Just like a library.) Our catalog is an ontology. It's a little more complicated than Dewey-Decimal; but, once you get used to it, it can help you trace and follow a logical trail to what you want real quickly. It's like having a map when you go through a maze. "Over, under, up, over, down, turn left: there it is." But not for beginners, and it's not fully installed right now.

This is indexed, direct access to models, discussions, projects, forums, announcements, operating instructions, reference works, et. al. about issues, subjects and tools related to "architecting the future."

Resources

Resources is a 4th area and I thought I said there were only three "viewpoints." There are only three. This is the garage. This is where the mechanics hang out sometimes to talk about who has the best tools. This is also where you can find things like a glossary, bibliography, etc.

  • 1. It also drives to the conclusion of "in one are multiple, and they are all equally significant and important" but that's reading the flow the other way.
  • 2. Wow. When I proof read that paragraph I just had to come back and add this note for the archeologists in the audience. Wouldn't be able to build a "Lucy's World" model in a computer be a really cool thing? Do you guys already have one that incorporates all of your ideas and defines a societal model that relationally interconnects to climate, animal and plant evolution coincident with home sapiens development, and other related factors. If you did, I assume you don't or we'd be reading about it in Science News, what kinds of advantageous discoveries would you be chasing? 10 years. That's when I'd like you to have it. If not before then.
  • 3. My references are going to be "age related." You can find this stuff in Wikipedia most of the time. But not all of them are arbitrary. I use a lot of Start Trek, Star Wars, and other Sci-Fi references and analogies. Sci-Fi today, when I pick it up once in a while, I find a lot of "fantasy" rather than "fiction." There's a difference. Some people seem to think its a marketing thing, with a technicality: "Science fiction deals with scenarios and technology that are possible or may be possible based on science." That's not a technicality. It is "Core" with a capital 'C' and it rhymes with me. The future is fiction, but of a type that can become real as in Reality as in it will affect your life, or the lives of people you care about. Do not worry too much about vampires. Do worry about, no think about, AI and everything else that's happening in the world right now all around you. Like Predator Drones and AI cats that can be used to help older folks with dementia, or related issues, feel comfortable when they get anxious and need something to pet, that purrs, when a real cat may not be available. (Probably an outgrowth and extension of Tamagotchi.) There are trend lines and projections that can be made. When I was in grade school, it was "Tom Swift" and his amazing XYZ machine, Flash Gordon, and characters like that. Jules Verne was the same for older generations. Two really good references for the kind of thing I'm writing about on this web site are Arthur C. Clarke and Isaac AzimovChildhood's End among others, and I, Robot, the Foundation series, and others. These are serious speculative works of fiction. Created for a different purpose, but if you read them carefully, and study them in context with other materials, they are also background material for serious planning studies. I don't use them here now, because of the audience. Star Wars and Star Trek are easier to related to and use as a communication channel. But I suspect Clarke and Asimov are closer to "classics." Anyway, that's the why for the Sci-Fi.
  • 4. Hopefully, always "disclosed" in a recognizable form, sometimes with ironic humor, or so I think. Being "PC" isn't always appropriate, I think, but I apologize in advance if I offend people unnecessarily. Call me out.

Comments

Add new comment

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.