zenpundit.com » 2006

Archive for 2006

Thursday, November 16th, 2006

ATTENTION SCARCITY

I had about three items that I promised some blogfriends to get up tonight and I failed on two of them. As I really need to get some sleep ( I get up about 5 a.m.) they must carry over to the next evening. I’m beat.

Thursday, November 16th, 2006

MAINSTREAMING THE GOSPEL OF RESILIENCE

As noted by Dr. Barnett, Stephen DeAngelis of ERMB, Enterra Solutions and now a co-founder ( with Oak Ridge National Labratory) of the Institute for Advanced Technologies in Global Resilience, has been named one of Esquire Magazine’s “Best and Brightest”. Steve has been made the subject of a feature article “The Age of Resilience” by Brian Mockenhaupt, who has lucidly explained Steve and Enterra’s mission:. An excerpt:

“Squirreled away in an office building a half hour outside Philadelphia, Enterra’s small staff of tech whizzes and programmers is breathing life into Resilience Net. They huddle around computers writing language that translates regulations, laws, and accepted business practices into automated rule sets—if A and B, then C. These rules, which might tell a busi¬ness how to order new parts or com¬ply with the Patriot Act, are amassed in virtual libraries as algorithms. The system can think and react, much the way your antivirus software detects a threat, sends in a report, and brings back a patch to fix the problem while it inoculates other systems. The rules decide what information needs to be analyzed and shared, then how to disseminate it to the right people. If a law changes, new rules are added to the library and the system updates and learns. Now the organization can act with minimal human involvement, and as new sensors, databases, or analysis techniques are developed, the overall network grows in strength. With different groups using the same rules library, translating information into code every¬one can understand, communication is streamlined. This is how you connect the dots.
But Enterra’s creature needs skin and bones, and Oak Ridge has the scientists. The laboratory was a key play¬er in building the first atomic bombs, which is fitting, because DeAngelis sees the new institute as another Manhattan Project, a group of disparate players com¬ing together to solve a special problem. Oak Ridge is well suited to the role. After the lab lost the spigot of cash that flowed during the cold war, it devoted itself to increasing American competitiveness, teaming with private enterprises to devel¬op new technologies. Companies working with Oak Ridge draw on a deep and unique resource pool—cutting-edge and hugely ex¬pensive facilities, some of the best minds in the country, and co operative agreements with top university research departments. Give Oak Ridge a problem and it can probably solve it. Its $1.4 billion spallation neutron source can peer inside materials and map their atoms. Its electron microscopes can see to a ten millionth of a millimeter. And its banks of supercomputers can apply Enterra’s rules to a million scenarios and spit out solutions while there’s still time to act.”

(A personal aside; having been through Fermilab’s nuclear particle accelerator lab on a couple of occasions as a guest of Dr. Von, I found the description of Oak Ridge’s facilities and partnership with Enterra to be darned interesting)

Steve too had some remarks on his blog where he added some information to the Esquire article:

“As the Founder and Executive Director of the Institute, I have started recruiting some of the world’s best minds and will continue that effort. Some of those brilliant individuals undoubtedly would like to know exactly what the relationships are between Enterra and the Institute. In order to fully understand that relationship, you have to understand the relationships between the Department of Energy, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, UT-Battelle, Oak Ridge Associated Universities, and the Oak Ridge Center for Advanced Studies. I’m going to give you just a brief version of those relationships.

…Although Enterra Solutions helped establish the Institute, it is independent from Enterra’s commercial ventures. We deliberately sought a forum that would make it clear that Enterra’s involvement is not a subterfuge to attract business or tap free labor. That is why the academic association is so important. The company does support the Institute with pro bono assistance (I serve as Executive Director and Shane Deichman, another Enterra employee, serves as Managing Director). Our interest, however, is advancing technologies and ideas, not generating business leads.

We do hope that some of the work that we do in collaboration with Oak Ridge National Laboratory finds it way into Institute publications so that it can be discussed and applied in other sectors to make them more resilient. The most promising of these ventures, and the one discussed in the Esquire article, is ResilienceNet™. ResilienceNet is Enterra’s concept to complement Oak Ridge National Lab’s SensorNet program.

ResilienceNet is an intelligent, rules-based sense, think, and act application that enables decision support and secure information sharing based on real-time data sources such as SensorNet. SensorNet is an ORNL research program that addresses technical challenges associated with real-time sensor systems for national security and other large applications. ORNL and Enterra Solutions are collaborating to enable advanced ResilienceNet applications to interface with SensorNet interoperability standards. These tools will create an automated sense, think, and act capability in response to Chemical, Nuclear, Biological, Cyber and Explosive threats that should make existing nuclear emergency response capabilities even more effective

The important aspect of the Esquire piece, aside from the nice honorific element, is that it will help take the concept of ” resiliency” out of the esoteric realm of defense intellectuals, network theorists and adolescent psychologists and inject it into the world of mainstream journalism and political discourse. Making organizations, networks, institutions and America itself more resilient requires tens and perhaps hundreds of thousands of decisions by local and midstream deciders.

“Opting for resilience” is non-obvious from a short-term balance sheet perspective. It requires some education and diffusion of knowledge throught the culture so that the resiliency becomes a standard ” option in play” when entrepreneurs, agencies and communities are planning for the future. As it stands, in most public debates, the benefits of building resiliency is usually understood only by engineers who usually prove less persuasive before political bodies than do bean-counters or self-aggrandizing special interest voices.

( A second personal aside: in a fit of civic idealism, I once served for a number of years on a planning commission for a midwestern municipality; a commission that had unusually broad powers over economic development. As a rule, engineers do not win arguments with lawyers when the judges are laymen, unless the engineer can point – in bold colors – to the imminent disaster some proposed course of action will cause. Hypothetical but reasonable probabilities are a concept that is totally lost on the general public)

Steve has a company. Enterra is not in the business of losing money. But in preaching the gospel of resilience, Steve is also working toward the public good. A public that must live in a world that increasingly resembles an ecology as much as an economy – a dynamic, complex, adaptive system whose evolution appears to be acclerating even as it’s internal ” brakes” and ” circuit-breakers” are being eliminated. Resiliency cannot be done by an American GOSPLAN, it is something that people will choose if they understand the advantages.

When the next Hurricaine Katrina or a biological 9/11 hits, America will discover that resiliency is not an option.

ADDENDUM:

Dan of tdaxp – “Web 3.0

Asia Logistics Wrap – “Semantic Web for the Supply Chain

Wednesday, November 15th, 2006

ON THE LIGHTER SIDE

As I was drawn into some annoying, time-wasting, online nonsense earlier today, I thought it might be amusing to highlight that experience with a link to Flame Warrior. A lighthearted look for anyone who has dealt with roving bands of trolls.

Hat tip to Prometheus6 who brought it to my attention a while back.

Tuesday, November 14th, 2006

GREEK RESILIENCE: SPARTAN AND ATHENIAN STRATEGIES

A while back, at the prompting of Dan Abbott, I picked up Howard Bloom’s excellent Global Brain:The Evolution of Mass Mind From the Big Bang To The 21st Century. The book lived up to the billing Dan gave it and I was as impressed with Bloom as I have been with such eminent scholars as Robert Conquest, E.O. Wilson or Jacques Barzun. Which is to say, that Global Mind is a work of a rare intellectual caliber.

This however, my opening paragraph to the contrary, is not a review of Global Mind. Instead, I would like to draw attention to a section where Bloom has, correctly in my view, pointed to a dichotomy of paradigms that describe two espistemological -cultural meta-strategies for civilizational resilience:

” …But the subcultural struggles retarding science’s advance are minor maladies of mass mind compared to a set of twenty-first century clashes in which Sparta and Athens remain vigorously alive.

Today’s cyber-era Spartans are bone crushers of conformity. they are the fundamentalists of both the left and the right. Some are godly, some are secular. Religious extreminsts, ultranationalists, ethnic liberationists and fascists fall on the fundamentalist side of the line. Brooking no tolerance of those who disagree, they invoke a golden past and a higher power, both which demand submission to authority. The worst shoot, burn and bomb to get their way. Their opposites are Athenian, Socratic, Aristotelian, diversity-generating, pluralistic and democratic….these champions of human rghts use the word ‘freedom’ to liberate he individual, not hammer the triumph of a chosen collectivity.”

Count me as an Athenian.

Nevertheless, while I find the people who are Bloom’s Spartans or Eric Hoffer’s True Believers to be anything from misguided to dangerous, I am aware that both the Spartan as well as the Athenian approaches to life represent resilience strategies. Each with particular advantages and dangers.

Spartans are resilient in the face of ideological and often physical attack. They react with moral certainty and outrage toward threats to deeply cherished beliefs. They have the solidarity of moral cohesion and rigidly disciplined unity and the heightened attention, even paranoia, of a people under siege. Hallowed traditions and unifying themes become banners of war, metaphorically or literally. This is a response of vigilance appropriate for an existential threat or similar grave emergency.

Athenians are resilient in the face of shifting conditions of the environment. They react with debate, analysis, multiple perspectives, insight and experimentation. They have the creativity of competent, self-confident, individuals and do not fear to hazard risks. Hallowed traditions that no longer serve are quickly discarded in favor of efficiency and effectiveness that force Rule Set resets. This is the response of adaptive evolution, even revolutionary change, appropriate for epochal shifts and long term adversity.

Each has their flaws. Spartans stubbornly corner themselves in mental cul-de-sacs built from self-imposed blindness, Athenians bicker over the existence of a threat at all even as the enemy is at the gates -or even after he has breached the walls. Of the two, though, I will place my bet on the Athenians. They can correct errors more readily.

Creative resilience deals with the unknown unknowns over the long haul as they emerge in a way that the most violent and reflexively vigilant response cannot.

Sunday, November 12th, 2006

SUNDAY’S RECOMMENDED READING

Hmmm…let’s go with strategic analytical perspectives this morning ( ok, afternoon, it was a late night yesterday).

Pride of place today goes to….

Kent’s Imperative for ” War in the next generation” and “The spread of hostile memes“.

Very nice to see some of the PNM/4GW/5GW concepts discussed here and in the old koinon moving into professional IC circles.

Dr. Barnett in his syndicated column on ” Time for a new generational voice in politics “.

As an aside, I am not in sync with Senator Obama’s politics though an understated factor in his charisma may be that he comes across as an earnest, responsible, adult in a chamber filled with political hacks ( case in point, Obama’s senior colleague from Illinois). With the Senate in Democratic hands, Obama will need to tie himself to at least one prominent legislative issue -and help steer it to passage – if he wishes to make the leap to the next political level.

Re; Tom’s take on worldviews -identifying, critically analyzing and metacognitively asserting control over one’s worldview is something I emphasize to my students.

Josh Manchester of The Adventures of Chester -“Radio: Interview with Fred Ikle

Josh is an old blogfriend and a rising multimedia presence these days. Here he interviews a senior defense intellectual, Dr. Frederick C. Ikle on Ikle’s hot new book Annihilation From Within.

Steve Deangelis at ERMB – “An Electoral Lesson in Resilience

Mostly in agreement with Steve – it will be interesting if the Democrats make a new start in terms of ideas or revert to type under the pressure of the party’s Liberal-Left gerontocracy in Congress.

John Robb at Global Guerillas -” GLOBAL GUERRILLAS IN THE UK

John’s post raised the practical question for me of how long does the state permit these networks to mestastisize simply because they have them successfully under surveillance and “the devil you know” is better than dealing with ” unknown unknowns” ?

I would also add that not nearly enought thought has gone on in government circles into how authorities can demoralize these networks on the moral level, in conjunction with surveillance, prosecution and punitive action.

Critt Jarvis at ConversationBase – “CSR: ROI in the context of everything else

Stakeholders is a useful analytical concept for defining ” who is affected ?” but is often a poor model for ” who gets to decide ?”. Inequalities of information flow, knowledge and provision of resources often lend themselves to manipulation more than true consensus. Nevertheless, key stakeholders who remain unaware or ill-informed about the interests of lesser players are doomed to strategic errors and will reap excessive friction. Reaching out is a better move.

Sun Bin – ” Machiavelli on Iraq

Scathing. Machiavelli remains, however, a useful primer and classic lens for analysis as Sun Bin demonstrates.

That’s it !


Switch to our mobile site