... I think that there are opportunities now for some
companies that have the vision to build useful tools that accelerate the
compliance to the new government reporting
requirements that are coming out in response to terrorism, the financial crisis
and by an increasing desire in the part of politicians on all sides in all
jurisdictions to talk about reducing wasteful regulation while wanting to
control everything and the expectation that the various government agencies
will monitor everything and instantly see patterns and individual transactions
that pose a threat to society.
Actually, I think the trend now is to get rid of government regulation because
it has been inefficient, infeasible, incorrect and ineffective. But then,
governments have the guns to make their way heard if not listened to. Only
by getting back to the business and technical issues, and eliminating as much government
interference as possible, will lead to economic growth and prosperity. The
government is the problem, not the solution, to most issues we have today.
Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com
9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2
[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ron Wheeler
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 6:52 AM
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Quote for the day
On 03/01/2011 9:45 PM, John F. Sowa wrote:
> Ron and Pat,
> People have been defining standard terminologies and
> for many centuries before anybody taught them to use the
>> I would think that local conformance concerns should be
>> extensions and processes around an internationally agreed
>> Having an unambiguous description of goods and services
>> (customs, homeland security, environment, regulatory
>> would seem to provide a clear ROI for development of
> Many *centuries* before computers were invented, governments and
> international standards bodies developed standards for navigation,
> geographical coordinates, time, units of measure, screw threads,
> wheat grains, chemical compounds, etc. Note that the terms
> and "Gregorian" for dates refer to Julius Caesar and
>> I would think that a universal description of a financial
>> would facilitate international trading of that security.
> The Sumerians baked those financial instruments into clay tablets
> many millennia ago. Their successors were doing
> trade across the Silk Road from China
to Europe and Africa over
> three millennia ago. The Phoenicians invented the alphabet
> keep track of all the goods they were shipping from port to
> port around the Mediterranean to the British
> The modern definitions were established by the Italian bankers
> half a millennium ago. Their successors were using
> electronic funds transfer by telegraph for many decades before the
> Internet came along.
>> The point I think is worth considering is that, unless one
>> has a common vocabulary to describe one's models, there is no
>> to tell that they are in fact different.
> I certainly agree -- and so would Julius Caesar, Pope Gregory, and
> lots of Sumerians, Phoenicians, and Renaissance bankers.
> Before we try to sell them on the idea of using ontologies, we
> to show them some advantage. They know their business far
> we do, they've been running it successfully for a long time, and
> need to show some clear value in this newfangled O-stuff.
>> This suggests that the primitive elements may focus on
>> phenomena, and perhaps also on mathematical or graphical
>> that can serve to build the mental models people use.
> Look at the words 'suggests', 'may, and 'perhaps'. That
> too speculative to convince people who have been keeping precise
> records about billions and trillions of dollars of commerce.
> I really hope that the work on logic and ontology can succeed.
> But it has to do something better than what people have been
> doing already. Vague suggestions that may perhaps do
> someday aren't going to convince anybody.
I think that there are opportunities now for some companies that have
the vision to build useful tools that accelerate the process of
compliance to the new government reporting requirements that are coming
out in response to terrorism, the financial crisis and by an increasing
desire in the part of politicians on all sides in all jurisdictions to
talk about reducing wasteful regulation while wanting to control
everything and the expectation that the various government agencies
monitor everything and instantly see patterns and individual
transactions that pose a threat to society.
I am not sure what role this forum has in making the case for
integrating tools that support an ontological approach to this
increasingly complex problem.
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> Config Subscr:
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
> To join:
> To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx