I agree with many of Nova Spivack perspectives.

I strongly agree that the focus will now switch to the backend which is currently lacking in structure, function and process.

What we will see is the rise of neutral third parties that host the backend churning of data and maintain a shared directory of entities and identifiers which is the only authoritative or centrally managed by multiple hierarchical parties, component of the system. The rest of the system is totally autonomous and totally extensible and infinite in scope, secure, with privacy and ownership of data being inherit to the system.

I built a working open architecture that meets many of these goals and put it into real application about 5 years ago. It used database replication and VB for the larger entities and web based input for smaller entities. It featured distributed gateway processing that processed and redistributed data and then fed a data warehouse(s) for history, analytical and archival purposes.

It featured an integral security that was in fact manifested by the design of the system such that even if data were unencrypted or captured it had little meaning unless one had access to the “whole data” and various indexes owned and created and shared by the participating entities. In other words to interpret the data one needs to see the whole screen, any part of the data is meaningless just as if you could only see a quarter inch of a television screen you could not see determine what was being displayed.

The other hurdle was that Two-factor authentication Secure ID using solutions from say RSA were cost prohibitive especially for small entities, and created unnecessary management overhead. So I created a new approach for authentication using elements natural and already present in the system interfaces and embedded in the data itself.

I was reading the w3 articles and specs on Semantic Web technologies but I did not come across where hierarchical data control is addressed. This is where data access controls are based on various levels and membership, the data originator (individual), location specific, organization, regulatory, and alliance levels.

This is necessary for easy secure sharing and access control of data say between countries, companies, agencies, etc.

In my model this was built to be an integral part of the system from the start and is an inherit part of the data packet/unit/capsule. If one fails to do this the system will not work as a universal system.

One of the problems with a collective information system is accommodating the horizontal expansion of a data set as it relates to data transfer and mapping. So we get data pipes of various widths which need to be managed and coordinated. This produces system overhead and slows implementation.

So my thought was to do away with horizontal expansion as it relates to data transfer so that all data pipes are the same. What we have then is only vertical expansion. The horizontal expansion occurs at each end user and is more akin to slotting the data into the user preferred horizontal data format.

This vertical processing is also unique in that it allows event triggers to follow or be embedded in a stream of data that can alter the flow of the data or initiate various types of processing or distribution etc.

I posted this here before but I think it is similar to what one is declaring Web. 3.0 to be.

In my analysis of the world’s information systems, I realized that we could never have a universal information system which is necessary for seamless and fluid global commerce.

The reason is that the current information systems (applications) were designed from the perspective of a single organization. They all have this built in flaw. It is the result of designing from the individual point of view rather than a collective point of view.

I sought to design and architect an open system from the perspective and needs of all organizations, including governments, regulatory bodies, third party certification, escrow agents etc.

This system is designed such that it can encapsulate all other systems until they were restructured to be Universal in nature. It is designed to be autonomous, modular, totally extensible and infinite in nature. It is secure, encrypted, and yet it is also transparent.

Understanding that the needs of every business and industry are different it is designed to accommodate them all.

So the first order is for everyone to subscribe to this new universal architecture for data processing from a collective point of view. It focuses not on the user interface but the methodology used for data processing. This methodology can quickly be taught and adopted by any software application.

The energy savings, efficiency and security provided by a universal information system would be dramatic.

The best way to describe it is that there is no horizontal expansion of data, only vertical allowing data to all flow through the same type of pipe for distribution anywhere from one to many or many to one.

It provides many of the solutions the world is looking for because it has a foundation universal in nature rather than individual in nature, which seems to be the theme of all the solutions to the world’s issues.

Wow! You are either my hero or you are laying the foundation for the Borg, but maybe a conscious evolved Borg.

Somehow I am able to follow most of what you said, and I'm still impressed that I can turn my computer on. Seems almost organic somehow.

everything is everything

yo, my name is derek

Well thanks Derek, it all comes from the same source. I am a devout fan of free agency and hold the individual will to be supreme.

I would never tolerate a collective will that would force it's will, or dictate the behavior of a free agent.

One aspect of the collective is to protect individual rights and liberty and maintain a fair playing field.

In fact the soul purpose of the collective would be to protect against infringement of the rights of one free agent by another free agent(s).

I would allow war to exist rather than violate the tenet of free will and independent agency.

About twenty years ago I changed my perspective of the future. It used to be the typical Armegedon version. One day I it dawned on me that there could be another possibility a completely peaceful and global collective moment of awarerness, a moment of "OH" we don't have to fight anymore.

I use to think I was a part of the last generation, I remember getting under my desk at school for nuclear bomb drills.

To think of a this technology and this new conciousness emerging.....convergence, coincidence or phenomenon

That being said if I wanted you to bend over I would simply drop a $20.00 bill in your path.

That being said if I were to breech the veil of the illusion of separation there is only One will and in that context love for all of myself is the impetus for all action.

Maybe it was too much Startrek or just wishful thinking, but I was obessesed with the notion of a global moment. My friends and family did not know what to do with me. Oh there he goes again.

Then The Celestine Prophesy came along I got a chapter into and never looked at it again, just freaked me out.

Yo then I ran across Deepak, then I thouhgt maybe I'm not so crazy.

Then I found IntentBlog..............oh my god.

Thanks guys for letting me have a voice it's be enlightening to say the least.

peace comes from peace

derek

Oh I'm an artist been that way since birth.

namaste

Hi folks -- and particularly, hello Richard. The architecture you describe is interesting. Did you ever write a whitepaper on it? Is there somewhere I could go to learn more about it? Thanks!

Nova
http://www.radarnetworks.com/

Dear Nova,

To answer your question, it has not been published publicly. But I can tell you more about it in private communications. It contains too many “temporary” trade secrets to publish a thorough white paper at this time. The idea is to have a 6 – 12 month lead on everyone else and to maintain that lead rather than trying to create a monopoly with a patent which stifles growth and acceptance. One would want to be near a product launch before they let everyone in on it so that one could acquire permanent base market share in at least some areas.

That being said there are several supplemental applications / processes / technologies that could be patentable so we would want to secure those first even if they involved open licensing later.

It solves problems for at least four industries right off the bat. For one it enables RFID technology to actually work amongst multiple parties. I built a working RFID system, when I saw Wal-mart’s plan I said that won’t work and it didn’t because a certain infrastructure and methodologies need to be in place to overcome certain hurdles that arise in the real world.

The core approach is not obvious and is one most developers would steer away from if they thought of it because it does not necessarily provide benefit, although it can, to a single organization or application. It is only when the application is viewed as a collective application that it makes sense and results in everything working smoothly later.

The free to the world core approach produces many offshoots that can be developed that result in major efficiencies for global commerce. It is very congruent with the Semantic Web Specifications.

I will send you my contact info and we can talk about synergies with the Web 3.0 intentions. One of my personal goals was to block a “Big Brother” future and embed the right to privacy and control over one’s personal data into technology.

Cheers
Richard

Now the information alone is not enough. We want to build the information artificial analysis for mass behavior actualization and predictions?

I am getting a strange impression of this Web 3.0 structuration. Specially when banks and e-business roll the dice.

Before developing things like that, why not think the reasons for developing that technology and the out of control consequences aspects reaching globalisation hands by example.

Where are the fondations for a better world here? Yeah yeah like always, they put magic ideas $$$ in your head to make you feel special and important, to make the work done... but history show a lot of broken roads right after.

If only I could "see" the Spirit and heart in this project and not another reverse spirit engineering manifestation from & for isolated blind mentals.

But anyway, this will be useful for Spirit position later.

Expressions of future direction begin to be too crystallized and yet indistinct, as this one is, right at the point in time when a paradigm shift is about to occur. The energies, intelligences and viewpoints that will drive the shift forward are not those doing analytical write-ups of what the future will be. Some of what's proposed here will come to be because it already has momentum and a logical reason to be. Some of it will be blown away by new realties and conceptions. This is not my opinion, it's my observation of reality.

love, Heath

Regarding the intelligent web concept and open identites and all that. Maybe I missed it in all this writing, but all of this sound to me like the evolution of a natural brain. Nodes, interconnections, protocols, quantisation of function and identity at many levels and scales.

Lets face it, how different can the evolution of the internet be to the evolution of natural brains? Will all this eventually reach some kind of selfless selfness that serves humanity, a bit like the universe itself? Will it evolve to reach some kind of consciousness? Could it be claimed by free ranging spirits that are out of our control? Is the universe some kind of super internet?

Web 2.0 ... The Machine is Us/ing Us...

It's kinda like clicking up the rollercoaster when you begin to crest the top. You become more aware what's coming. The butterflies the excitement the letting go. The people in the front see it a little sooner.

Hang on it's going to b a fun ride.

Maybe the internet is an example of the connectedness of the universe so we have a physical representaion of the spiritual one.

derek

Yes, the universe seems to be an entity that likes to refresh itself through a long chain of evolution. I remember someone already has a theory about this. That all super civilisations end up merging with it. Or maybe create their own alternative universes. Maybe the universe is like a huge coral. We live in the remnants of what came bofore us. We live in an infinite hall of mirrors. Once look into it to see your image, you tumble down (Derek, like your roller coaster) the rabbit hole with no end. It is a feeling machine on the outside, supervised by some inconcivable entity on the inside, to which I suspect we will join after infinite number of trials.

I can understand why Rumi yearned for non-existence;

I died as a mineral and became a plant,
I died as plant and rose to animal,
I died as animal and I was Man.

Why should I fear? When was I less by dying?
Yet once more I shall die as Man, to soar
With angels blest; but even from angelhood
I must pass on: all except God doth perish.
When I have sacrificed my angel-soul,
I shall become what no mind ever conceived.

Oh, let me not exist! for Non-existence

(Mevlana Celaleddin Rumi)
(2007 is his 800th anniversary!)

So much wisdom from a man who had no access to science like we do. Yet I feel like a fool when I think of him. Was he an alien? Was he an angel? Or was he just a human being like you and me?

But one thing is for sure. There is no reason for fear. Let the earth kill itself, if it wants to so much. It is not the end of the universe. But it seems we are expected to contribute to the overall picture as we see fit. If we don't, the entity that is deep within us, judges us to be worthless. And makes us go through another cycle, to cleanse us. Maybe thats what they mean, usually not knowingly, when they say "trust God", meaning trust your soul. The trouble with the God concept is that, once you equate it with a metaphor, you get stuch with it. Maybe it is best not to name it. As TTChing suggested;

"The Tao that can be trodden is not the enduring and unchanging Tao. The name that can be named is not the enduring and unchanging name."

Mystics seem to be right.