Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <email@example.com>
- To: Gavin Thomas Nicol <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com
- Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 15:42:20 -0500
Trust is a learned behavior where you
say "nice doggie" until you find a
rock. Who do ya love?
Then there is that Taste thing. Any
system that flattens out based on standards
is eventually in the same position as
classical music. To quote a pamplet on the
subject, "Lincoln freed the slaves but
Jazz freed the musicians."
The UDDI communities and models are just
another way to automate Keiretsu yellow
pages ++. The ++ is in the rules of
engagement and the tModel.
Invoking the topic behavioral reinforcement
we discussed earlier this year, the usual
models of tit for tat trading rules apply
which is why the phrase (may have originated
at PARC) "The rule of rationality is weak
for organizing human behavior" is quoted.
Who do ya love?
We get Operator Sites, tModels
that assume a URL pointing or citing a
specification is a binding contract, etc.
The medallion of trust is the URL, but
really, who do ya love?
Again, style counts. This system can produce
what the jazz musicians call "sweet bands"
and it isn't a complement (think Kay Kyzer
fronting Lawrence Welk). Becoming
Le Jazz Hot requires more than adhering to a
public specification. On the other hand,
some bodies of work (see previous citations)
are too hard to understand and so languish
until a future emerges needy and ready to
implement. The trick is to cross the chasm.
A lot of good trumpet players starved until
Louis passed his apprenticeship.
The T-Model owner got one choice of color.
The Caddy owner got Chrome. Style!! Who
do ya love?
... and a generic version attribute. :-)
Intergraph Public Safety
Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h
From: Gavin Thomas Nicol [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Friday, September 08, 2000 1:34 PM
Subject: RE: UDDI, uddi.org and an open source project at SourceForge
> Yes as with namespaces, the land grab is on, but at
> least it is desirable land finally and not a swamp of
> complexity. :-)
> QOS? Quality of service? Yes, definitely.
The point I was making is that global repositories are
only really good for local communities, because, as you so
eloquently noted, at the end of the day, trust is what
will bind relationships, not registry entires (or at least,
not until trust is bound into the discovery process).
Of course, this is one of many steps in the evolution of