Oh, we're really "managing" now! I bet this baby really packs a punch! In a message dated 5/11/00 3:10:05 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Once you get the metadata in a consistent format you then will be able > to use intellegent agents aka supplychainbots (scbots) to give near > perfect market informatiom. So near. Yet so far? Having owned and operated a small ( $3mil+) business from the age of 14 to 51, I had many experiences of seeing my University Math, Science and Engineering precepts in usage of varying degrees of enlightenment. In most of these cases it was either directly (my company; my money) or indirectly (my customers or suppliers; their prosperity that I was significantly impacted upon (sic)) whose "use" (and/or implementation) of such precepts were needed by me to be at least legitimate, due to our interdependent "need" for "success". Early on, exposure to the then evolving (renewed actually) importance of numerical methods, due to the availability of (the then new) higher "level" languages of computers, as well as their availability in the newly flourishing implementation of minicomputers in commerce, "round off" error became of interest to me. Many years later, error propagation in the "realizations" assembled under the concept of "fractals" was even more interesting. This is in no small way due not only to the observation of the effects (on my wallet) of incomplete analysis in problem solving, but the apparent (to me) global lack of knowledge that "monstrous" errors in interpretation and interpolation of "data" were regularly "promoted" not only to "information", but incredibly often into a "basis" for activity, on suprisingly large scales, of assumedly "smart" (VERY well paid) managements. The impact potential is so "impressive", I have enjoyed the publications of those who publish critiques of the errors imparted on computer languages by various compilers of same, their investigations being led into the nanocode on the chips themselves (which algorithms implemented on which chips, in which "way"), and even their investigations and reports on the issues of the photolithographs, etc. used in said chip production being in fundamental disagreement with the publications of what to expect from the chip in "error" processing methods "utilization". My point is, I have experienced mistakes that, in their own transaction processing context, were "huge", and which, in a frightening number of occurrences, were corrected via additional transaction(s) and ignored (with respect to subsequent skewing of data set "readings" (sometimes, apparently, to the "provable" accuracy comparable to the "readings of tea leaves", the two cancel out right?), and waaaaaaay too often, not corrected (sometimes "caught" but for a diplomatic impact on someone, even ignored and allowed to remain "hidden"), and to the point, the impact on me and my wallet, or subsets (both proper and improper) of humanity, upon which I was and remain "interdependent". Soooooooooo? Would you fellow code-bangers be vigilant in matters of fuzzy logic impacting the promotion of data to mis-information, as action therefrom can (and probably does, IMHO) hurt "us". "Data Mining". Here we go again. If Satan exists, it seems likely he would have a "principle" weapon, and my guess is that it would be (simply) "fear". "He" is reported to have been, like us (same set of reports), created in God's image and likeness. Well then, "He" would be efficient. Waaaaaay efficient. He would get us to "do in" us (each other surely, ourself (sic), certainly). The potential utility of lack of fear (a waaaaaay improper subset of fear), has not escaped me, and as such, seems certain to not have escaped "Him", but, to be "sure" of such "information", I'll have "run the data (of the data points of reports of human activities) thru my algorithms" on this one; it seems that important to me. But then, wouldn't that be exponentiation of error impact? Since we may not be able to "trust" us, in our reports on us? So, getting back to the concept of us analyzing the impact of our errors on our error analysis, What does that mean? That's enough for now. I've given myself another headache. Regards, Jim Cunningham Bertrand Russell, Alfred North-Whitehead, we hardly knew ye. P.S. Just a "parting" thought? Don't make Satan's (Lucifer) mistake. Knowing we can never be God, try then, anyway, to be god-like. P.P.S. Does the cc: of this email "hassle" innocent third parties? I don't get "here" as often as I like. Tho a lot. Has someone's ""let's call it "coding"" (truely, in this case), gotten "this" "AOL:cc:Mailbot:whatever" (in?)finite state automaton to iritate others? That would then be me irritating myself (in the act of caring). If so, I would appreciate any response to inform me, tho I didn't cause it (directly). If there was a "publication" re: same, I apologize (sort of), it's so hard to keep current, the site has become so (wonderfully) busy. It wasn't so, when I "hit" the (big) "list". ========================================== XML/EDI Group members-only discussion list Homepage = http://www.xmledi.org Brought to you by: Online Technologies Corporation Home of BizServe - www.bizserve.com TO UNSUBSCRIBE: Send email to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Leave the subject blank, and In the body of the message, enter ONLY: unsubscribe Questions/requests should be sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To join the XML/EDI Group complete the form located at: http://www.geocities.com/WallStreet/Floor/5815/mail1.htm
