Hi Grant, and welcome to the group. I too have struggled with complex
enterprise systems and have been intrigued by analogies with natural
organisms, although at a very superficial level.

Recently I met up with a long lost school buddy who has spent the last
20 years in biology.  I have spent the last 20 years in IT (cut to
references to Herman Hesse novels involving diverging paths between
the priesthood and "worldly" pursuits...whither go I?).

Anyway, I mentioned something along the lines about how natural
systems seemed more adept at handling complexity. My friend pointed
out that natural biological processes are mostly one jury-rigged
process built on another with dubious processes often being co-opted
for purposes way beyond their original "intent". When I mentioned the
apparent longevity if natural systems, my friend pointed out that
species regularly become extinct.

My friend scoffed at the idea of anything vaguely resembling
"intelligent design" which I certainly don't believe in, but which I
guess I had come to naively attribute to natural evolutionary
processes - probably as a result  of wishful thinking.

So I'm intrigued by your theory. Do you, as I believed, side with a
model in which natural selection leads to elegant solutions. Or is
your view more aligned with my friends assertion that the natural
outcome of evolution is a ramshackle expression of "good enough" for
now. Does a bilogical model of complex IT systems lead to an SAP or a
Google?

Regards,
Saul

On Friday, February 26, 2010, Grant Holland <[email protected]> wrote:
> Dear FRIAM...
>
> I'm excited and happy to subscribe to the group. (Thanks for the invite 
> Stephen, - and David.) For many years I have architected and implemented 
> large-scale (mostly Java) enterprise software (applications and systems) for 
> corporations and gov. institutions mostly in North America on behalf of a 
> number of major computer systems vendors (e.g. Sun). However, for the past 
> few years, my passion has turned to the question "Why is the organization and 
> dynamics of living systems so different from those of 'engineered' ones - and 
> why are their systemic properties so much more interesting?" From a practical 
> perspective, I hoped to improve the engineering of large-scale computing 
> systems from this research; but in reality I became fascinated with the 
> theory, and so I had to (lovingly) read lots of books and research articles.
>
> Anyway, to drive toward an answer to above question, I have developed a 
> mathematical theory of living and lifelike systems, which I call "Organic 
> Complex Systems". A few months ago I began to write up an overview of the 
> results of my research so far. I am nearing completion of that paper, and 
> intend to publish it on arXiv.org in a couple of months with the hope of 
> getting comments, and hopefully collaborators. BTW, perhaps somewhat more 
> descriptive of this work is the subtitle of this forthcoming paper: "A 
> Comprehensive Theoretical Apparatus for Modelling the Organization and 
> Dynamics of Living and Lifelike Systems".
>
> Anyway, these are my immediate interests. I'm looking forward to finding out 
> about yours.
>
> Take care,
> Grant
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
>

-- 
Saul Caganoff
Enterprise IT Architect
Mobile: +61 410 430 809
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/scaganoff

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Reply via email to