Innovation (technologicallly driven) – Page 29

Art project for grabs

Putting it out there, for grabs. An art project.
Crowdfunding as the Purpose of it.
Imagine: 3D (sic) printing small parts of an existing Jackson Pollock, e.g., One: Number 31, 1950, and framing them in oversized rococo frames. Sizes of the cuts differ, depending on the amount of funding provided. Of course there should be some photo shoot (actual or virtual) of the pieces assembled, to the max of the original as possible (the frames will make completion of the puzzle impossible but that’s the point, too) and using some state-of-the-art knapsack algorithm.

No more. No fancy bits. Just this. Because you Can. Art = [I could do that] + [Oh yeah but you didn’t]

To which:

[Pieces / assembled, for strength; Royal Waiting Room, Ams Central Station]

Yup, there it is …

… What took us (?) so long …?

Hybrid war

Yes, the phrase we all were waiting for, or might have predicted but hardly anyone did. But now, out there for all the FUD and fear mongering (to profit from ..!). May this be the avenue of submersion of cyber (#ditchcyber !), like a U-boat trolling and unexpectedly blowing you out of the water?
What will be, will be. Grab the money trucks!

On a side (?) note:

[Transport for the consultants /-cy fees for you, required to tackle it all; Baltimore]

Short on tape

The title being a mere reference to Turing machines. Since I wanted to bring up the subject of short-sightedness of those that do not understand the fundamental nature of the Church-Turing thesis and Halting Problem deeply enough.
Because they, symptomatically, consider that humans can solve the problems associated with it hence any machine that would think similarly enough or better than humans, would have overcome the problems by sheer thinkpower. But that is simply wrong. Humans do not overcome the problem, they work around its applications — another element of what makes us human, maybe. And there is no guarantee whatsoever, or rather to the contrary, that any ASI will be able to do the same, in all situations — because any true ASI will explode to cover all of the universe hence also all of its problem areas, right ..? [Reference to Kurzweil’s books and ideas not really necessary, are they?]
Gödel’s Incompleteness isn’t just something that can be solved! It is!, whether that’s fortunate or not. And a world ‘beyond’ such axiomatic issues, well… Wovon man nicht sprechen kann…

And Good versus Evil: Also not ‘solved’ by humans. And phenomenology — not something that the ultimate abstract of Hegelian Ratio can ‘solve’. And …

In similar vein (not?):

[The eternal fight between Good and Evil, ratio versus original Natural brute force, Yin versus (!)(?) Yang; Sevilla]

Watson’s place to be

Two points re Watson here, one poignant, one solved:

Where is Watson? Because, it must run on some (i.e., enormous number of) core processors that physically are, somewheres (multiple). Would anyone actually know or otherwise, wouldn’t that be scary for all the idol-worshippers of individualised-robotlike AI ..?
The name, the motto. After Thomas J.’s … Think. Name, sole purpose. Nomen est omen. Capice ..?

So there you have it. The question remains Open. Until you provide me with some answer, possibly..?

Also:
000010
[Cogite, citius altius fortius! of the 1928 kind; Amsterdam of course]

The ides of March

… aren’t today only, but are indicative of … well, a lot of what goes on in infosecland these days.
Who to trust, when your buddies and experts and both in ones, may carry knives or worse. Like, turning their your defenses against you behind your back. Like the Brutus’es and Ed S.’s did because their consciousness revived (true in both cases ..!), like the great many are doing without tipping you off already. Until it’s too late. And, in similar vein, how’zat for your backdoors built in ..?
But then, as long as you can sit there like a rabbit in the headlights … sleep now in the fire [insert appropriate link to RATM clip] because the Time Till Collapse may leave you less room for Après Nous la Déluge than ever before.

Just to wake you up, by the way; if you read the above as some kind of chagrain I may have achieved my aim of making you think beyond mere Mehhhh.
So, I’ll leave you with:

[Shifting politics, shifting alliances…]

Privvezee Shield

The fig leaf of the trade ..?
Probably will blow in the wind at the first whisper over 2Bft. E.g., through ‘misinterpretation’ of the rules and inherent incapacity to understand the Principles, by some vague fifth-line anonymous placeholder instructed to not understand, buried deep down in some TLA you may or may not have heard of.

And then, the wind cried Mary; landsliding into only the thinnest of lip service with a torrent (no double entendre intended) of factual breaches.

You’ll see… Plus:

[A sub, appropriately, even if only in Baltimore…]

Vindication …

With due respect, but vindication is a beautiful thing…
As I had delivered a lecture over five years on all the places that risk management of the Basel II/II style, using quants and all to model (an übercomplex combination of scores of) human behaviour thus sublimating one’s model errors and one’s misunderstanding of how the world turns, not even mentioning the risk of the 15.5 risk; necessarily (if you’d had got It) speculative about what’s next, the evaluation was heaviliy tilted from quite (UK style) positive to mediocre by one bad review, that had as only comment “not based in evidence”. See the latest pres’s in my LinkedIn profile; without much by way of speaker notes, the ones on e.g., Blind Alley et al. can be readily understood qua intent.
Recently then, finally, this arrived. Maybe spinning off in an adjacent direction; veering off or running in parallel? But definitely touching the sore spot.
To the point where the dish is sweetest served cold.
But hey, would have liked all the business (and ~travel…) opportunities that could’ve been…

Now, let’s all go study Basel IV’s methodology and learn (e.g., as in the above-linked article). Maybe there is a future for risk management. Even if not as a separate discipline; see my posts of management-in-general. Plus:
000003 (8)
[Once was my ‘work’ location; worth re-pursuing Trois Islets, Martinique]

Jobba… Niche or disruptor ..?

Was dealing with Jobbatical.com the other day. The site of which, well.., still has that β feel to it, which made me wonder: Is this the UX of a disruptor ..?
Since, ‘local’ recruiters seem to move back and forth on the margins they can rob off clients (either side), pointing at pendulums between monopolies (e.g., by having blanket contracts with buyers even when thaht defeats the purpose) and open competition (when the Professionals don’t even want to work with middle men b/c of lack of effectiveness).

And now, the same, but much lighter on the go-between parts and more transparent hence (sic) more efficient. Though maybe a slight bit less glitzy — but those are the characteristics of Disruptors, right ..? Yeah, causation can’t me mirrored (A Or Not B isn’t B Or Not A) but still.

Why am I tipping you on this as you might compete ..? B/c I don’t think your profile will be like mine; you might (big if) compete on the Want side but hardly on the Can side …

So I don’t care. And:

[Wouldn’t mind this as work location, either — minus the trampling tourists]

Quick Note: Big Data or ..?

“I do not know what I may appear to the world, but to myself I seem to have been only like a boy playing with pebbles on the seashore, and diverting myself in now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay undiscovered before me” [I. Newton]

Whence my feeling when reading this, that I was looking into Big Data ..? Maybe Big Data could be made to work when set loose on the world’s major problems. So, no petty process analysis or what have we; onto serious fruition!

But then, it turns out that such problem solving, in particular such problem solving, needs no more data but can be solved, as shown throughout history, to be solvable without it and where data was available (yes, far more commonly available in the heads of otherwise decent much less looking-away kind of people) it wasn’t used properly or even in opposition.
Apart from the applications where it is used fully wherever more comes available and still not bringing us much closer to eternal humanitarian bliss.

For the humanity’s departure:
DSCN0124

Mock transparency in accounting

Errrm, this on increasing transparency. By using Mock’s Scale (as here, in Dutch but you’ll get/GTranslate it) on e.g., materiality levels in financial auditing and publishing them in annual figures even if only in the accountant’s statement (in full for every line item listed…). Much beyond mere ‘reasonable assurance on true and fair views’ that aren’t anything of any of those kinds.

Then, we’ll know much better where the trouble spots are. Yes, some analysts may be of a quality that they already know. But wouldn’t it be nice to let the wisdom of the crowds work on the figures’ margins as well, to detect (e.g., per big data analysis or via some OK-rating-like instrument) anomalies.
And, maybe expanded to some form of XBRL tag per communicated line item. Add a dose of fuzzy logic arithmetic and hey presto there’s your (Not)InControl-statement …?

Fit for a grad thesis, I guess.

Oh well:

[Rennie Mackintoshian approachability but this in Dunedin]