Reboot 8: What have I learned so far? (before the dust settles… and i enter another chaos state)

To begin with it is tough, to say nothing of difficult, to deal with one’s expectations of an event like reboot that has been so praised and so anticipated! That and the fact that i, like a few other people, have been dealing with information input overload since about lunch time yesterday.

The best place to start is however to say that this is so far (June 2, 2006 15:00) this reboot is an excellent conference. Expectations and anticipation are a good thing, but somehow they are not the whole story. In fact these gray emotional states do cloud one’s thinking and need to be embraced and cherished.

The way that I see it, the paradigm shift already happened. We are here and the revolution is taking place. The shift is from capitalism to social humanism.  I am not quite sure what to call it, but let’s play around with the term social humanism along the lines that business is art and that it is all about sustainability somehow. How? We are working on it.

Due to my lackadaisical approach to studying Copenhagen’s map I missed Ben Hammersley talk. I got lucky and Bruno Giussani did blog on it. I managed to find myself as the guest of two different families thanks to the genius of Henriette Anderson Weber who had the wonderful idea of starting “can i crash?“.  Do not get me wrong, I find the experience delightful, however I could afford to improve my relationship to logistics.

I was rather in for a surprise with the talks by Adam Arvidsson that both enlightened and challenged my thinking. He gave both an introduction to sociology and revisited Marx idea of general intellect.I find it both amusing and appropriate that somebody would introduce an ethical economy by referring to Karl Marx and asking how does capitalism looks in its final stages.

I was rather pleased to have JP Rangaswami  (his blog) participate in my workshop, I wanted a challenge, I got it and I will blog on it as soon as my mind gets back to ground state and I can write something coherent, right now it feels like mush or rice pudding. Euan Semple is up on stage and I am going to listen to him.

Knowledge and Information

Knowledge and information are often used interchangeably in the popular literature. Within the scope of innovation and technology, it is important to make a fundamental distinction about the true nature of the two. Information is archival and slow, that is, information is the resource contained in recording media from books, to hieroglyphs and databases. Information is static, archival and one of the resources upon which knowledge draws. Information is not knowledge. Knowledge is a resource residing within cognitive beings. Knowledge is a synthesis of information and experience; it is fast and dynamic, not necessarily archival. For example, if you provide a well trained electrician with all the legal information on a specific topic and ask him a concrete question about that issue, the electrician will not give you the answer immediately; he will have to read all the information on the legal aspects of the question, study and learn, and then will provide you with an adequate answer after a certain time of either days or weeks. If you pose the same problem to a lawyer, he will provide you the answer either immediately or within some minutes. The electrician had information, the lawyer had knowledge, the difference is speed.

Who owns information?

Who owns knowledge?

A bit of reading about software protection

This article published on the website of the WIPO may be old hat for some of the super-geeks, but for others it may provide useful reading. Another good read on the same subject that also includes a few links and additional information can be found on the website of CORDIS.

For preliminary prior art search search I recommend espacenet and the USPTO. Whatever you do, do read the small print, disclaimers and remember that terminology is in this field as important as syntax is in programming.