Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 11:34:50 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Commerical applications (was: Development and validation Message-ID: <199701201834.LAA15733@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <Mutt.19970120003518.j@uriah.heep.sax.de> from "J Wunsch" at Jan 20, 97 00:35:18 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > One of my main talents is the ability to see order in apparently > > chatotic systems. But further, I see orders of order in these > > systems. This is what makes me a good systems engineer. > > Articles of more than five pages should be required to come with an > abstract... Abstract "There are more things in Heaven and Earth, Horatio..." Social organisms have philosophical basis which can be mathematically modelled using games, chaos, and fractal theory. Using such a model, it is possible to percieve growth limitations on the social organism which may not be apparent to the organism itself. Indeed, these limits can be seen to be dependent on the fractal order of the organization. Given knowledge of these limitations, it is possible to adjust the organization to optimize its growth. A rational social organism will act to optimize its growth, since that is the primary goal of social organisms: to subsume all competitors. Most social organisms (governments, churches, etc.) are not rational, in that they hold tenets which act to oppose change, and since growth is a form of change, they end up opposing growth. It is hoped that an organization in a less restrictive implementation space, such as a dynamic information space, will be more able to be rational. Our hypothesis is that decreased external pressure on the organizational structure will enable it to avoid ossification, and remain more fluid that one in a more traditional implementation space. Our theory is that a more fluid social organization will be, by nature, better optimized for progress toward achieving its goals (both primary and secondary). We base this theory on observation of venture capitolized social organisms with a two year fiscal horizon historically out-competing publically held social organisms with a three month fiscal horizon, with all other external stress factors being equal (in fact, we have compared the same organization with itself in different stages of a life cycle involving conversion from venture capitol to public funding). End abstract Regards, Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199701201834.LAA15733>