November 3, 2004
Center of Excellence Proposal
à
White Paper on Incident Information Orb
Architecture (IIOA) à
Adi Structural Ontology Part I
à
ARDA rejection notice
(Friday, October 29, 2004) à
On
the possibility from Stratified Ontology Knowledge Processors
BCNGroup Founding Committee October 27, 2004
Dr, Day and the ARDA group.
You will be included in BCNGroup messages for a while, as is my Constitutional right to express the BCNGroup community's disappointment in the nature of the Challenge Problem program management. This is not spam; it is a stream of communication to you about your decision.
ARDA's rejection of
anticipatory science
All communications from members of the ARDA management team will be posted and will be public domain. If you wish, you may put the BCNGroup email on your spam list. The messages will be sent and there will be a public record. And I suggest that if you are truly unwilling to consider the consequences of not being even interested on our challenge problem, then you should not tell me to not send messages to you. Just put me on your spam list. The public record, as expressed in the BCNGroup Glass Bead Game postings, is compete with many examples of government program managers’ disrespect for the notion that poor and provincial funding evaluation is deeply and profoundly effecting the very nature of science. The case that the BCNGroup community has made, and is willing to testify to the Congress is being re-expressed as the
2005 BCNGroup Report to the Congress
I am talking to you, Dr Day, not “as an individual” but as someone who has a specific job and whose decisions have consequences to me and to my community of innovators and scientists.
As you must agree this communication, about your funding decisions, is a proper expression of my constitutionally protected rights under our common understanding of the American culture. You, and the small group around you, have the authority to award 4 - 12 million in direct funding, and there are many forms of indirect funding that piggy backs your narrow and confused decisions. This authority has a responsibility which the system at Mitre has protected itself from. Why not, everyone else does this separation of authority and responsibility. (see also [**])
Dr Ballard’s communication to the BCNGroup Founding Committee, yesterday, on this issue of funding decisions, see [151], shines light on the fact that a specific group of 400 or 500 hundred old men, and women, in these position of funding power have no longer any true sense of the nature of natural science, nor of the confusions about information science and mathematics that they contribute to. They are protecting turf and illusions in the most deceitful fashion imaginable.
In American, we now have to fight for the right to not be excluded in funding and employment.
Over the past four years the situation has grown disabilitating for us on the outside of the "group of responsible people", as President Bush sometimes refers to you-all in the security community. American science stands naked and starving as the “responsible people” make these huge expediters on IT stupidity, like distributed smart agents, and the like. These technologies are deeply confused about the nature of human intelligence and no one in the program management community cares,
What is important to them is the funding stream, i.e., the business contracts. This truth is a truth about massive and now common and seen to be acceptable war profiteering in the cottage industries to extract 100 Billion dollars per year for just plain garbage technology.
Somewhere, some how the light of day and the light of hard science has to be shone on the funding decisions.
BCNGroup Founding Committee
See related: