Excruciating Painful Parsing (Waterboarding to make it tell the truth) of this link follows where I will beat the hell out of the horse until something with little ambiguity is left remaining after the beating.
http://governor.hawaii.gov/newsroom/governors-office-news-release-hawaii-becomes-first-state-in-nation-to-enroll-firearms-owners-in-centralized-information-system/
This blog entry takes a closer look to see what the "Centralized Information System" structure is and what it does. The essence of any Information System is what it is and what it does. Two things. One is a noun thing structure the other is a verb action structure implementing relationships between noun things. Its Basic English language Information System structure. It works for a simple sentence or a complex book. It works as our language used to express our thoughts. Pure, simple, Object Oriented approach to binary relationship of thing to action in the Physical or Conceptual Domain.
What the Information System "is" is not just one thing. It is always two things, two nouns. One is the Subject, the other is the Object receiver of the Subject's action. The relationship is implemented by a verb. No implementing verb? There is no relationship. How can that be when every thing is related to every other thing? If there is no relationship of a thing to another thing then it does not exist in either the natural or conceptual world. That is the great trick of the conscious mind in the case of the conceptual world. A thing that stands purely alone that has no relationship to any other thing, real or conceptual is "no thing" or to join those two words into one word to make it pure: Nothing. The absence of any thing is "something" in the conceptual world of the human mind. In our minds nothing can be ( to have meaningful existence) something by virtue of its non-presence.
Reduction to the lowest granular level of anything gets down to the real nitty gritty. The point at which the object is no longer reducible to component parts.....related to and depending on the context of the Problem Domain. That is the way to understand the structure of the Information System.
"Owner Enrollment (Firearm)". The understood part in parenthesis. Not a very good looking sentence structure but it can be cleaned up to bring it into the bounding general rules of the English Language. Two lowest granular things: Owner and Firearm. Each with a unique identifier applicable to a single Owner and a single Firearm.
Oh, the ambiguity of the English Language. That of course, (meaning Ambiguity to clear up any ambiguity about what "that" refers to) is a feature to a Politician, a Bankster or a Flim Flam Artist (why, Alice it can mean anything you want it to mean) skilled in the art of using English to create ambiguity but ambiguity is the bane of Artificial Language. Artificial Language is increasingly used in Artificial Intelligence and a very small segment of the population is conversant in Artificial Language communication with others that think and speak the same Artificial Language among themselves. Intelligent machines as well as other human beings know and speak Artificial Language to creat the Information System. Computing machines communicate with other computing machines to create and learn Artificial Intelligence ability among machines. It is all very exact. Artificial Language is exact.
This is the first step of moving from the English Language to the Artificial Language application in a computer based Information System: Translate an ambiguous English Language structure to the least possible ambiguity expression possible within the domain of the English Language using a more rigorous form of the English Language as step toward expression in an Artificial Language Coding and Information structure.
This is where to start with: Make "Owner Enrollment (Firearm)" a more sensible English Language statement to expose what it "is" all about and what it "does". When the best least ambiguous expression of what it is and does is accomplished in the English Language then the next step is translating it to a better and more precise, less ambiguous Artificial Language. Then the Problem Domain of "Owner/Firearm is less ambiguous to those that are conversant in the Artificial Language and its application. Those that are not conversant in Artificial Language (Object Oriented Design and Coding) don't understand the Artificial Language of Object Oriented Design and Coding of Information System Structures. Therefore this lack of understanding allows the use of ambiguity to confuse the nature Problem Domain Specification and Solution as expressed in English. The degree of accuracy (ambiguity) of complex structure relationship and interactions that may be expressed by Natural Language has a wide range. That is a feature or a bug depending on the agenda of those skilled in using English to confuse or clarify.
Not everybody is conversant in the Artificial Language and its Application to Information Systems.
Most everybody in the USA can speak and understand English.
However, most can understand a great deal of complexity that is the function of the application of any language they know, Natural or Artificial. They can put together things bought from Ikea by following written instructions. Or not. I contend that an Information Engineer could, depending on their level of expertise, express a complex Information System as accurately in the English Language as an Artificial Language. Who is an example of this ability? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neil_deGrasse_Tyson
If only a Presidential Candidate could perform such a gifted trick to express things so unambiguously. Ambiguity, however, is a feature in the art of politics not a bug. Bait and switch.
http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/tag/ambiguity
Cleaning up "Owner Enrollment Firearm". "Owner Enrollment" is a verb phrase presenting the Action. That is why the sentence "Owner Enrollment (Firearm)" word structure looks funny as well as the semantics of its meaning. It states the Object of the action "Owner" first not the Subject "Gun" first. Rule of English (its rules are often broken, meant to be broken) is Subject first then verb directing action of subject to a receiver Object.
While Owner and Firearm are related by Enrollment is it the Owner or the Firearm receiving the action of Enrollment? This is where the accuracy of translation from Natural Language expression to Artificial Language expression exposes the application purpose intent of the plan. The answer is both and can be presented either way.
This is where the situation gets to be so fascinating: Something said so simply in the Natural Language of English gets extremely complex in the Artificial Language Information System structure that implements it. Fortunately we have developed Artificial Languages to handle the complexity in the Information Age. English Natural Language usage to manage the Information System Structure and Operation ended abruptly as a more technical Artificial Language became the better choice. "We" got to the moon with a better Artificial Language.
Both Owner and Firearm are being "Enrolled" in the Centralized Information System. Recall here that both Owner and Firearm have an exact unique identifier physical object identity. The action "Enrollment" is ambiguous until defined exactly. Perhaps the use of "Enrollment" is intentional to dumb down what the action being performed involves. Enrolled is a term related more to the Academic domain than the computer information system domain. In the computer information system domain it would be expressed as linking specific attributes shared by two objects the link being "Owned".
At the granular level Owner and Firearm are unique singular objects with attributes. At the collective level these singular unique objects are aggregated to a Parent Class Object of All Owners and All Firearms. In this case all Owners geographically in Hawaii and all Firearms geographically in Hawaii. That introduces an attribute (geographic location) to each object (Owner and Firearm). Obviously, it is a relationship that that may be sized to any geographic level like all States.
Owner is a person. (disregarding institutional ownership of any "militia" for the sake of this analysis)
All Owners of a Firearm are people. Not all people own firearms. At the aggregate Object Class level of All People, Owner of a Firearm is an attribute of a sub-class child of All People. This is where the User View and its requirements shape the structure of the Information System.
This is an important Object Oriented statement that by this definition for analysis purposes is absolutely true: All Owners of Firearms are Human Beings. All Firearms are Physical Objects.
Ownership of objects (real or conceptual) is an important thing in our social system and it is defined and regulated by a very detailed operating and application structural specifications written in Natural Language English. Ownership is an equally important thing in an An Object Oriented System that is and System and Application Programs written in an Artificial Language as a translation of the Natural Language. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object_composition
The FBI investigates to discover relationships. Starting with an identified Person of Interest or intending to discover the identity of potential Persons of Interest requires specification of an inquiry that may involve linking of multiple data elements of All People. It is a search inquiry. Firearms and ownership are only a thing and a conditional relationship in the bigger scope of all things that are owned. Ownership is only one data element that may lead to other object links like vehicle ownership, residence, age, date, time, etc, etc. depending on clues or possibilities.
The investigation to discover relationships may start with a Firearm. Ownership of a Firearm being an attribute of all Firearms. A good clue linking Firearm to All People (Owning or Not Owning). There will be a direct granular level link if All Firearms are linked to All Owners. However if there is a direct link that may lead to other associated linking clues. Like location of Firearm and/or other attributes of Firearm in the Information Data Base . Associates of the Owner or other attributes of Owner or Not Owner but associated with Owner in the All People Data base.
One Thing leads to another Thing. All related information data elements must be captured in advance for search purposes to enable successful search to be made when the the time comes to make it. It is the Google model.
Owner "Enrollment" In a Centralized Information System means all information about all Owners all the time. Owners are People. Needless to say, Companies are People my friend. Generally exclusionary for attributes that Companies want to be excluded from. Inclusive for those they wish to take advantage of. Companies commit institutional crime. They, however are not so much the target of investigatory crime and punishment. Because Bank. My Monetary System model would Enroll all Owners of Money in a Centralized Information System. Same Model as Firearm Ownership. That is another matter but the same model.
The Object Model structure of the Centralized Information System is built on the broadest universal SuperClassObject:AllPeople at the Aggregate Parent Object Class Level. That Super Class is composed of Person as a granular instance of the aggregate class of AllPeople. Every Person is a child of some n number of higher level Parent Classes and but inherits all the attributes of the SuperClassObject:AllPeople and whatever attributes of a multitude of subclasses that an individual may belong to or be associated with. Attributes that are universally applicable and binary exclusionary at the Super Class Level like Living or Dead for example. Or attributes of Children Objects of the Super Class like CitizenUSA.
Information Systems are composed of Objects and their related interactions at all levels in an Object Oriented Information System. Levels ranging from Aggregates of Top Level Objects that encompass all Categorical Children of those Objects all the way down to uniquely identified granular level instances of any given object. An Information System focused on People has the granular level of person.
Association linking identification of Owner to Firearm simply adds another inherited attribute, known method and messages at some defined Parent/Child level in the Total Object Model of All People. Just like Social Security Number, etc. An Information System is organically voracious. It simply thrives on more Information and grows toward having it all. It can have it all, and maybe should. All that information however must be controlled subject to higher order Super Class Conceptual Objects in the Information System like Privacy. Privacy being a Conceptual but equal and related top Super Class Object Class at the same level as All People. Privacy has a relationship to Ownership at the top SuperClass level. The Constitution deals with that Conceptual Object. (All People being both real natural living and breathing and conceptual corporate non breathing but with attributes and method functions shared with real People.....it is a complex relationship but only one of the big things requiring resolution in the Total System Object Model.)
The whole world is progressing painfully toward a better Object Oriented Model applicable to our Social System. The nature and structure of that model and the methodology for making progress is embodied in the Information Age and its Artificial Language. The Information Age does not operate on our Natural Language of English. Its Operating System and Application Programs are based on an Artificial Language that is an order of magnitude less inherently ambiguous than Artificial Language. Our Natural Language of English can be refined to be more precise in its meaning as a progressive step toward translation to an Artificial Language. That is true in all the natural sciences but it still must be translated to an Artificial Language to enable computer based Operating Systems and Application Programs in an Information Age. Few understand and are conversant in that Artificial Language yet it increasingly drives our Society and its Social System. Those proficient in Artificial Language and their systems are at the helm of where we are going.
The general public must at least have an increasingly better ability to utilize and understand the English language at a higher level of accuracy that eschews ambiguity. Fat Chance. Because Trump! Ambiguity is a media model that serves to keep those in control that maintain their control through systems largely depending on the smoke screen of ambiguity and associated complexity that hides the true conceptual nature of sub-optimized, narrow sectoral interest, self serving operating systems and application programs from the public. Systems and programs expressed in English to take advantage of the public through ambiguity of the language but implemented in an Artificial Language to deliver more exactly what the designers intend that the public does not see or hear because they don't know or speak the Artificial Language.
By law uniquely identified gun owners in Hawaii are going to be enrolled in a centralized registration information system that relates those individual gun owners to their uniquely identified guns.
The link I am examining is not a media statement. It is a .gov official statement. This is the Bill For An Act. The English language specification that is to be translated into an Artificial Language for implementation in a computer based Information System. Simply expressing it in plain English is complex!
Hawaii state firearm owners are to be enrolled in a Federal centralized FBI information system called "Rap Back".
The FBI Rap Back link: https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/fingerprints_biometrics/ngi
This is the NRA link on Rap Back: https://www.nraila.org/articles/20160527/rap-back-a-new-federal-firearm-registry
All firearms and all owners linked to firearms in Hawaii are to be entered into the Rap Back FBI Information System. Which is the primary focus of the purpose? Owners or firearms. It chicken and egg. Doesn't matter except how it is spun to be one or the other for what purpose. They are linked at the most granular one to one level. Can't get more precise than that. It only excludes any entity ownership that is not an individual person. Institutional ownership. Military, police, gun club? agency? At least that appears to be the case. All individual owners will be registered. All firearms not linked to individuals will not be registered? Looks that way.
It is an interesting Information System structure to include innocent owners of firearms in an FBI criminal data base. At least it looks like that. http://www.kitv.com/story/32254891/proposed-federal-hawaii-gun-database-could-face-legal-battle. What it looks like and what it is by design can be two different things with different ways of presenting what they are and what they do. That is the beauty of a relational data base system. Apples can be separated from oranges but they can all be linked at higher parent levels of fruit. A legitimate claim could be made that that Hawaii registration would not be in the criminal data base, technically. Linking of data bases however just creates a bigger data base.
The greatest scope of a data base associating individuals with anything is a data base that includes every uniquely identified citizen of the USA. Then add all the data elements applicable to that individual. All applicable data elements include every chosen bit of information related to that individual. It could be in one master record or a linkage to any or all associated data base records in a virtual master data base. No duplication of data is a credo of Information System Management.
No duplication of data is a credo of Information System Management. Said it before and I will say it again. That is the natural evolution of Information Management. One single unique twisted pair of chromosome links to an entire organism.
The NSA seeks to capture Total Information. Capture it all. It is the natural urge of a system that feeds on and needs all information in order to digest out what it wants from the total captured and consumed. It may not know what it wants. When the time comes that identifies what it wants it will not be there unless all possible information was previously captured and stored. Just like Google does not know what I will ask it. It captures everything so I can ask for a very specific thing.
Information systems are evolving to know everything about everybody. They are fenced systems owned by the institutions that create them and shared among major institutions for mutual benefit, often at a price.
No matter how I beat the horse, parse what is said (and there is a long parsed connection linkage trail that I have omitted) the bottom line is that Hawaii firearm enrollment is a single state feeding the maw of growing national federal level information on everyone. A foot in the door at a state level.
Good thing or a bad thing??
An Information System that has all information on everyone is potentially like.......dangerous. Potentially. All depends on who and how and regulations. Regulations ultimately determined in accordance with our social structure way of object management and doing things with them. The trouble is that our social structure is expressed in one language, our Natural Language; English but it is implemented in another language intended to be an accurate complex translation of the Natural Language intent but becomes a Information System of an Artificial Language that determines what happens in the real world.
There is an ambiguity gap between where we all live and use Natural Language to define order and application to our lives and the use of an Artificial Language to apply Natural Language intent. Ambiguity at the translation is both or either a bug or a feature to create an Information System to serve us all or serve a few with a sub-optimized interest contrary to the common welfare.
It requires an intelligent population to achieve our goals. That intelligence used to depend mostly on a Natural Language intelligence. Now it depends more on understanding an Artificial Language and what it is used to create and apply.
I would like to follow, step by step, the trail of this English Natural Language specification to Artificial Language specification and Information System design and implementation. In the end it will obviously be a plug into a bigger system. How big of a bigger system? One that covers everything where the fundamental granular unique entity of the big system is a citizen.
https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/fingerprints_biometrics/ngi
I have a disturbing feeling that things proposed and introduced at the state level for federal level inclusion may be used at the federal level to further an agenda that says: We the top officials at the federal level know what must be done in the best interest of the people and willingly undertake the responsibility for getting it done. We know best what is best.
The FBI is an investigative agency. To do that investigating they need a file resource. If what they need is total information then that is what it takes to do their job for us. Getting that total information is absolutely necessary. If some degree of manipulation of user requirements from the base or state level is necessary to achieve that end then that is necessary.
No comments:
Post a Comment