Re: the distinction between data and intelligence
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 01:46:08 GMT
Message-ID: <Ap3ue.25617$F7.18598_at_news-server.bigpond.net.au>
Thanks for the dialogue Ken ...
"Kenneth Downs" <knode.wants.this_at_see.sigblock> wrote:
> Normally when pressed for details on "intelligence", you seem, and I use
> this word inviting correction, to equate intelligence with processes. I
> would suggest this is way too broad. You are trying to pin down the
> assets
> that are not physical, no? Boxes are physical. Data, being static once
> recorded, is actually more like boxes than it is like code, because once
> you have it you have it. But what is code? Is this what you call
> intelligence? I'd like to follow that reasoning through and see if it can
> be nailed down to measurable terms.
Let's examine the database systems environment of a progressive
organisation that has harnessed technology to some lengths. We
would see that there is going to be three layers of software:
The activity of the combination of these software layers (in conjunction
with the data itself) effectively acts as a developed intelligence with
respect to the organisation.
E1: some operating system
E2: some (R)DBMS (and data).
E3: some application (code)
I answer this question as follows: All database system invariably
have associated with this data a specific suite of database
application software (CODE).
Traditionally this code was external to the database, but times
and technology are rapidly changing. Today, much of this code
(ie: E3 - application software code) may exists internal to the
(R)DBMS - stored procedures coded from SQL.
To take matters to their extremes, I am able to demonstrate
http://www.mountainman.com.au/software/southwind/
a database system in which 100% of the application code
is internal to the (R)DBMS - along with the data - in the
form of SQL (stored procs).
Best wishes for now,
-- Pete Brown Falls Creek OZ www.mountainman.com.auReceived on Wed Jun 22 2005 - 03:46:08 CEST