System of systems?

[Ex-User (15237)]

What are some drawbacks and advantages of studying or making system of systems?
what would be some principles which would make sure the new made system of systems is not corrupt?

 

[Black Rose]

error correction feedback
preliminary code
game theory

(system recovery)

 

[Ex-User (15237)]

what do you think about a approach like this
i have assumed a lot of things as hard facts

error correction feedback
preliminary code
game theory

(system recovery)

system with evolving world views

its not about coming up with something new its more about compressing concepts to abstract and more compressed form
so things become easy for me

 

[Black Rose]

what do you think about a approach like this
i have assumed a lot of things as hard facts

Have you thought about how it will self organize?
A rearrangeable hierarchy for better maps perhaps.

it looks like you need a graph to deal with links and nodes.

 

[Ex-User (15237)]

Have you thought about how it will self organize?

yes i forgot to mention
the people currently alive will either go with the map or add remove items.
if the people using the maps have same intents then likely new map will be formed by combining the two
which also be divided further as intents change.
when people die and no new people use there maps the map is not in use

when people with the same map interact they also support each other views and there will to those maps

 

[Ex-User (15237)]

it looks like you need a graph to deal with links and nodes.

what would you use?
can you describe this in your language?

 

[Black Rose]

Oh I simply meant you need a way to organize data (like a graph) and if your data changes the graph needs to change as well. Just to keep everything neat and clean.

You wish to find similarity in the data and form multi-valued clusters.

cat vs dog
chocolate vs vanilla icecream
favorite color etc.

 

[Ex-User (15237)]

Oh I simply meant you need a way to organize data (like a graph) and if your data changes the graph needs to change as well. Just to keep everything neat and clean.

I understand what you said but it's no ringing any bells can you be specific about this

 

[Black Rose]

Sorry I did not understand at first. You are making an evolving map. And you want to make sure it isn't corrupted (systems of systems).

The only way I believe such is possible is editing tool kits and management providers. Like how Wikipedia has a set of good editorial collaboration. What is needed is collaboration on the map's history for reliability. All edits are stored for revision if needed.

Is what I said accurate?

 

[Ex-User (15237)]

Okay
But forget my example I just want to discuss how systems of systems should be constructed
Will they be reliable?

 

[Rebis]

"I am ozzymandias, systems of systems! look on my networks, ye mighty and despair."

 

[Ex-User (15237)]

"I am ozzymandias, systems of systems! look on my networks, ye mighty and despair."

 

[Ex-User (14663)]

"I mistrust all systematizers and avoid them. The will to a system is a lack of integrity"
--Nietzsche, twilight of the idols

 

[Ex-User (15237)]

system

i am sure he meant system in a different way, what i meant was just a abstraction of the world, and more abstractions on top of that .
He believed in mathematics thats how i know

 

[Ex-User (15237)]

"I am ozzymandias, systems of systems! look on my networks, ye mighty and despair."

System of systems is not like kings of kings
In other words
"A grand system "
What I mean is a top down view of a abstract bottom up world

 

[Ex-User (15237)]

Nietzsche

Nietzsche was a INTJ just like me, I can relate to him better.

 

[Rebis]

"I am ozzymandias, systems of systems! look on my networks, ye mighty and despair."

System of systems is not like kings of kings
In other words
"A grand system "
What I mean is a top down view of a abstract bottom up world

That is a system of systems is it not? One king acts through the medium of another, as does the mind have separate entities that have an associate function but are all interfaced by a centralised idea, or "consciousness". A top down view would be the equivalent: You can see the references to lower level data and emulate the systems at your will.

 

[Ex-User (14663)]

Even an atom is a system of sub-particles. So how is it that everything in the universe works so flawlessly despite being a systems of systems of systems and so on? It is because it was made by... *inhaling deeply and activating street-preacher voice* GAAAAAWD

 

[Rebis]

Bait averted.

 

[Ex-User (15237)]

That is a system of systems is it not? One king acts through the medium of another, as does the mind have separate entities that have an associate function but are all interfaced by a centralised idea, or "consciousness". A top down view would be the equivalent: You can see the references to lower level data and emulate the systems at your will.

Even an atom is a system of sub-particles.

@Rebis thats your cue
i dont intend to manipulate
systems, i want only elevate my understanding
not every person wants to be malicious

Systems of systems already exist, we dont create them we discover them
they are hidden to the normal eye

 

[Rebis]

What do you mean? There's no manipulation. A higher level view of systems could only be attained by understanding the lower-level systems that you have transcended. Transcedental, or elevated understanding comes on the basis of understanding elementary systems. This is not malicious, infact it's completely seperate from personal interaction. When I mentioned king of kings I did not mean a king and his vassals, I meant in the context of a grand umbrella that has many facets. The ultimate king is a subject, let's see psychology and psychology is the "king of kings", with the plural form "kings" being all the sub-disciplines within psychology.

 

[Ex-User (15237)]

What do you mean? There's no manipulation. A higher level view of systems could only be attained by understanding the lower-level systems that you have transcended. Transcedental, or elevated understanding comes on the basis of understanding elementary systems. This is not malicious, infact it's completely seperate from personal interaction. When I mentioned king of kings I did not mean a king and his vassals, I meant in the context of a grand umbrella that has many facets. The ultimate king is a subject, let's see psychology and psychology is the "king of kings", with the plural form "kings" being all the sub-disciplines within psychology.

i didn't understand one thing you said