The Internet has given us the power to express ourself. And boy, are we using it in creative ways. Just look at this video about the health care system debate in the USA.
(Listen to the last line.." I want my country back").
Hyperconnectivity: September 2009 Archives
We all use the word "Internet" quite often as a sort of container for everything "online". To my surprise a very concise and good definition was adopted in 1995 by the Federal Networking Council (USA) and later adopted by Congress. Even 14 years later a very good definition.
"The Federal Networking Council (FNC) agrees that the following language reflects our definition of the term "Internet".
- "Internet" refers to the global information system that --
- (i) is logically linked together by a globally unique address space based on the Internet Protocol (IP) or its subsequent extensions/follow-ons;
- (ii) is able to support communications using the Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol (TCP/IP) suite or its subsequent extensions/follow-ons, and/or other IP-compatible protocols; and
- (iii) provides, uses or makes accessible, either publicly or privately, high level services layered on the communications and related infrastructure described herein."
(hat tip Vint)
[ A rant about old thinking: why can't we get a downloadable spreadsheet with our government budget so we can analyze it ourselves?]
Onze regering laat indirect zien dat ze nog "oud" denken. Waar is de online toegankelijke rijksbegroting in bewerkbaar formaat en waar is de discussiesite?
Op de dag na Prinsjesdag staan de media bol met quotes van politici over de
rijksbegroting die gisteren gepresenteerd is. De "soundbites" zijn niet van de
lucht. Een ritueel dat ik al vele jaren voorbij zie trekken: luchtballonnen en
electoraal populaire uitspraken die echter geen enkele zoden aan de dijk zetten
(zoals 60 % top tarief voor alle inkomens boven de B-norm) worden afgewisseld
met serieuze overwegingen (de staatsschuld stijgt vooral door de investeringen
in banken, maar dat geld is niet weg en brengt meer rente op dan de lening
kost). Een brij van kwalitatieve kreten.
Voor een normaal mens is het
getallenoverzicht helaas ontoegankelijk. Zelf met een spreadsheet in de hand
gaan puzzelen en eigen conclusies trekken over wat politici en anderen beweren,
die analyses vervolgens delen met anderen is een onbegonnen werk. Want de
rijksbegroting (zie hier http://rijksbegroting.minfin.nl/2009/voorbereiding/miljoenennota)
is alleen te vinden als document in pdf-formaat.
Wat een ouderwetse
benadering van je electoraat! Waarom is de discussie gelimiteerd tot politici,
journalisten en lobbyisten?
Het is een kleine moeite om de begroting en
achtergrondgetallen in spreadsheet of databaseformaat toegankelijk te maken.
Volgens mij zijn er honderden zoniet duizenden mensen in Nederland die daar goed
mee om kunnen gaan en zelf gaan puzzelen met de begrotingsgetallen. Eens even
rekenen of de quotes van een populist echt ergens over gaan of verdwijnen achter
de komma. Je mag verwachten dat die mensen hun rekenpartijen en analyses gaan
delen op een openbare website, en dat vele anderen daar met belangstelling
kennis van nemen. Dat noem ik controleren van je regering en van je
volksvertegenwoordiging.
De rijksbegroting 2.0.
Het wordt tijd dat ook
"Den Haag" met zijn denken toetreedt tot deze eeuw...
My geeky self always gets excited when you meet someone who really understands the how and why of architectural choices in technology.
Recently someone explained to me that they had found the reason why some networks (backhaul for mobile, cable networks and others) did not perform as expected. The effective payload transferred can be reduced because the protocol overhead can be atrocious ( building TCP/IP on top of other protocols, which are themselves built on top of another etc.). The observed performance however was much worse than expected.
No, it was something else. A fatal combination of cheap memorychips and the wrong mindset.
The traditional telco mindset is to go for "5 nines": absolute gold-clad reliability, no loss of data whatsoever. The designers of TCP/IP however designed their protocol for imperfection, expecting imperfection (packet loss, link loss, erratic throughput) and using the imperfection in the algorithms for congestion control. In other words, if you want to run at maximum (dynamic) performance you have to exceed the limits regularly in order to know where they are.
Deep down in the network gear one uses memory chips as a buffer for incoming data between the network and the application. If the buffer is full, you lose a sent packet. TCP/IP "sees" the loss because the reception of the packet is not acknowledged (ACK) by the receiver to the sender.
But what happens if the traditional telco mindset and the cheap big memory chips of today meet each other? The buffer is set to be very big "so you don't lose packets". Who cares, memory is cheap.
The effect is that sometimes a lot of data can be held waiting in the buffer for the application. No ACK's (acknowledgements) are returned to the sender (yet). TCP goes crazy and thinks a lot of data is lost, reduces the sending rate and starts to retransmit all the data again, bringing the throughput to its knees.
The fix was easy: reduce the buffer to a small size so TCP/IP gets its desired feedback quickly. Performance was excellent again as a result.
The lesson is a deep one about the conceptual difference between striving for perfection on one hand and (elegantly) designing for imperfection on the other hand.
The difference between control and governance in a nutshell.
