This is a good introduciton to REST. REST is an architectural style, although it was not intended to be one when the thesis was published. Each URL is a representation of the resource, and the client changes state as it navigates from one representation to another. Some style details:
1. Client-Server, pull based model. Stateless. caching possibility. etc.
2. Nouns used for URLs.
3. HTTP get used when representations are only accessed- the underlying resource is not modified.
4. The user should be encouraged to navigate from resource to resource.
amit's blog: 11/01/2003 - 11/30/2003
can not believe that I am blogging a blog. But then I have seen this elsewhere.
This relates to the idea of Market Research firms being considered factories which process information and churn out finished goods- insight, understanding, and usable knowledge. Comparing with the old model:
Factory MR firm
Raw material Information (0s and 1s)
Machinery Models, Frameworks, Methodologies
Finished Good Insight, Understanding, Structured knowledge, action items
Skilled Labor Experienced Consultants, MR experts
Unsilled Labor Backoffice people, report writers, generalists
This insight is applicable in general to the whole knowledge industry, in a sense. There are two observations here:
1. One must try to get into a position in the knowledge industry where one is specialised- the equivalent of a skiller labor.
2. One must develop machines for the knowledge industry. Machines are things which automate the processing of inputs, easing the work of humans and allowing economy of scales. While they may take time to develop in the beginning, their rewards are rich and long lasting. The machines in the knowledge industry are themselves intangible in nature. They are the frameworks, methodologies and models using which information can be processed and some kind of useful output generated.
TCS: Tech Central Station - Is Intelligent Design a Bad Scientific Theory or a Non-Scientific Theory?
Phew! Before making the entry, let me say that I have done something stupid in installing this google toolbar thing. Struggled for 15 minutes before getting the browser to work right.
Anyway- this interesting article talks about how Intelligent Design is not really science, because it does not meet the criterion of falsifiability. This is, of course, right. The author draws upon Karl Popper's views.
What do I have to say about this? Since I also think that something like I.D. could be a reality, what is my view? Hmm. I actually think that I.D. can put up a clear case of falsifiability. It would have to go back to the kind of things Paul Davies talks about in his "The Origins of Life". Higher level laws, and how certain things which exist in nature are simply not possible without intelligent design.
