Re: Partial executability/ determinism of a Chor description language

Jon Dart wrote:

>
> One of the problems I'm having evaluating the various proposals for 
> solving this problem is that relatively few people are actually doing 
> this kind of automated interaction at present. It is easy to find use 
> cases that involve complex interaction of business partners. It is a 
> little harder IMO to turn those into plausible scenarios involving 
> automation of the interaction.


It's the chicken and egg problem.

You don't have a technology, so obviously you have no use case for using 
that technology. And if you don't have a use case, why would you bother 
inventing that technology?

Until at some point some customer comes up and says "wouldn't it be nice 
if I could do this and that". And your immediate reactions is "it's not 
a use case for anyone else" or "it doesn't work for X, Y, Z". But if 
instead you decide to create some basic solution and offer that 
technology to the customer, most often then not you find that it ends up 
being used by a lot of customers in a lot of places you could never 
imagine, and you have an implosion of use cases, to the point where you 
start asking "now, why didn't I think of this before?"

And then you discover that you just invented the Web or P2P file sharing 
or WiFi which were all originally some simple technologies for very 
specific uses and ended up being used on a massive scale in use cases no 
one ever considered ;-)


I don't think we're about to re-invent the Web, all I'm saying is that 
we tried some of these features that have "absolutely no use case" or 
just "doesn't work for X/Y/Z" and gave them to customers and sure enough 
some of them never ever used them. But some of them did, and actually 
came back with more use cases. And if you keep expanding the network by 
putting these capabilities into more products I think you would find 
even more uses cases. And more interestingly, I think it would compel 
people to find problems to X/Y/Z if only so they can use it there.

arkin

>
> --Jon

Received on Friday, 30 May 2003 18:48:39 UTC