UCGIS Virtual Seminar - Fall 1998 [Back][Refresh][Options][Search] White Paper [Edit*][Delete*] [Image] White Paper Dawn Wright 10/11/98 [Image] [Image] Any questions or comments on the Dawn Wright 10/11/98 white paper? Please post th... [Image] [Image] Distributed Computing, Network Byong-Woon Jun 10/12/98 Computing, Client-Sever Arch. [Image] [Image] re: distributed vs. network Ronald William 10/12/98 computing Ward [Image] [Image] Ron's response is quite Dawn Wright 10/12/98 right. Distributed computing does i... [Image] [Image] Distributed Computing Erik Shepard 10/13/98 [Image] [Image] Summary: Distributed Computing Byong-Woon Jun 10/14/98 [Image] [Image] Distributed Computing, Byong-Woon Jun 10/12/98 Interoperating GISs, and Open GIS [Image] [Image] Distributed Computing, etc. Erik Shepard 10/12/98 [Image] [Image] re: distributed computing Ronald William 10/12/98 etc... Ward [Image] [Image] > reply to Jun - and am I Dawn Wright 10/12/98 right in thinking that ... [Image] [Image] It seems software that Jay Raiford 10/12/98 survives finds a niche for itself. A... [Image] [Image] analytical 'black Ronald William 10/13/98 box' Ward [Image] [Image] Re:GIS as an Byong-Woon Jun 10/14/98 Analytical Black Box [Image] [Image] re: distributed computing Erik Shepard 10/13/98 [Image] [Image] You are right Erik, Jay Raiford 10/13/98 money will always drive...........well, ... [Image] [Image] By the way, do the Ronald William 10/14/98 users or do the companies drive GIS's Ward directi [Image] [Image] re: money is Erik Shepard 10/14/98 everything [Image] [Image] Who drive GIS's Byong-Woon Jun 10/15/98 direction for the future? [Image] [Image] User-Driven Software James Nichols 10/21/98 [Image] [Image] re: User-Driven Erik Shepard 10/22/98 Software [Image] [Image] Valid concerns, James Nichols 10/23/98 but I think the picture is a bit brighter th... [Image] [Image] interoperability with Dawn Wright 10/14/98 extensions [Image] [Image] Security and Public GIS Byong-Woon Jun 10/14/98 [Image] [Image] Good Distributed Computing James Nichols 10/14/98 Example (I think) [Image] [Image] Once again, you guys have beat Dawn Wright 10/12/98 me to it! Erik has done a ve... [Image] [Image] additional reference Ronald William 10/13/98 Ward [Image] [Image] Sum: Distributed Computing, Byong-Woon Jun 10/15/98 Internet, Interoperability, Open GIS [Image] [Image] Theory re: optimal location of Bill Moseley 10/21/98 computing activity [Image] [Image] re: optimal location Erik Shepard 10/22/98 [Image] Open GIS Consortium Dawn Wright 10/11/98 [Image] Why does Distributed GIS work? Byong-Woon Jun 10/13/98 [Image] [Image] re: why does distributed Ronald William 10/13/98 computing work Ward [Image] [Image] software vendors Deana Pennington 10/13/98 [Image] [Image] re: software vendors Ronald William 10/14/98 Ward [Image] [Image] monopolies Deana Pennington 10/14/98 [Image] [Image] re: monopolies Erik Shepard 10/15/98 [Image] [Image] Another Implication: Towards Byong-Woon Jun 10/15/98 Societal GIS [Image] [Image] paradigm shift Deana Pennington 10/16/98 [Image] distributed computing and research Ronald William 10/13/98 priorities - questions. Ward [Image] [Image] re:research priorities - J. David Fuss 10/14/98 questions [Image] [Image] digital libraries Dawn Wright 10/14/98 [Image] [Image] Oops, I kind of snoozed on Wilmot Greene 10/15/98 this thread. But, I find this ... [Image] [Image] I think Wilmot has good Jason Seifert 10/15/98 reason to be cynical. Government, i... [Image] [Image] > I think Wilmot has Dawn Wright 10/15/98 good reason to be cynical. >... [Image] [Image] comments Ronald William 10/14/98 Ward [Image] [Image] Distributed computing and Bill Moseley 10/14/98 less developed countries [Image] [Image] re: Distributed computing Ronald William 10/14/98 and less developed countries Ward [Image] [Image] Neo-fordism vs Byong-Woon Jun 10/15/98 Post-fordism [Image] [Image] > There are two Dawn 10/15/98 approaches to explain the > rela... [Image] [Image] Reference Byong-Woon Jun 10/16/98 [Image] [Image] re:Neo-Fordism and Bill Moseley 10/17/98 Post-Fordism [Image] [Image] re: Distributed Bill Moseley 10/17/98 computing and developing countries [Image] [Image] comments Peter Henschel 10/14/98 [Image] [Image] re: comments J. David Fuss 10/14/98 [Image] [Image] standards Deana Pennington 10/16/98 [Image] [Image] re: standards J. David Fuss 10/16/98 [Image] [Image] reply Peter Henschel 10/17/98 [Image] [Image] data standards Andrea Swnasby 10/19/98 [Image] [Image] re: comments - less J. David Fuss 10/14/98 developed countries [Image] [Image] less developed countries Erik Shepard 10/15/98 [Image] [Image] trickle down Deana Pennington 10/16/98 [Image] [Image] Developing country Bill Moseley 10/17/98 priorities and GIS [Image] [Image] developing countries Dawn Wright 10/14/98 [Image] [Image] re: priorities Erik Shepard 10/14/98 [Image] [Image] Re: re: priorities Ronald William 10/14/98 Ward [Image] [Image] re: priorities Erik Shepard 10/15/98 [Image] [Image] Philisophical perspective Ronald William 10/15/98 Ward [Image] [Image] ... Aaron Timbo 10/15/98 [Image] [Image] Pontification Aaron Timbo 10/15/98 [Image] [Image] Response James Nichols 10/16/98 [Image] [Image] re: audience Erik Shepard 10/16/98 [Image] [Image] Re: Research Priorities Byong-Woon Jun 10/15/98 [Image] Comments on the White Paper Byong-Woon Jun 10/14/98 [Image] [Image] title of white paper Dawn Wright 10/14/98 [Image] Hello, my name is Stephan. I am a MGIS Stephan Dunning 10/15/98 student at the U of ... [Image] [Image] "more pressing issues than GIS." Ronald William 10/15/98 Ward [Image] [Image] Ron, I may not have been as Stephan Dunning 10/15/98 specific as I should have been i... [Image] [Image] re: unsecured access J. David Fuss 10/15/98 [Image] [Image] re: access Erik Shepard 10/16/98 [Image] [Image] re: more pressing issues J. David Fuss 10/15/98 [Image] [Image] questions and comments Kirsten McDade 10/15/98 [Image] [Image] equipment in developing Dawn Wright 10/15/98 countries [Image] [Image] Cost of HW/SW Brian Ward 10/16/98 [Image] [Image] Cost of data Jason Seifert 10/16/98 [Image] [Image] re: cost of data J. David Fuss 10/16/98 [Image] [Image] hardware and customs Ronald William 10/19/98 Ward [Image] [Image] Comments James Nichols 10/16/98 [Image] Kirsten, Coming from a developing minh le duc 10/16/98 country, I agree with y... [Image] Basic Jay Raiford 10/16/98 [Image] [Image] Your comment is appreciated Ronald William 10/19/98 Ward [Image] [Image] re: GIS on the street Erik Shepard 10/19/98 [Image] [Image] Clarification Ronald William 10/19/98 Ward [Image] [Image] ***"...provide an outlet Stephan Dunning 10/19/98 for information so that people can ... [Image] [Image] I know quite a few Jay Raiford 10/19/98 people that have built there own house. ... [Image] [Image] GIS free-for-all Ronald William 10/20/98 Ward [Image] [Image] Example anyone? Wilmot Greene 10/20/98 [Image] [Image] User dependent Ronald William 10/20/98 Ward [Image] [Image] I heartily agree Dawn Wright 10/20/98 with Ron's analogy to Africa. And here in ... [Image] [Image] re: access Erik Shepard 10/20/98 [Image] [Image] Arguement or Discussion? Ronald William 10/21/98 Ward [Image] [Image] reply Erik Shepard 10/21/98 [Image] [Image] semantics Ronald William 10/21/98 Ward [Image] [Image] re: semantics Erik Shepard 10/22/98 [Image] [Image] point well Ronald William 10/23/98 taken Ward [Image] This discussion has elicited many great Blaine Hackett 10/20/98 comments. I have a ... [Image] [Image] > His comment brings to > light Dawn Wright 10/20/98 an issue that ... [Image] Microsoft Locked up? Jay Raiford 10/22/98 [Image] Application Areas of Distributed Byong-Woon Jun 10/22/98 Computing and Web-based GIS [Image] [Image] > I'm interested in integrating Dawn Wright 10/23/98 Web technologies &g... [Image] Post new message in this thread ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 11, 1998 07:03 PM Author: Dawn Wright (dawn@dusk.geo.orst.edu) Subject: White Paper Greetings everyone, We are now going to shift gears and move on to the topic of Distributed Computing. Before posting discussion questions and such I'd like to point you to the URL for the white paper. You can get it directly from: http://www.ncgia.ucsb.edu/~good/newwhitepaper.html Let me know if you have difficulties getting this. Also, I'd like to post another reminder about preparations for the GIS/LIS panel in Ft. Worth, Texas. This will be a great opportunity to meet some of your "protagonists" in person, :-) as well as share the successes and perhaps failures of this "seminar" with interested scholars. Once again, I hope that your departments will be able to send 1 or more of you to GIS/LIS. The panel is Session #18 at GIS/LIS, Wednesday, November 11th, Fort Worth Convention Ctr., TX, Room E105, 8:30-10:00 a.m. See http://www.gislis.org/sessions.htm Oregon State folks will have their flights booked by this Tuesday to get good rates. Conference registration has started and a discount is in effect until October 20th. Student registration fees are $95 each. GIS/LIS has a housing reservation service as well and the cut-off date is October 13th. Rates range from $73-$110 per night for a single. Cheers, Dawn (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=1864) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 11, 1998 08:19 PM Author: Dawn Wright (dawn@dusk.geo.orst.edu) Any questions or comments on the white paper? Please post them. And let's continue the great "tradition" of attempting to answer questions as well as raising them. (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=1866) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 12, 1998 08:33 AM Author: Byong-Woon Jun (bwjun@arches.uga.edu) Subject: Distributed Computing, Network Computing, Client-Sever Arch. Does anybody have any idea of distinction between distributed computing and network computing? How is client-server architecture related with both of terms? Thanks in advance. (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=1868) ------------------------------------------------------------------ [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 12, 1998 12:22 PM Author: Ronald William Ward (ronward@arches.uga.edu) Subject: re: distributed vs. network computing Jun, I'm not exactly sure what the hard differences are, but after reading the White Paper it seems to be that distributed computing as a concept includes networking as well as many other sub-topics. For example, networking at public and private sector institutions using GIS are the norm (as in our network here a UGA), but distributed computing concepts bring different issues, such as data integration and transferibility) to the idea of a network. Other wireless types of computing (wireless communication being an important aspect of distribited computing) from field sites and automobiles might not necessarily be networked. Ron Ward (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=1885) ------------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 12, 1998 02:01 PM Author: Dawn Wright (dawn@dusk.geo.orst.edu) Ron's response is quite right. Distributed computing does indeed include networking as well as many other sub-topics Distributed computing does not refer so much to computer architecutre as to new *paradigms* for we USE computers, the ability to access data and process them irrespective of the location of the data or the computers. In that sense, field computing as Ron mentioned, would not necessarily be networked but most definitely in the realm of distributed computing. Dawn (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=1898) -------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*] [Delete*] Date: October 13, 1998 04:52 AM Author: Erik Shepard (shepard@uga.edu) Subject: Distributed Computing I would argue that distributed computing is more than just computing irrespective of location, It also has to do with the componentization of computing into smaller pieces that may be distributed across a computer or a network. For example with a word processing program, the program would be written in such a way that (for example) the dictionary component was a separate piece from the font formatting component. These components might be organized in such a way that the dictionary piece executes on one server while font formatting is on another, all the while making these operations appear to the user as if it were executing on his or her own machine. I think that the key to distributed computing is the idea of these virtual machines create out of pieces of software and actual machines. (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=1920) ------------------------------------------------------------------ [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 14, 1998 11:42 AM Author: Byong-Woon Jun (bwjun@arches.uga.edu) Subject: Summary: Distributed Computing The rise of networked workstations and fall of the centeralized mainframe has been the most dramatic change in the last two decades of information technology. This shift has put more processing power in the hands of the end-user and distributed hardware resources throughout the world. The term distributed computing was derived from computer science and literally refers to the distribution of computing work. It focuses on the means and ability to access distributed objects and process them irrespective of the location of the hardware, software, and data. Underlying all distributed computing architectures is the notion of network communication between computers. There are serveral components to facilitate distributed computing: Client-server architecture, Synchronous and Asynchronous transmission, APIs (Application Programming Interfaces), Terminal interfaces, Messages, RPC (Remote Procedure Call), Database protocols, Parallel processing, and Component-based development environments. Hope you find it to be informative. Jun (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=1990) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 12, 1998 08:34 AM Author: Byong-Woon Jun (bwjun@arches.uga.edu) Subject: Distributed Computing, Interoperating GISs, and Open GIS I have a basic question. While reading through the white paper, I think several research concepts such as distributed computing, Internet GIS (especially Web-based GIS), interoperating GISs, and open GIS are confusing me. Could you give me any clarification (including hierarchy and relationship) among them? Thanks in advance. (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=1869) ------------------------------------------------------------------ [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 12, 1998 09:01 AM Author: Erik Shepard (shepard@uga.edu) Subject: Distributed Computing, etc. My take on this (which is offered with no warranty) is: Distributed Computing basically encapsulates the idea of components on one or more machines. Data may be stored on one machine, while a piece of the software to manage the data is on another machine, and still another piece of the data on another machine. If they are on the same machine, they are still implemented as pieces which may be broken out later if needed. An example of this would be Oak Ridge's Parallel Virtual Machine software which allows software to be written in such a way that processes are distributed among several machines. Internet GIS has to do with adding GIS functionality to so-called browsers or making functionality available via the world wide web. An example of this might be Microsoft/USGS's new TerraServer which allows browsing capability of a *lot* of data over the web through Netscape, IE, etc. Interoperating GIS's are when vendor software has capability to work with other vendor software. For example, ERDAS has written an extension to Arcview which implements some of ERDAS's capability in Arcview. OpenGIS has to do with the development of standards which allow vendor and platform independence between data, development tools, etc. For example, ARC/INFO now makes use of the Open Development Environment which allows a developer to use such common environments as Visual Basic, Delphi, etc. to develop GIS application code. This also seeks to develop common data standards which would function in any GIS (much as you can use a GIF or JPG in virtually any drawing package). Hope this helps. (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=1870) ------------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 12, 1998 12:32 PM Author: Ronald William Ward (ronward@arches.uga.edu) Subject: re: distributed computing etc... Erik, That was a great help! Given the clear way in which you outlined the pieces in your reply to Jun - am I right in thinking that distributed computing is facilitated by interoperable systems? Can distributed computing be effective with all the password protected and non-transferable GIS software out there? I think it's helpful that on-screen digitizing can be done on arcview, then brought into arcinfo for use with more powerful analytical tools. I'd like to see everything in a common format that is transferable to what ever software is necessary to get the job done. But with profitability as an issue in the development of new and more effective GIS, where is the room for interoperability so that distributed computing can become an effective tool in the development of GIS? Ron Ward (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=1887) -------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*] [Delete*] Date: October 12, 1998 02:11 PM Author: Dawn Wright (dawn@dusk.geo.orst.edu) > reply to Jun - and am I right in thinking that > distributed computing is facilitated by > interoperable systems? Most definitely! I think that interoperability is more of a computers science nuts-and-bolts topic, whereas is distributed computing is much broader, encompassing even societal and cultural issues (e.g., the notion of distributed computing helping to create "cybersocieties"). > Can distributed computing > be effective with all the password protected and > non-transferable GIS software out there? Good question! Let's hear from some other folks! Who haven't contributed to the virtual seminar yet! > But with profitability as > an issue in the development of new and more > effective GIS, where is the room for > interoperability so that distributed computing > can become an effective tool in the development > of GIS? Once again, another good question which I will defer to our students. Let's hear it folks!! (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=1900) --------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*] [Delete*] Date: October 12, 1998 07:37 PM Author: Jay Raiford (jraifor@lsu.edu) It seems software that survives finds a niche for itself. ArcInfo is analysis while Erdas is image processing. Sure they will try the competitors arena, but will eventually stay with what they do best. It would seem that the vendors would profit more by making there software, or at least a middle ground format, compatible with all software. Much time and money is spent today with converting from one to another. And it is not necessary that it be that way. Not to mention if there was a standard format you could have greater confidence in the results of your analysis. I often wonder what exactly changes when converting from say AutoCad to MGE and then to ArcInfo and then building topology. How much, if any, will the changes effect my analysis? (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=1915) ---------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*] [Move*][Delete*] Date: October 13, 1998 06:27 AM Author: Ronald William Ward (ronward@arches.uga.edu) Subject: analytical 'black box' Jay, your concern is well founded. I use GIS as well as statistical analytical techniques - but I always take care to begin with testable questions in as simple a research design as is possible, that way it's easier to keep track of what might be going on in the analytical black box. With research designs utilizing much more sophisticated data sets and analytical techniques (for example data from remote sensing imagery), beginning with reasonable and testable questions is even more important - if the questions are not clear then tracking data from one operating system to another becomes a futile persuit. In shorter terms, I do not (at this point in time) trust that changing from one operating to the next does not alter the robustness of analytical methods. Ron Ward (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=1926) ----------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply] [Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 14, 1998 01:51 PM Author: Byong-Woon Jun (bwjun@arches.uga.edu) Subject: Re:GIS as an Analytical Black Box I agree with Jay and Ron in the fact that unlike statistical packages, GIS is considered as an analytical black box because it is not easy to keep track of what might be going on inside it. By the way, I would argue that such data conversion between GISs or data formats may result in information loss of the original data so that it may have an effect on the final result. For example, while converting AutoCad DXF format to ArcInfo coverage, we can convert only spatial data except attribute data. Reversely, while converting ArcInfo coverage to AutoCad DXF format, we lose attribute data and topology corresponding to spatial data. This is a simple example. Most definitely, data conversion is a source of GIS error. Jun (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=1997) -------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*] [Delete*] Date: October 13, 1998 05:05 AM Author: Erik Shepard (shepard@uga.edu) Subject: re: distributed computing I do definitely thnk that distributed computing is facilitated by interoperable systems, but the profit motive is definitely always going to be an issue. One of the problems with traditional GIS software systems such as ARC/INFO is that they are monolothic and embody huge amounts of interdependent code. There is a movement in the software industry toward creating "components", which are an extension of the object-oriented paradigm. These components are complete libraries of methods which can be plugged in (think of the plug-ins in Netscape). This is where the software industry in general is moving, and is (I believe) where the GIS software industry is moving. ESRI released about 2 years ago their MapObjects software which essentially provides a developer some *very* limited capabilities for extending traditional GIS functionality to applications written in Visual Basic, PowerBuilder, etc. ESRI also has been working toward a complete reimplementation of ARC/INFO - in MapObjects and Visual C++ (this is one of the reasons that ESRI will no longer offer ARC/INFO for UNIX as of version 8.0). The idea here is again the componentization. So it may be that you will build a virtual GIS with vector components from ARC/INFO, raster components from ERDAS (I don't know that ERDAS has the same direction right now - this is just hypothetical), and a smidgeon of printing and plotting capabilities thrown in from, say, Adobe. Of course for this to work, OpenGIS standards must be developed, but this a big issue right now in GIS and has the backing of some of the major players (like ESRI) so I think that this will happen. I think that most vendors realize that OpenGIS is going to happen whether they like it or not, so they might as well at least drive it. (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=1921) --------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*] [Delete*] Date: October 13, 1998 04:10 PM Author: Jay Raiford (jraifor@lsu.edu) You are right Erik, money will always drive...........well, most everyhting. I haven't seen the latest ArcView but MapInfo 5 and Geomedia 2 have already passed ESRI in compatibility. Most of the GIS software purchased in the future will be just such packages. Only very large companies and universities can afford ERDAS and ArcInfo anyway. With more players using many different software packages if any of the data is going to be "re-useable", interoperability and Open GIS must get with the program and catch up. Who do you think will own the majority of the GIS software, in say the next 10 years? My guess is everyone. You, me grandma...everybody. I heard Microsoft has plans to incorporate it into one of there operating systems. While there are just a few major players would be the time to work on standards. Once standards are in palce, and used by all, maybe Al Gore's digital earth won't seem so "pie in the sky". As is, I hope my grandkids realize it. What do you think? By the way, do the users or do the companies drive GIS's direction for the future? (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=1960) ---------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*] [Move*][Delete*] Date: October 14, 1998 05:51 AM Author: Ronald William Ward (ronward@arches.uga.edu) Subject: By the way, do the users or do the companies drive GIS's directi "By the way, do the users or do the companies drive GIS's direction for the future?" I don't think either of these groups set the direction of GIS development. The origins of GIS are in helping to formulate policy. It stands to reason that policy makers will continue to identify types of information needed to formulate policies, and GIS companies will develop avenues within their software through which the needed information can be had. Keep in mind that the profit motive is an intergal part of policy formation. By 'policy makers' I do not refer to government officials/consultants only, I would also include CEOs from the insurance, transportation, natural resource (forestry, mining, etc.), and a slew of other industries. In this respect, policy makers from private institutions are using GIS to obtain information as part of cost-benefit analyses. With regard to formulating policy, and as part of the decision making process, distributed computing may not be a contradiction of terms for the neoclassicists. Clearly, for me anyway, distributed computing will make GIS applications, and the development of new applications, easier for all interested parties. If applications are smoother, policy/decision making will be more precise, costs will go down, profits will go up, and everybody will be better off for it. So, it IS within the best interests of GIS vendors to work out distributed computing architectures - the question is whether the vendors will realize this, or take the Bucanian path of protecting profit margins by being exclusionary about software compatibility/interoperability. I think there is a hidden contradiction in what I wrote above - the commodification of information is a sticky topic. Ron Ward (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=1970) ---------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*] [Move*][Delete*] Date: October 14, 1998 06:39 AM Author: Erik Shepard (shepard@uga.edu) Subject: re: money is everything I definitely agree with you Jay. Monolithic GIS packages definitely are waning especially in favor of "toolkits" from Intergraph, Smallworld, Autodesk, and others. We definitely need to have standards in place to insure interoperability, but fortunately the OpenGIS consortium is working hard on that right now. By the way there is actually a 3rd part piece of software from Blue Marble Geographics called Geographic Explorer which extends GIS functionality directly to the Windows shell like you were talking about. Perhaps Microsoft is going to use some of that technology? Anyway, on to your final point. I think that in the beginning competition from the "big" players (ESRI, Intergraph, ERDAS, etc) drove GIS directions as they all struggled for market share. Since all of the packages now have more or less the same capabilities I think to some extent users but also in large part the software industry in general is driving GIS direction for the future - as GIS becomes more mainstream. (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=1973) ---------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*] [Move*][Delete*] Date: October 15, 1998 08:50 AM Author: Byong-Woon Jun (bwjun@arches.uga.edu) Subject: Who drive GIS's direction for the future? It's an interesting question. I think refreshing the history of GIS gives us a good insight into who drive the future of GIS. As you know, several stages of evolution of GIS can be defined: Pilot GIS, Departmental GIS, Enterprise GIS, and Social GIS. These overlap in time and occur at different moments in differents parts of the world. In each stage, the role of organizations and individuals were different. The pilot GIS, the first or pioneering stage, ranged from the early 1960s to about 1975. In this stage, professional individual personalities were of critical importance in determing what was achieved. The departmental GIS, the second stage, ranged approximately from 1973 to the early 1980s. This stage witnessed a regularization of experiment and practice fostered by national agencies, and continuation of local experiment and action untrammelled. The enterprise GIS, the third stage, ranged from about 1982 to the late 1980s. This stage was that of commercial dominance. The social GIS, the fourth and current stage, is one of user dominace. This stage has been facilitated by competition among vendors, embroyonic standardization on open systems and increasing agreement on the user's perception of what a GIS should do and look like. However, we are still in infant stage of the social GIS. We are heading towards the mature social GIS. Therefore, my prediction is that user, new information technologies, and software vendors are goning to drive the trend of GIS industry in the era of the mature social GIS. Jun (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2022) ---------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*] [Move*][Delete*] Date: October 21, 1998 02:10 PM Author: James Nichols (jnichols@extension.umn.edu) Subject: User-Driven Software Just wanted to point out a couple of examples of distributed software development/open standards projects that have been widely successful, I think these could serve as models of alternative development in GIS software. The "free/open source licensing" of these products, seems to protect the contents from being used without acknowledgement by for-profit companies. The LINUX operating system and the Apache web server are widely utilized open software packages. Because of the nature of the distribution of these products the numbers are somewhat hard to estimate. Current belief is LINUX is used by about 4 million people word-wide (see http://counter.li.org/estimates.html for details) and Apache (a little easier to estimate) is run on about 1.2 million machines (see http://www.apache.org/docs/misc/FAQ.html#compare). We don't need to only rely on (and pay) the big software companies for quality products. (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2195) ----------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply] [Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 22, 1998 06:35 AM Author: Erik Shepard (shepard@uga.edu) Subject: re: User-Driven Software James, Excellent points. Linux and Apache are both hugely successful projects and there are actually some initiatives in open development of GIS systems (similar to Linux) that I know of - I can't quite recall where I saw the information at the moment, but if I come across a reference I will post it. There are a couple of problems with these open systems, though. First and foremost is the level of knowledge and understanding that is sometimes required to use them (Linux is pretty "user-friendly" these days with RedHat distributions and others but in the beginning you had to know UNIX system administration to set up your PC). Another is that many vendors will not acknowledge these systems or develop any sort of compatibility because they often see these projects as sort of a joke (witness the difficulty with running any Windows application on Linux). Finally, these products don't have the budgets or timetables to develop competitively against vendors, nor do they have the resources to bombard the public with product information and advertising, so they may not be well known. Don't get me wrong, though. I still am a staunch supporter of open projects a la the Gnu public licensiing model. I think that they often can bring innovation to a stagnant market and at the very least offer free or cheap alternatives to prohibitively expensive packages. (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2207) ------------------------------------ [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply] [Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 23, 1998 01:01 PM Author: James Nichols (jnichols@extension.umn.edu) Valid concerns, but I think the picture is a bit brighter than you imply... As you said, new versions of these products continue to improve in terms of user-friendliness and although they are not as easy to use as some of the big commercial packages they have done a lot of catching up in the past few years. Companies such as Corel (Word Perfect, etc.), and Oracle have decided make LINUX versions of their products available in the past couple years. IBM announced this spring it would incorporate the Apache web server in to its WebSphere application server. (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2230) --------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*] [Delete*] Date: October 14, 1998 12:41 AM Author: Dawn Wright (dawn@dusk.geo.orst.edu) Subject: interoperability with extensions I agree with Erik that the GIS software industry is definitely moving in the direction of these "libraries" of interchangeable methods/extensions. It will also be interesting to see what happens with the Unix vs. NT "standoff." As for Arc at version 8.0, I spoke with some developers at the ESRI User Conference this year and they said that Unix is not being trashed yet. They will still offer Arc/INFO for the Unix platform. Distributed computing, despite the NT "revolution" is still firmly rooted in Unix servers for now. (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=1967) -------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*] [Delete*] Date: October 14, 1998 03:27 PM Author: Byong-Woon Jun (bwjun@arches.uga.edu) Subject: Security and Public GIS In reply to Ron's Question: "Can distributing computing be effective with all the password protectd and non-transferable GIS software out there?" I think distributed computing can be effective with all the password protected and non-transferable GIS software. Last year, I did an interesting work to initially investigate my dissetation topic. The work had to do with distributing and visualizing distributed geospatial data on the Web using a GIS software (especially, Arc/Info for Unix version). A Web-based GIS application created in the research provided public user with free remote invocation on Arc/Info using single user license. If you have only a network-connected computer and Web browser such as Netscape and Internet Explorer at a remote site, you can run the GIS program on the Web without using your login procedure on the server and software license. This brought me several issues in public GIS: security and legal issues. These issues still remains to be unanswered. In the topic "GIS and Society", these issues will invoke a hot debate. Jun (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2002) ------------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 14, 1998 10:23 AM Author: James Nichols (jnichols@extension.umn.edu) Subject: Good Distributed Computing Example (I think) Just to add a very common example to Eric's response: Package shipping companies such as UPS, FedEX, etc databases that are accessible and modifiable from practically anywhere in the world. Initial information is entered at a terminal, hand held scanners record location information as the package makes its journey, delivery details and signatures are gathered using simple computing devices. "End-Users" of the system are able to use a web browser to access information that has been gathered. I can't think of a more widely used and familiar distributed computing example. Utility companies, local government entities, and others use similar systems to record geographic information on-site of their customers and infrastructure. (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=1984) ------------------------------------------------------------------ [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 12, 1998 02:09 PM Author: Dawn Wright (dawn@dusk.geo.orst.edu) Once again, you guys have beat me to it! Erik has done a very nice job of distinguishing between "distributed computing," "internet GIS," "Interoperable GIS" (another UCGIS research priority VERY closely related to this one), and "Open GIS". I would add to this that if this research topic is really captivating to you, you might consider investing in a new book that does a great job of explaining these terms, discussing pertinent research in distributed computing, and laying out a possible agenda for the future. The book is "GIS Online: Information, Retrieval, Mapping, and the Internet" by Brandon Plewe, one of the members of the research priority team on Distributed Computing. Copyright of the book is 1997, published by OnWord Press, ISBN: 1-56690-137-5. You can probably order it ONLINE (smile) from the ESRI bookstore at www.esri.com. Dawn (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=1899) ------------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 13, 1998 06:15 AM Author: Ronald William Ward (ronward@arches.uga.edu) Subject: additional reference Thanks Dawn - for not only the reference but also for all the helpful insights as to the place of distribited computing in GIS research. Here's an additional reference for those interested in learning more about distributed GIS computing: Onsrud, Harlan J., and Gerard Rushton (1995). Sharing Geographic Information. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Center for Urban Policy Research. This book not only includes information on technical aspects, applications, and implications of distributed computing, but also includes a truly effective synthesis of topics related to distributed computing, interoperability, and GIS and society. enjoy, Ron Ward (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=1924) ------------------------------------------------------------------ [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 15, 1998 11:43 AM Author: Byong-Woon Jun (bwjun@arches.uga.edu) Subject: Sum: Distributed Computing, Internet, Interoperability, Open GIS Several research concepts can be summarized as followings. Distributed Computing refers to the distribution of computing work in a networked environment. It deals with the means and ability to access distributed objects and process them irrespective of the location of the hardware, software, and data. Interoperable GISs deal with the interchange of spatial data held in incompatible or proprietary systems and with exchange standards, geographic data semantics, and metadata.The term interoperability means many things: openness in the software industry, the ability to exchange data freely between systems, and commonality in user interaction. Open GIS refers to open and interoperable geoprocessing, or the ability to share heterogeneous geodata and geoprocessing resources transparently in a networked environement. It is the highest level of the interoperablitiy specification. Internet GIS is a network-centric GIS tool that uses Internet as a major means to access and transmit ditributed data and analysis tool moduls, and to conduct analysis and visualization. Component GIS has to do with internal development of GIS components to handle map display and other GIS-based activities. Component GIS--------------->I I Interoperable GIS<---->Open GIS ----------------------->I--->Internet GIS I Distributing Computing ---->I Distributed computing can be facilitated by open GIS, interoperable GISs, and component GIS. Internet GIS must be supported by distributed computing and can be facilitated by open GIS, interoperable GISs, and component GIS. Finally, Internet GIS will lead us to societal GIS, democratic GIS, or public GIS. Jun (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2028) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 21, 1998 09:08 AM Author: Bill Moseley (wmoseley@uga.edu) Subject: Theory re: optimal location of computing activity One of the research priorities in the white paper was "[t]o develop a theory that addresses the optimal location of computing activity." This topic seems to have received little attention to date. While I have a limited awareness of other models, I will, at the risk of making a fool of myself, attempt to make a few comments. I assume that there is a distinction between distributed databases and distributed computing power? Please correct me if I am wrong. It seems that database custodianship should lie with the people who collect and update the data. In a similar manner, it seems that those entities that develop and update computing/analytical capacity should be the custodians of this component in a distributed computing set-up. While some might argue that computing capacity should be located in the same location as the data, this does not seem necessary if everyone has access to analytical capacity via a distributed computing network. Cheers, Bill (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2193) ------------------------------------------------------------------ [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 22, 1998 06:55 AM Author: Erik Shepard (shepard@uga.edu) Subject: re: optimal location One thing to consider is that optimal locations can be optimal under a variety of different conditions. It may administratively optimal for a data custodian to store their data on their server, but may not be technically optimal (due to firewalls, poor network connections, or slow machines). Or vice versa. There is definitely a distinction between distributed databases and distributed computing power. They both fall under the umbrella of distributed computing, though. I think that the ultimate goal is to create a single, global, virtual machine where computation and data access seem local even if they are not. A good example of distributed computing (though not GIS) is the SETI@home program being developed at Berkeley (http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/). In this, users with spare machine time (and I guess a lot of flexibility in power bills) can leave their machine running and process SETI data. You have to connect initially to their server to set everything up, and then you are downloaded a chunk of "sky" data for your machine to process. When your machine is idle (i.e. you are not typing your thesis) your machine process the chunk of data that it is has obtained. When it is finished with one chunk it reconnects itself to the server, sends the results, and gets a new chunk of data. So the program looks like one-heck-of-a-massively-parallel system where theoretically every PC in the world has a single process. Actually, since you are parsing data which has coordinate information, I guess it would be some kind of a GIS. Or maybe an AIS (Astrographic Information System)? (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2209) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 11, 1998 08:06 PM Author: Dawn Wright (dawn@dusk.geo.orst.edu) Subject: Open GIS Consortium The white paper contains a "dead" link to the Open GIS Consortium site. Try http://www.opengis.org Dawn (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=1865) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 13, 1998 07:11 AM Author: Byong-Woon Jun (bwjun@arches.uga.edu) Subject: Why does Distributed GIS work? Thanks you all for giving me a lot of threads replying to my questions. I found them to be informative. So far, we defined the terms such as distributed computing, network computing, Internet GIS, interoperable GISs, and open GIS, and thought what might influence what. Now, I have other questions coming up. What implications does distributed computing have for GIS? Why does distribted GIS work? Thanks in advance. (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=1927) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 13, 1998 07:37 AM Author: Ronald William Ward (ronward@arches.uga.edu) Subject: re: why does distributed computing work "What implications does distributed computing have for GIS? Why does distributed GIS work?" Jun, According to the benefits outlined in the White Paper the implications of distributed computing and the reasons it should work are largely one and the same. Cost reductions, benefits to users (albeit vague at this point), improved decision making, and joint custodianship over geographic information are all implications of distributed computing as well as reasons why it should work. An important consideration here is found in the 'benefits to users' category. What benefits are there for software vendors with regard to distributed computing technology? This, it seems to me, is the most important, yet unclear, benefit. Software vendors work for profit, but the profit motive does not necessarily facilitate distributed computing (witness the Microsoft/Java trials). Am I wrong about this? Ron Ward (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=1929) ------------------------------------------------------------------ [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 13, 1998 02:46 PM Author: Deana Pennington (penningtond@geo.orst.edu) Subject: software vendors One definite benefit for vendors is that the revamping of the software, while costly up front, results in code that is largely independent of operating systems and hardware. Hence, it is marketable to everyone, rather than to a select group of users. The surge in marketability results in a rapid, short term sales increase, which offsets the initial financial outlay. With the technological trend in this direction in other categories, GIS vendors will have to do this, just to remain competitive with each other. Those who get there first will get the lion's share of the new market. Deana (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=1955) ------------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 14, 1998 06:10 AM Author: Ronald William Ward (ronward@arches.uga.edu) Subject: re: software vendors I agree with Deana on this point (read her message) - this is the ideal. If we can speak to the GIS developers/vendors from the standpoint of short-term profits (which, after all, is the language of the current economic paradigm), then distributed computing might just get off the ground. The contradiction arises with the formation of GIS monopolies (see: Obermeyer, Nancy J. (1995). "The Hidden GIS Technocracy." Cartography and Geographic Information Systems, Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 78-83.) Ron Ward (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=1971) -------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*] [Delete*] Date: October 14, 1998 11:39 AM Author: Deana Pennington (penningtond@geo.orst.edu) Subject: monopolies Interesting point...thanks for the reference. The lack of competition will certainly allow them to drag their feet. However, noone wants to become the next Cobol, or DOS system. Distributed computing is rapidly progressing in business and industry, and I don't think it will be long before it becomes the norm. If current GIS companies do not respond to that change, there will be a Bill Gates in GIS who will! There is not a lack of innovators in the current tecnological atmosphere... Deana (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=1989) --------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*] [Delete*] Date: October 15, 1998 05:23 AM Author: Erik Shepard (shepard@uga.edu) Subject: re: monopolies GIS companies are already responding to the change. The big push in GIS in the last year or two has been to move toward "toolkit" object libraries (ESRI MapObjects, Blue Marble Geographics' GeoObjects and GeoView, Intergraph's Geomedia and others). Also, there is much more of a push to develop functionality in terms of Internet capabilities. While I don't see the web as the last step in the distributed objects scheme, I do see it as the next step (and the one where I think a lot of the work is being done). (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2016) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 15, 1998 03:10 PM Author: Byong-Woon Jun (bwjun@arches.uga.edu) Subject: Another Implication: Towards Societal GIS In addition to benefits from the white paper, the important implication distributed computing can have for GIS is that it helps GIS become democratized. I think it can facilitate moving current enterprise-oriented GIS towards social GIS or public GIS. That's because GISs, applications and clients can benefit from the attributes of distributed computing and next generation GISs can be easier to use when they can take advantage of Internet as a medium of distributed computing which facilitates sharing data and information. Societal GIS appears true as GIS data clearing house and geodigital library. I think societal GIS is a shift for GIS paradigm. Jun (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2035) ------------------------------------------------------------------ [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 16, 1998 08:29 AM Author: Deana Pennington (penningtond@geo.orst.edu) Subject: paradigm shift I see it as a paradigm shift, too. And an important one. It's not unlike the shift the internet went through when it changed from a largely academic interconnection, to the explosion that we see now, with tremendous social consequences. Years later, we're still sorting through internet security and content issues! Probably an indication that it may be awhile before we sort through these issues with interoperable GIS! Deana (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2057) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 13, 1998 07:20 AM Author: Ronald William Ward (ronward@arches.uga.edu) Subject: distributed computing and research priorities - questions. "In [the distributed computing environment], it is important that activities focused on geographic information be embedded firmly within broader trends affecting the computing world generally. In the future, geographic information could be fully integrated with other information types, and as familiar to computer users of the future as text and numerical information are today. Geographic information could be more prominent in the digital libraries of the future than in conventional libraries, and digital libraries could offer additional services for processing and analyzing data. But we need to take the necessary steps today to ensure that this will happen." The above quote is taken from the White Paper on distributed computing. Read this quote, then read through the long list of research priorities at the end of the White Paper. Are all of the research priorities presented here in line with the directive put forth in the quote? Are these research priorities in a prioritized order? Can you suggest an order? A broader question is this: Given that GIS were developed to aid in making policy decisions, and this remains the primary function of GIS applications today, which research priorities are best suited to helping formulate policy? Looking forward to GIS and Society: This White Paper includes a great deal of discussion about benefits and cost benefit analysis with regard to developing distributed computing architectures. Who stands to benefit most from distributed computing - who stands to benefit the least. Consider your answers to the above questions and ask yourself if the current dominant economic paradigm facilitates or hinders development of distributed computing. Do you see a contradiction here? Ron Ward (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=1928) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 14, 1998 12:30 AM Author: J. David Fuss (dfuss@oce.orst.edu) Subject: re:research priorities - questions Ron, It seems to me that the research priorities in the White Paper are in an order. If distributed computing is going to succeed over the long term, then standards are essential and this is reflected in its listing as the first priority. Also high on the list are consideration of costs and teaching materials. All three of these research priorities apply tremendously to the formulation of policy. If standards exist to guide the distribution of information, then policies will be more sound. Economics obviously figure into policy making. And, if policy makers are to use the information available over a distributed computing "system", they will need to be educated. One research priority that seems to very important to the formulation of policy is that of social implications of distributed computing. Knowing how society will react to the realm of distributed computing figures prominently in how information gleaned from it will factor into policy decisions. Also, it seems that digital libraries are stressed in the White Paper quote, but do not appear to be addressed adequately in the research priorities. There seems to be a gap there. As far as who might benefit most, distributed computing seems most suitable for projects on a regional, national, or global scale. Although local communities may gain access to information through distributed computing, it may not feature prominently in their priorities. The problem of economics requires consideration in the development of distributed computing. It would seem that if the federal government were serious about achieving Gore's "digital earth", then funds should be made available to learn the answers to the questions that we are asking in this forum. It might be fruitful if software vendors were eligible for some of these funds, so that they might be inspired to pursue the development of distributed computing in greater earnest. Comments? Dave (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=1966) ------------------------------------------------------------------ [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 14, 1998 12:46 AM Author: Dawn Wright (dawn@dusk.geo.orst.edu) Subject: digital libraries > Also, it seems that digital > libraries are stressed in the White Paper quote, > but do not appear to be addressed adequately in > the research priorities. There seems to be a gap > there. Good point Dave, as one of the authors of the white paper is heavily involved in the huge Alexandria Digital Library Project at UC-Santa Barbara. However, one thing to note about these white papers that we are reading is that they are preliminary drafts which were then discussed and expanded on at our summer assembly this past June in Park City. Hopefully our discussions in this course will have some bearing on the next round of revisions to the white papers! At any rate, Mike Goodchild, during his presentation in Park City, expanded on the digital library theme quite a bit. Check out the Alexandria Digital Library web site at: http://alexandria.sdc.ucsb.edu/ > The problem of economics > requires consideration in the development of > distributed computing. It would seem that if the > federal government were serious about achieving > Gore's "digital earth", then funds should be made > available to learn the answers to the questions > that we are asking in this forum. It might be > fruitful if software vendors were eligible for > some of these funds, so that they might be > inspired to pursue the development of distributed > computing in greater Interesting idea. I wonder if the government would be resistant to this as some software vendors (who shall remain nameless (smile) all already bringing in scads of money from their sales. This gets back to the very good question that Jay raised about whether it is the users or the companies who drive the future direction of GIS. Dawn (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=1968) ------------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 15, 1998 08:46 AM Author: Wilmot Greene (mot@uga.edu) Oops, I kind of snoozed on this thread. But, I find this discussion to be relevant to the proposed "digital earth". Several people have mentioned that connection in their comments. And Dawn's comment above questions how the government would act/react to help/hinder distributed computing. This aspect of the discussion puzzels me: On one hand we need somone to create standards so that data compatability will not be so much of a problem, but should the govt. step up to the plate and do that? The GIS industry would have corporate winners and losers in that scenario. And the conspiracy theory people would never trust the GIS peoples' results ;-) The problem as I see it with any type of shared knowledge is that some people can make more money if they are stingy with their data. The only solution I can dream of is a utopian society. But I am a cynic. For true universal distributed computing to occur govt., industry, academia, and others have to really cooperate, and I have no idea how to pull that off. Wilmot p.s. blame the 'macromedia' tech. support dept. for my foul mood! (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2021) -------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*] [Delete*] Date: October 15, 1998 04:48 PM Author: Jason Seifert (seifert@nws.gov) I think Wilmot has good reason to be cynical. Government, industry, and academia SHOULD cooperate for the advancement of distributed computing, but there are strong forces hindering that cooperation. The government decided long ago to get into the data collection "business". They should spearhead the data intercompatiblity issue, but ... there is only so much they can /should do in that regard. There will always be problems with proprietary data formats since good data is expensive and VARs (value added resellers) can produce data needed for many industry applications. I am of the frame of mind that the direction of GIS is governed more by user's needs rather than GIS industry. The user may not be who we think it is, though. There are a whole slew of GIS applications which have little if anything to do with policy-making. I am speaking of operational uses of geographic data and IS. People and goods are moved all over the world using distributed systems involving transportation, logistics, warehousing, and routing software. Are these not GISs as well? I am inclined to believe that a "Digital Earth" concept is well under way already, but its appearance will be more transparent than we envision today. (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2039) --------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*] [Delete*] Date: October 15, 1998 08:26 PM Author: Dawn Wright (dawn@dusk.geo.orst.edu) > I think Wilmot has good reason to be cynical. > Government, industry, and academia SHOULD > cooperate for the advancement of distributed > computing, but there are strong forces hindering > that cooperation. Good point Jason. And this is one of the reasons why the UCGIS has been formed: "a strategic partnership between research, industry, and government" (www.ucgis.org) for the advancement of these research issues. Dawn (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2045) ------------------------------------------------------------------ [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 14, 1998 06:53 AM Author: Ronald William Ward (ronward@arches.uga.edu) Subject: comments "Also, it seems that digital libraries are stressed in the White Paper quote, but do not appear to be addressed adequately in the research priorities. There seems to be a gap there." J. David, EXACTLY! Dawn points out below that the author of the White Paper is invloved in establishing such a library, but hasn't included this high up on the list of research priorities - we'd like to see this in the revised White Paper. I think some of the research priorities appearing lower on the list should be shifted up in position. I agree that standards come first, but the second two priorities refer to building models, and some of the priorities below on the list should (maybe) come before building GIS activity and economic models. For example, shouldn't we know more about human-computer interactions in the field BEFORE building a model of GIS activities in the distributed computing environment? Shouldn't we know more about the social implications of GIS, and GIS with regard to intellectual property rights, BEFORE building an economic model of the distributed processing of information. Would not the above-mentioned models have to be adjusted as information on human-computer interactions and societal implications of distributed computing come to light? "As far as who might benefit most, distributed computing seems most suitable for projects on a regional, national, or global scale. Although local communities may gain access to information through distributed computing, it may not feature prominently in their priorities." This is also an excellent point. Distributed computing will facilitate broader scale GIS projects - yet local community access DOES NOT feature prominently in the list of research priorities! Perhaps issues of access belong in the "GIS and Society" White Paper - but we've seen a fair amount of overlap among the topics discussed in the virtual seminar thus far - and establishing a digital library of geographic information is (I HOPE) part and parcel to providing access to local communities. As far as GIS projects on the regional, national, and global scale are concerned, less developed countries/regions are in large part left out of the distributed computing picture. I'd like to see this issue explicitly stated in this White Paper (and elsewhere). "As part of developing distributed computing architectures, a high research priority will be to include less developed countries in a truly global exchange network of geographic information. Efforts should be made to provide less developed countries access to geographic information via distributed computing architectures developed inclusive of governmental, educational, and private institutions in these countries." GIS technologies in use in the developed world commodify geographic information, and this commodifications further marginalizes the 'information-have-nots' in less developed areas of our world. Much of the discussion in the White Papers is implicit as to these topics being mostly applicable in more developed countries - efforts to include less developed countries in the development and exchange of geographic information need to be more explicitly stated in the papers! Ron Ward (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=1974) ------------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 14, 1998 08:36 AM Author: Bill Moseley (wmoseley@uga.edu) Subject: Distributed computing and less developed countries I would like to pick up on Ron's point about distributed computing and less developed countries. I feel like the technology is presenting us with a real opportunity that, with the proper vision, could be used in a very positive way. At the subnational level in developing countries, my experience has been that data and information represent power. The introduction of computing technology has often accentuated the concentration of data and analytical capacity in the capital city and within the central government. Distributing computing could contribute to the process of decentralization wherein provincial and district governments would have the ability to be their own data custodians. At the international level, databases (e.g. biodiversity) have also often been centralized and located in the first world. Distributed computing allows national government to be the custodians of their own data. In summary, I increasingly believe knowledge and information represent power and distributed computing allows one to decentralize this power. Cheers, Bill (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=1977) -------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*] [Delete*] Date: October 14, 1998 09:13 AM Author: Ronald William Ward (ronward@arches.uga.edu) Subject: re: Distributed computing and less developed countries Bill, The situation you describe above is the ideal - but I see a contradiction here. Distributed computing does indeed represent a means by which informational power can be decentralized, providing that governments see decentralized information as being in their best interests. Do you believe there are many governments that see it this way? Here's another point: Do you remember the fiasco of the 1980 Nigerian census when each region of the country reported inflated population estimates because of the decentralized knowledge that funds would be allocated based on population by region? I believe in the free and fair flow of information, but... Comments? Ron Ward (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=1981) --------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*] [Delete*] Date: October 15, 1998 08:54 PM Author: Byong-Woon Jun (bwjun@arches.uga.edu) Subject: Neo-fordism vs Post-fordism There are two approaches to explain the relationship between information technology and the degree of concentration of information: neo-fordism and post-fordism. The neo-fordism approach argues that the advance of information technology accelerates the concentration of information in a certain area. The post-fordism approach insists that the development of information technology contributes to the process of decentralization of information in a certain region. No concensus on which one is right has made. Different culture and country result in different reuslts. This arguement issue still brings a heated and endless debate to us. Distributed computing is kind of digital technology and information technology. We can apply these approaches to the arena of distributed computing. Birds in eggs or Eggs in Birds? Jun (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2047) ---------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*] [Move*][Delete*] Date: October 15, 1998 09:16 PM Author: Dawn (dawn@dusk.geo.orst.edu) > There are two approaches to explain the > relationship between information technology and > the degree of concentration of information: > neo-fordism and post-fordism. Very interesting Jun! Thanks for sharing this! Can you supply us with a reference? > The neo-fordism > approach argues that the advance of information > technology accelerates the concentration of > information in a certain area. As in the developed world? (smile) > The post-fordism > approach insists that the development of > information technology contributes to the process > of decentralization of information in a certain > region. It seems as though the web started off with a post-fordist approach, back in the good old days when it wasn't so commercialized, and Netscape and Microsoft weren't at each other's throats. Dawn (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2048) ----------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply] [Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 16, 1998 11:44 AM Author: Byong-Woon Jun (bwjun@arches.uga.edu) Subject: Reference Dawn, Here is a reference for the paradox of information technology (IT) and the thesis of ambivalence with regard to centralization and decentralization strategies. "Grimes, S., 1992, "Exploiting Information and Communication Technologies for Rural Development", Journal of Rural Studies, Vol. 8, No. 3, pp. 269-278." Hope this helps. Jun (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2065) ---------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*] [Move*][Delete*] Date: October 17, 1998 07:02 AM Author: Bill Moseley (wmoseley@uga.edu) Subject: re:Neo-Fordism and Post-Fordism I would suggest that there are at least two determinants for a neo- (centralized) or post-fordist (decentralized) outcome in information technology: 1) the ability of the technology to work in a decentralized format, and 2) the objectives of the information power brokers. Distributed computing technologies allows one decentralize databases (and therefore power). Before this capacity existed, one could, presumably, only contemplate a centralized set-up. Information power brokers, on the other hand, can try to influence the shape of the system by limiting the type of technology available. (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2077) --------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*] [Delete*] Date: October 17, 1998 06:48 AM Author: Bill Moseley (wmoseley@uga.edu) Subject: re: Distributed computing and developing countries I just knew Ron would respond to my comments. I agree with you in that many developing country governments would not like to see their power (in terms of information and analytical capacity) decentralized. I think we forget, however, how much influence wealthy donor countries can have in these types of situations. For example, USAID supports Famine Early Warning Systems (FEWS) in many African countries that are heavily based on GIS and remote sensing. Given that African countries are eager to understand this technology, they are often willing to accept whatever set-up the expatriate "experts" suggest. Rather that seizing on this opportunity to promote decentralization, USAID has further facilitated centralized power by consistently (in every instance I know) basing FEWS analytical capacity in capital cities. The point you make regarding Nigeria (provincial government exagerating claims for political purposes) is exactly the argument I heard from other experts when I lobbied for decentralized databases and analytical functions when I worked for Save the Children (UK) in Mali. I think the answer is to have a consistent methodology and some sort of impartial review process. You may still have people trying to massage the system for political purposes (which, by the way, will still happen in a centralized system as it often local government that actually collects the information on the ground), but I think this is better than provincial government being totally in the dark about how central government arrived at a decision. Cheers, Bill (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2076) ------------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 14, 1998 01:08 PM Author: Peter Henschel (hens0045@tc.umn.edu) Subject: comments I think there has been some good questions brought up about who will benefit from distributed computing at different levels. It is important to look at distributed computing at a global and national level but the local level is also very important. If local governments don't have interoperable systems, they won't be able to share data. Just within the county I work in, there is different software being used by different departments. As of right now if I need data from another department I have to go and ask them for a download of what I need and hopefully I can get the data in a format that I can use. This is where the time and cost factor comes into play, if I could get at this data easily it would not only save me time but the people I have to bother to get it. One problem is that I don't have access to some of the data. Which will become an issue in the GIS and Society paper of who has the right to access certian databases. Not only is distributed computing important within the county, but there needs to be communication with neighboring counties, working up to the state, national and global level. Distributed computing standards need to start at the global level and work its way down to the local level. (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=1994) -------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*] [Delete*] Date: October 14, 1998 04:38 PM Author: J. David Fuss (dfuss@oce.orst.edu) Subject: re: comments Peter, You are quite on the mark about local governments and communities having difficulty accessing data. "If local governments don't have interoperable systems, they won't be able to share data. Just within the county I work in, there is different software being used by different departments. As of right now if I need data from another department I have to go and ask them for a download of what I need and hopefully I can get the data in a format that I can use. This is where the time and cost factor comes into play, if I could get at this data easily it would not only save me time but the people I have to bother to get it." The situation you describe highlights the need for integrated standards for not only GIS data collection and analysis, but for distributing it widely. The closer the GIS world moves towards standards, the easier it will be for end-users to share information without having to worry about how much time and money it will cost them to get the information into the format they desire. Thanks for sharing your example. David Fuss (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2003) --------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*] [Delete*] Date: October 16, 1998 08:45 AM Author: Deana Pennington (penningtond@geo.orst.edu) Subject: standards The need for standards occurs at a much deeper level than just analysis and collection. I worked for several years converting data from different systems into a new system. There was a serious problem with the way different systems used terminology. The same term in two different systems might mean two completely different thing. Sometimes it took a substantial amount of data analysis to figure out that a particular piece of data was being used two different ways, and how to make the corrections so that the two systems could be merged. As long as everyone has their own system, it will be a challenge to grab data from multiple sources and use it correctly. Deana (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2058) ---------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*] [Move*][Delete*] Date: October 16, 1998 05:08 PM Author: J. David Fuss (dfuss@oce.orst.edu) Subject: re: standards Deana, Excellent point about standards reaching even to terminology. In fact, I think one of the positive things about this forum is that various participants have provided us with definitions of terms, as well as sources for this information. I think this thought pattern leads us to the importance of metadata standards and how these can help us to know what the data actually mean. Maybe better metadata documentation can help to reduce the amount of analysis you mentioned is sometimes necessary just to determine how the data is being used. Dave (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2073) ----------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply] [Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 17, 1998 01:19 PM Author: Peter Henschel (hens0045@tc.umn.edu) Subject: reply Dave I think you bring up a good point of how metadata can be important. Metadata documentation can be very helpful in determining if the data is the correct data you are looking for. If you come across a couple different data sources for a project, the metadata could allow you to choose the data that you feel better represents the project. I think there is a need for better metadata documentation. At the state and federal level many agencies are providing metadata, but there is a lack in metadata documentation at the local government level. I am glad to see that metadata is a priority area of research in the white paper. Pete (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2080) --------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*] [Delete*] Date: October 19, 1998 07:45 AM Author: Andrea Swnasby (swan0295@tc.umn.edu) Subject: data standards A major part of my job is collecting data. So I have a lot of experience with incomparable data. It is amazing as you move from one region to another, through out the country how much data and its format can vary. This makes the research my organization does very difficult. It is hard to do comparable analysis without comparable data. For instance, we are currently doing a study of the Washington D.C. region. This region includes part of Maryland, Virginia, and the District. Data compatibility has been a major problem in the study and has cost us an extra month of work at least. I am glad to see that data compatibility has been marked as a priority. It would make my work much easier and more accurate. (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2099) ------------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 14, 1998 04:48 PM Author: J. David Fuss (dfuss@oce.orst.edu) Subject: re: comments - less developed countries Ron, I agree that the haves/have-nots issue is a difficult one and that more developed countries should aid the less developed ones in finding solutions to their problems. I believe, however, that by developing the means by which GIS data can be collected and analyzed (i.e. UCGIS Research Priorities), the more developed countries are providing an opportunity for the less developed countries. In many third world countries, the idea of distributed computing is far from the citizenry's idea of a priority. But, when the country reaches the point that it is ready to make GIS a priority, the technology will be available (and may also be affordable given the way the cost of hardware and software has dropped in recent years). Am I off the mark here? David Fuss (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2008) -------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*] [Delete*] Date: October 15, 1998 05:30 AM Author: Erik Shepard (shepard@uga.edu) Subject: less developed countries Great point David! I agree completely that less-developed countries have other priorities. But I think that you are right that our development here will ultimately trickle down and as the cost of computing comes down it may be more of an impetus for them to go ahead and make the leap. (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2017) --------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*] [Delete*] Date: October 16, 1998 08:48 AM Author: Deana Pennington (penningtond@geo.orst.edu) Subject: trickle down I wonder, though, if this won't play out the same way the lack of education has played out in developing countries. It's clear to everyone that better education would profoundly improve their circumstances in a thousend different ways. Yet, improving education has been virtually impossible to obtain, in spite of significant efforts by developed countries. Comments? Deana (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2059) -------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*] [Delete*] Date: October 17, 1998 07:17 AM Author: Bill Moseley (wmoseley@uga.edu) Subject: Developing country priorities and GIS Excuse me for being blunt, but I think it is somewhat presumptuous to say that developing countries are not ready for GIS or that it is less of a priority. Developing countries often have serious problems (AIDS, hunger, drought) to address, and I think most governments in these countries would gladly use GIS if it could help them solve their problems more quickly and cost effectively. While I'm all for appropriate technology, it makes little sense to try to tackle a problem as serious as AIDS with a filing cabinet full of dusty surveys and few staff when GIS may provide a more efficient approach. Cheers, Bill (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2078) ------------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 14, 1998 08:47 PM Author: Dawn Wright (dawn@dusk.geo.orst.edu) Subject: developing countries The points that have been raised about access in less developed countries are well taken. Here is an article written by Gerry McGovern to give us a perspective from Ireland. I really enjoy Gerry McGovern's musings about the Internet. He writes a newsletter called NEW THINKING which some of you may want to subscribe to (free of charge). Attachments: taxi.txt (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2014) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 14, 1998 06:13 AM Author: Erik Shepard (shepard@uga.edu) Subject: re: priorities Ron, I disagree with you that GIS were developed to aid in making policy decisions. I also disagree that this is the primary function of GIS today. I believe (and Dr. Usery can correct me if I am wrong) that GIS has its roots in automatic cartographic production. I think that the widespread use of GIS as a policy tool did not come about until the late 80s. Although policy making is an important use of GIS, it still is not the primary one. There is still a lot of work going on in map-making and other things. Regarding your comments on distributed computing differentially affecting various sectors of society, you are definitely correct. However, one thing that I would put forth as a devil's advocate is that GIS has always been a tool of the "haves" since the technology required for its use has been prohibitive until relatively recently (think $20K Sun hardware for ARC/INFO). While distributed computing still keeps GIS out of the reach of those without access to computers, GIS would have been out of reach anyway - and perhaps by distributing operations ubiquitously, we can actually put GIS into the hands of some of those who would not have otherwise had access. (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=1972) ------------------------------------------------------------------ [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 14, 1998 08:51 AM Author: Ronald William Ward (ronward@arches.uga.edu) Subject: Re: re: priorities Erik, Curry, Michael R. (1995). The Inevitability of Ethical Inconsistancy. Chapter 4 of Ground Truth: The Social Implications of Geographic Information Systems, John Pickles(ed.). New York: The Guilford Press. ...and I quote, "At the level of practice it should be obvious that more than elsewhere in geography, in GIS there is an attempt to "get out into the world." The earliest of these systems were designed not for pure research, but as instruments of policy making, and this has remained true today. Hence, GIS usually assumes a particular set of relations to society and to politics." Early research on the development of GIS, as with most research, depended on funding from various governmental agencies. We all know how difficult it is to get funding for research that has no broader applicability to the government that funds it. "While distributed computing still keeps GIS out of the reach of those without access to computers, GIS would have been out of reach anyway..." This is a singularly tautological statement that I find deeply troubling. "...and perhaps by distributing operations ubiquitously, we can actually put GIS into the hands of some of those who would not have otherwise had access." Exactly, but for this to happen, and since distributed computing in GIS is in a stage infancy anyway, the inclusion of 'have-not' needs to be an explicit goal/research priority in this White Paper (and elsehwere in the GIS literature). Ron Ward (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=1979) ------------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 15, 1998 05:12 AM Author: Erik Shepard (shepard@uga.edu) Subject: re: priorities Ron, And I quote: Coppock, J.T. and D.W. Rhind (1991). "The History of GIS" in David J. Maguire, Michael F Goodchild, and David W. Rhind, editors, Geographical Information Systems: Principles and Applications: New York: John Wiley. "... the whole field of automation in cartography ... was often the precursor to any involvement in GIS ..." There were a few early systems such as the Canada GIS which offered some capabilities for policy making, but largely the early systems were simply automated cartographic systems. Their use as tools of policy (and to large extent even their capabilities) did not come about until later. I agree that it would be great to somehow figure out how to let all of the "have-nots" have access to GIS. But I'm not sure how you plan to give people who don't know what GIS is or don't even care because it doesn't put food in their children's mouths access to this technology? (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2015) -------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*] [Delete*] Date: October 15, 1998 07:59 AM Author: Ronald William Ward (ronward@arches.uga.edu) Subject: Philisophical perspective Erik, "...but largely the early systems were simply automated cartographic systems." This is a trivial matter, but I wonder, if these early systems were "simply automated cartographic systems," then were they GIS? "I agree that it would be great to somehow figure out how to let all of the "have-nots" have access to GIS. But I'm not sure how you plan to give people who don't know what GIS is or don't even care because it doesn't put food in their children's mouths access to this technology?" Erik, It may be that my point comes from an ideal, 'pie-in-the-sky' attitude, but philisophically speaking, an ideal serves better to solve what you agree is a problem, whereas making generalizations about a group of people being centered only on putting food on the table does nothing to solve said problem. There are many types of people living in less developed countries, and as is the case anywhere, there are people of many differing intellectual capacities living in less developed countries. "...people who don't know what GIS is..." I know you don't actually believe that the less developed world should be generalized in these terms - I assure you there are many professionals in less developed areas who know what a GIS is. The real issue is providing access to professionals in less developed countries via distributed computing. In a place like the University of Dar es Salaam, there a quite a few learned professionals who are familiar with GIS theory - yet have no access to rapidly developing GIS theories and applications in the North. Why is this? The University of Dar Es Salaam is a governmental institution, and that government has enough trouble trying to pay off its debt to the IMF and World Bank - let alone spending $20K on a site license for ARC\INFO. I would like to see sections in the distribited computing and interoperability White Papers outlining an economic research directive to help wire such places in. kazi kazi, Ron Ward (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2019) --------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*] [Delete*] Date: October 15, 1998 02:27 PM Author: Aaron Timbo (timb0002@tc.umn.edu) (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2033) --------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*] [Delete*] Date: October 15, 1998 02:35 PM Author: Aaron Timbo (timb0002@tc.umn.edu) Subject: Pontification Determining who will benefit and who might be disadvantaged as a result of advancements in Digital Computing should be the first priority for the UCGIS. Digital Computing has the potential to further distance the "have-nots" from the decision making process. I'm thinking here of questions of accountability and implementation of controls. I'm encouraged by the participants in these discussions as there seems to be the knowledge that the implementation of GIS systems can affect, to varrying degrees, many different people. (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2034) ---------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*] [Move*][Delete*] Date: October 16, 1998 09:58 AM Author: James Nichols (jnichols@extension.umn.edu) Subject: Response I wonder how much interdependency there should be, or needs to be between the 10 research areas. For example, should research on Distributed Computing as it relates to GIS, also try to address the GIS and Society implications it has or is it more effective to keep the research priorities focused? I realize the research priorities are not fully independent but we should think about how to most effectively achieve the goals. I'm not looking for answers or discussion here but it is something to think about. (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2064) --------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*] [Delete*] Date: October 16, 1998 07:32 AM Author: Erik Shepard (shepard@uga.edu) Subject: re: audience As I stated in another article, getting this technology to professionals in 3rd world countries is very different than getting the technology to everyone in the owrld. I don't believe for one second that there aren't people in 3rd world countries who want or need access to this technology. But I don't think that everyone in the world needs or even cares about GIS. It is this second group of whom I was speaking. (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2055) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 15, 1998 08:15 PM Author: Byong-Woon Jun (bwjun@arches.uga.edu) Subject: Re: Research Priorities In reply to Ron's question:"Given that GIS were developed to aid in making policy decisions, and this remains the primary function of GIS applications today, which research priorites are best suited to helping formulate policy?" It seems that GIS as a collaborative SDSS (spatial decision-making supporting system) are stressed in the white paper and do appear to be addressed, though not adequately, in the research priorities. The research priority corresponding to your question is that "Conduct case studies examining the application of distributed computing in GISs, including horizontal applications (with data distributed across different location), vertical applications (with data distributed at different levels in the administrative hierarchy)." Distributed computing facilitates considering GIS as participatory or collaborative SDSS for democratic resolution of social and environemental conflicts. I'd like to see this issue adequately stated in a list of research priorities of the white paper. Jun (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2044) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 14, 1998 02:33 PM Author: Byong-Woon Jun (bwjun@arches.uga.edu) Subject: Comments on the White Paper I'd like to suggest that the title Distributed Computing in the white paper be changed to Distributed GIS, Distributed Computing and GIS, or Distributed Computing in a GIS Environment. That's because the purpose of the paper is "to carry out the basic research needed to develop new geographic information technologies that are distributed, ubiquitous, and mobile, allowing geographic information to be accessed, analyzed, and used in decision-making anywhere, at any time". In other words, the term distributed computing in the white paper is not a final goal by itself, but a means to achieve the above objectives. If our emphasis is more on distributed computing, the paper should focuse more on technical aspects attempting to develop new distributed computing architecture, distributed network architechure, distributed operating system, distributed hardware, distributed software, and distributed database. In summary, the purpose of the paper tries to develop distributed GIS using the concept digital computing and apply it to some areas such as GIS education, decision-making process and geodigital library, etc. Thus, the title digital computing had better be changed to one of what I suggested. Any comments? (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2000) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 14, 1998 08:43 PM Author: Dawn Wright (dawn@dusk.geo.orst.edu) Subject: title of white paper You've expressed some good concerns Jun, regarding the title of the white paper. The authors had actually considered changing the title to "Distributed and Mobile Computing." I think they've decided to keep it as is for now particularly because they are envisioning distributed computing as encompassing much more than nuts-and-bolts architecture. The white paper is not as explicit about this but the discussions at the UCGIS Summer Assembly in Park City, Utah this year brought out the notion that distributed computing represents a new paradigm in the usage of computers. Some once again, as geographic information science deals with the issues surrounding the USE of GIS and related technologies, so distributed computing deals with the issues surrounding the distribution of computers and databases. Hope this helps. All of the comments so far on these different threads has been GREAT. We will definitely make them available to the authors of the white paper. Dawn (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2013) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 15, 1998 08:07 AM Author: Stephan Dunning (stefe1anne@aol.com) Hello, my name is Stephan. I am a MGIS student at the U of Minnesota. I'm enjoying the interesting discussions, and would like to add to Erik's comment. "I agree that it would be great to somehow figure out how to let all of the "have-nots" have access to GIS. But I'm not sure how you plan to give people who don't know what GIS is or don't even care because it doesn't put food in their children's mouths?" Erik makes a great point about the potential benefit (or the lack thereof) to people who simply have more pressing issues than utilizing GIS. We need to look at the costs vs. benefits of creating an "all access" GIS. How many additional people would actually utilize this technology. Some other issues to consider regarding the development of this technlogy would include: education for the proper use of systems, data, and metadata, as well as the integrity of available data, interoperability, standards, and the legitimacy of analyses performed by anyone (and how that could affect the legitimacy of the field in general). (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2020) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 15, 1998 10:45 AM Author: Ronald William Ward (ronward@arches.uga.edu) Subject: "more pressing issues than GIS." Stephan, "Erik makes a great point about the potential benefit (or the lack thereof) to people who simply have more pressing issues than utilizing GIS. We need to look at the costs vs. benefits of creating an "all access" GIS. How many additional people would actually utilize this technology." This type of statement implies that all people living in less developed countries have more pressing matters to deal with than learning GIS - nothing could be further from the truth! There are MANY universities in less developed countries. Many of these universities have departments of geography (in fact, the U of Mexico at Mexico City has the largest department of geography in N. America) which employ many geographers. I assure you, to a professional geographer working at a university in a less developed country - no matter is more pressing than the lack of technical facilities, including GIS, and nothing is quite as frustrating as being left out of technological innovations because 'people' in the places where the technologies are developed assume that 'people' in less developed countries do not have the intellectual capacity to LEARN how to use GIS software and GIS principles. "How many additional people would actually utilize this technology?" The above comment reads as if the use of GIS is ubiquitous among people living in this country - which it is not. Trying to explain to the average american on the street just exactly what a GIS is can be every bit as frustrating as trying to explain the concept of a GIS to the average African. This is not the point. There are professional geographers everywhere - many geographers and other types of professionals working in less developed countries WOULD take advantage of GIS technology, given the opportunity. So the answer to you question is - thousands of professionals living in less developed countries and in need of GIS as a problem solving tool. Mwandikaji Wako, Ron Ward (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2023) ------------------------------------------------------------------ [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 15, 1998 11:42 AM Author: Stephan Dunning (stefe1anne@aol.com) Ron, I may not have been as specific as I should have been in my former comments regarding the "people" I was referring to. I agree fully that GIS should be made available to universities and professionals, regardless of location, monetary resources, etc. I also did not mean to imply that GIS and all connected with it cannot be learned or that the curriculum should not be available. In fact great good can come from proper availability to developing countries. That said, I am concerned instead about the potential for unsecure access to GIS and the analysis of geographic data with no regard for the user's knowledge or experience level with such applications and data (this involves the legitimacy issue I raised earlier, as well as ethical issues). Controlled access needs to be implemented in the development of such technologies. (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2027) ------------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 15, 1998 03:45 PM Author: J. David Fuss (dfuss@oce.orst.edu) Subject: re: unsecured access Stephan, Good point about the user's knowledge of applications and data. "I am concerned instead about the potential for unsecure access to GIS and the analysis of geographic data with no regard for the user's knowledge or experience level with such applications and data." However, this problem exists in the US and is not limited to less-developed countries. Standards in GIS seems to keep coming up. Dave (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2038) ------------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 16, 1998 07:19 AM Author: Erik Shepard (shepard@uga.edu) Subject: re: access I agree with Stephan. I am not advocating denying GIS to anyone but those of us up here in the city on the hill. I do believe that professionals anywhere in the world should have access to this technology. What I am advocating however, is that we don't just blindly try to make GIS available (or even desirable) to every person on the street. I think we need to figure out who our audience is here. (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2054) ------------------------------------------------------------------ [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 15, 1998 03:40 PM Author: J. David Fuss (dfuss@oce.orst.edu) Subject: re: more pressing issues I agree with Ron about the potential use of GIS in other countries. Take Gerry McGovern's comment below (from Dawn's message above - taxi.txt): "If the Internet is to truly grow within any country it has to have local information. Local information is not really the domain of mega-brands but rather of local publishers, organisations and individuals. Gradually, the Internet will begin to thrive at a local level, as, for example, old people in a neighbourhood chat and plan a birthday party for one of their members, ordering a birthday cake from the local bakery as they do. America has taken the lead in the mega-brand league, but that's nothing new. I believe that long-term there's a healthy enough marketplace for those who focus on the local and the unique. Sadly, many web businesses who are doing just that are suffering the pains of being early and waiting for the marketplace to arrive." I think this quote highlights the possibilities of using technology that may be made available through US enterprise. This possibility is pertinent to not only less-developed countries, but less technologically developed coutnries (such as Ireland, in this case). Also, the idea of local opportunities decries the importance of the opportunities to users in the US, as well. I would say there is great potential for distributed computing to add to the world's knowledge, in general. Dave (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2037) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 15, 1998 11:33 AM Author: Kirsten McDade (mcdadek@ccmail.orst.edu) Subject: questions and comments Having spent a couple of years in a "developing country", one of the few in the world apparently that does not have access to the internet, I'm curious as to the specific equiptment that is needed to participate in distributed computing. (What would be the minimum?) If I understand things so far, distributed computing may become an economic way for many countries to gain access to global information. Theoreticallly, would collaboration between countries be possible in making this idea feasible?? (i.e. could equipment be shared) In response to others, I, too, think that most developing countries are leaps and bounds away from being able to even THINK about distributed computing because of monatary, health, and political instability constraints. My opinion of this is two fold 1) Maybe we should try to raise funds to install computer networks in developing countries so that not only do they have access to the plethora of information we are inundated with but that we also have access to their ideas and concerns. 2) Since computer technology is mainly a westernized creation I can't help but be concerned about the impacts this may have on cultures around the world if it does become as widespread as it could with distributed computing. I'm sure this will all come up in GIS & Society but it is so strongly linked to the idea of distributed computing I though it worth mentioning now. -Kirsten (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2026) ------------------------------------------------------------------ [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 15, 1998 08:32 PM Author: Dawn Wright (dawn@dusk.geo.orst.edu) Subject: equipment in developing countries > Having spent a couple of years in a "developing > country", one of the few in the world apparently > that does not have access to the internet, I'm > curious as to the specific equiptment that is > needed to participate in distributed computing. > (What would be the minimum?) Good question Kirsten. Here in the Geosciences department we have a visiting scholar from Malawi who has been asking just that. I have discussed with him the possibility of getting a machine somewhere in the range of 75-200 Mhz, 16-36 Mb of RAM, 1-2 Gb of hard disk space. Of course he will be able to get the computer here and take back it to his home country, as to try and buy a computer in Malawi would be extremely costly. His name is Zachary Kasomekera (kasoz@geo.orst.edu) - super neat guy. > 2) Since computer technology is mainly a > westernized creation I can't help but be > concerned about the impacts this may have on > cultures around the world if it does become as > widespread as it could with distributed > computing. Another excellent point! Bring on GIS & Society! But wait, we still have 1 more week of Distributed Computing and I have some ideas in mind for what we might pursue. Stay tuned... Dawn (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2046) ------------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 16, 1998 09:12 AM Author: Brian Ward (wardb@terra.geo.orst.edu) Subject: Cost of HW/SW Dawn Wright - "Good question Kirsten. Here in the Geosciences department we have a visiting scholar from Malawi who has been asking just that. I have discussed with him the possibility of getting a machine somewhere in the range of 75-200 Mhz, 16-36 Mb of RAM, 1-2 Gb of hard disk space. Of course he will be able to get the computer here and take back it to his home country, as to try and buy a computer in Malawi would be extremely costly. His name is Zachary Kasomekera (kasoz@geo.orst.edu) - super neat guy." Good Point, Dawn. In addition to the cost of hardware, however, is the high cost of software. We get spoiled to the latest technologies here, such as ARC/INFO, but when money becomes a major concern and limiting factor, it is much more reasonable to consider buying IDRISI for a couple hundred bucks, rather than the perhaps more powerful and beneficial ARC/INFO, which might be 15-20x what IDRISI is once you put it all together. So, perhaps Distributed Computing is the answer if Jack Dangermond and ESRI really want to "save the world with GIS". It seems doubtful that they'll save any LDCs at those prices. Brian (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2061) -------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*] [Delete*] Date: October 16, 1998 12:47 PM Author: Jason Seifert (seifert@nws.gov) Subject: Cost of data I agree that H/W and S/W are expensive, but the greatest cost associated with operating an effective GIS is data. For a GIS to be an effective tool, good data is essential. If we are serious about having GIS be a beneficial tool in less developed countries, how about taking steps to improve the global spatial data infrastructure? The H/W and S/W will follow as more people realize the potential benefit of GIS analyses. (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2066) --------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*] [Delete*] Date: October 16, 1998 05:18 PM Author: J. David Fuss (dfuss@oce.orst.edu) Subject: re: cost of data Jason reminds us that there are many hidden costs in utilizing distributed GIS. There is also training and labor hours that equal $$. This may be a major drawback for many developing countries with limited funds. Dave (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2074) ------------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 19, 1998 07:02 AM Author: Ronald William Ward (ronward@arches.uga.edu) Subject: hardware and customs Hey Dawn, I've had some experience with trying to get hardware into LCDs. Careful - many such governments are centered on generating foreign exchange to the point that customs duty on electronic equipment may exceed the price of buying such equipment in-country. I could tell you a horror story about this - but the end of the story will suffice. ...and the computers never made it out of Dar es Salaam airport because the duty on them, even though they were donnated, exceeded the price of buying brand new hardware - and given this situation, I couldn't convince the donors to allocate the extra funds. I know I know, poor planning. surfs up, Ron Ward (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2097) ------------------------------------------------------------------ [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 16, 1998 08:14 AM Author: James Nichols (jnichols@extension.umn.edu) Subject: Comments As several people have pointed out here, the Distributed Computing topic has many components, most of which are well suited to allowing more people to participate in GIS for a lower time/money/technology investment. Just to name a few - Internet access of some sort is certainly important (not absolutely necessary though) in obtaining data and could become the primary delivery method, open standards make it possible to share and use data more efficiently and effectively, improved/defined metadata standards are important to appropriate use of GIS. In a nutshell, I would say improvements in Distributed Computing as they relate to GIS, will benefit people of all social, economic and cultural backgrounds though an increase in the amount and usability of geographic knowledge. (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2056) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 16, 1998 02:03 AM Author: minh le duc (ducm@geo.orst.edu) Kirsten, Coming from a developing country, I agree with you that "one of the few in the world apparently that does not have access to the internet, I'm curious as to the specific equipment that is needed to participate in distributed computing." and that "most developing countries are leaps and bounds away from being able to even THINK about distributed computing because of monetary, health, and political instability constraints.". I think, however, that the Internet is still more popular than others are and can play an important role in expanding distributed computing to developing countries. The Internet GIS, therefore, need to be developed because more and more people in the developing countries have access to the Internet. So the problem is to standardize the data and the software so that as many people in these countries can use that as possible. The problem with developing countries is also represented in shortage of data, especially GIS data, which is the most important part of GIS. So I hope with the distributed computing achievements, the developing countries can keep up with developed countries as Dave mentioned. (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2053) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 16, 1998 04:29 PM Author: Jay Raiford (jraifor@lsu.edu) Subject: Basic Getting real basic, will everyone need "T" cables in their homes or just satelite dishes? With the size of some of the raster data we should think about the size of the "pipe". As far as people misusing GIS, that is alwasy a possibility. We aren't the GIS police though, we are scientists. The census bureau has been putting out data that could be statistically abused for years. Should we put a stop to that? Jay (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2072) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 19, 1998 06:54 AM Author: Ronald William Ward (ronward@arches.uga.edu) Subject: Your comment is appreciated Jay, Thank you for your thoughtful comment - "we are not the GIS police here." ...but the problem runs a little deeper than that. Many of the persons invilved in the discussion here are very technically oriented (myself not included), and as Bill Mosely pointed out, "information is power," therefore the facilitator of that information - technology - is also power (I guess that's a no brainer). Some of the comments made about this issue are along the lines of, "I don't won't to see GIS made available to everyone on the street." Keep in mind, a comment like this assumes that those of us who develop and use GIS know where it belongs and no better than the less-enlightened who should have access to GIS. Those who place themselves in the place of the enlightened have a difficult time placing themselves in any other pair of shoes. "True progress is possible only when we begin to focus on the whole - those who see only multiplicity are dooomed to walk on from death to death." Katha Upanishad kazi kazi, Ron Ward (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2096) ------------------------------------------------------------------ [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 19, 1998 07:44 AM Author: Erik Shepard (shepard@uga.edu) Subject: re: GIS on the street Just a clarifying point, Ron, since I am the one to whom you refer. I never said that "I don't want to see GIS made available to everyone on the street". Actually, I think it would be great if GIS *were* made available to everyone on the street *who wants it*. This is the key. We need to be careful about allocating our resources to a digital utopia where everyone has access - when some people may not even care about it. (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2098) ------------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 19, 1998 09:48 AM Author: Ronald William Ward (ronward@arches.uga.edu) Subject: Clarification Erik, ...and I quote, "I never said that "I don't want to see GIS made available to everyone on the street". It could be that I took what is copied below out of context... ************************************************************ Date: October 16, 1998 07:19 AM Author: Erik Shepard (shepard@uga.edu) Subject: re: access I agree with Stephan. I am not advocating denying GIS to anyone but those of us up here in the city on the hill. I do believe that professionals anywhere in the world should have access to this technology. *What I am advocating however, is that we don't just blindly try to make GIS available (or even desirable) to every person on the street.* I think we need to figure out who our audience is here. ************************************************************ ...but it wouldn't seem so. Part of the purpose of a digital library, which utilizes distributed computing technologies, is to provide an outlet for information so that people can be made more aware of the types of information that are out there - and perhaps be brought to the point of caring. I'm confused, just exactly what is a digital utopia? Are you enjoying this as much as I am? akumbukaye, Ron Ward (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2104) -------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*] [Delete*] Date: October 19, 1998 11:58 AM Author: Stephan Dunning (stefe1anne@aol.com) ***"...provide an outlet for information so that people can be made more aware of the types of information that are out there - and perhaps be brought to the point of caring." Yes, but this outlet should not be a GIS free for all. It should be a well defined curriculum offered to any interested party. Without this, integrity is lost. ********************** ***"What I am advocating however, is that we don't just blindly try to make GIS available to every person on the street." I still have to back this statement up to some extent. I look at it this way: How sound would the field of architecture be if anyone could draw a building (for public use) on a piece of paper, with no regard for architectural guidlines, geometry, or physics, and have it built. Similarly, how legitimate would it make the field of GIS to permit spatial analysis (for public use) done by someone who may be completely unaware of datums, scales, metadata, etc. In a field where there is already enough uncertainty among professionals and the like, regarding the integrity of data and the affects that certain manipulations may truly have on a final outcome, wouldn't it be best to "work out the kinks" before making it as available as a word processor. (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2115) --------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*] [Delete*] Date: October 19, 1998 07:05 PM Author: Jay Raiford (jraifor@lsu.edu) I know quite a few people that have built there own house. Not a carpenter or a architect in the bunch. They aren't million dollar homes but very nice just the same. I don't believe that everyone will ever have complete access to all data, including the researchers. I do believe that there are tons of ways that the everyday person could use the data that is available. Many people are using the STATSGO soils data and other sources today. There are GIS maaping Internet sites popping up all the time. Let's not forget who is funding all of our research. Seems to me the more interest we can drum up in the technology the better off we will all be. I say let them have it......keep there results in context, just like we do other things. (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2129) --------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*] [Delete*] Date: October 20, 1998 05:59 AM Author: Ronald William Ward (ronward@arches.uga.edu) Subject: GIS free-for-all Stephan, One use of GIS, one that is practical for 'the street', is route planning. Maybe you've used it yourself - perhaps in ARCVIEW - the query that allows you to find the shortest distance between two places on a street map. Again - these generalizations some of you are making simply do not apply. Route planning, business locating, and quite a few other applications are perfectly fit for 'the streets'. Exacty what is this integrity you are talking about - is this to say that GIS is legitimite only when it's in the hands of the 'GIS enlightenment movement?' Distributed computing and the interoperable systems it depends on are not unlike a democracy in that, if the goal is to achieve more efficient exchange of data among professionals, a necessary evil is that less-than-professionals will also gain access - and for some applications this is not necessarily a bad thing. I'm with Jay on this one - we are not the GIS police! VIPI? Ron Ward (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2144) ---------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*] [Move*][Delete*] Date: October 20, 1998 08:14 AM Author: Wilmot Greene (mot@uga.edu) Subject: Example anyone? Here is an example for you, I was in New York this weekend(had a blast), and in Penn. Station what did I see? An interactive GIS for all to use. I played with it for about twenty minutes(while my date frowned). It started with a video clip of Mayor Gulianni saying something about "this new exciting GIS technology" Then a touch sensitive screen displayed a map of Manhattan sectioned up by lines. You then could touch a section to see that enlarged map. Then you could touch "switches" like food, transportation, art, police, etc. and those features would highlight on the map. You could touch specific restaurants and see their menu, or parks and see their facilities, and so on. This was/is the best example of GIS technology being available for the public that I have ever seen. But, I didn't see anyone else interested in the machine, and it looked pretty dusty and unused. All in all, the little folded map in my pocket was fine,,, so Perhaps all of this talk about "making GIS available to the public" will merely result in unused computer terminals. Maybe we in this seminar are all just a bunch of "map geeks" who are interested in something that not many other people care about. Mot (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2156) ----------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply] [Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 20, 1998 02:23 PM Author: Ronald William Ward (ronward@arches.uga.edu) Subject: User dependent Wilmot, I tend to think that here in the United States this would be the case (that public GIS would sit and get dusty), but the situation might not be the same in less developed areas. A good analogy might be newspapers. Here in the U.S., a person buys a newspaper and recycles it (at best), or wraps some fish in it (as per the Red and Black [UGA newspaper]). There are exceptions (like the Manhattan bar here in Athens - I go there because there's always a newspaper to read), but by and large a single newspaper doesn't change hands all that often. The situation in Africa is different. A typical newspaper will change through a dozen or so hands before finally going the way of the fish (or a multiple of other uses for that matter). Africans are news-hungry. If you put the same public wayfinder GIS machine in Nairobi or Mexico City, I tend to think the buttons on it would have to be changed often. The standards of apathy in the western world are not strictly adhered to elsewhere. piga gitara, Ron Ward (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2175) ----------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply] [Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 20, 1998 09:45 PM Author: Dawn Wright (dawn@dusk.geo.orst.edu) I heartily agree with Ron's analogy to Africa. And here in the U.S. I think that gradually the general public will follow the lead of us "map geeks" ;-) and get with the program. A similar situation - the growing popularity of handheld GPS receivers, even one that you can put on the handlebars of your mountain bike (sells for about $300)! Dawn (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2183) -------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*] [Delete*] Date: October 20, 1998 02:54 PM Author: Erik Shepard (shepard@uga.edu) Subject: re: access Actually Ron, you took what I said completely out of context. Let me try to simplify it. I believe that GIS and GIS data should be available to every person anywhere who wants it. The fact that the Georgia GIS Data Clearinghouse is a direct benificiary of my work attests to this. GIS should be available to anyone who wants it. However, I don't think for one second that we should allocate our limited resources into designing some Microsoft Map for everyone. There are far too many other pressing issues. If they want to use GIS, then fine. But they need to learn about things like projections and pixel sizes the same as anyone else. If they want to get a map from their house to the supermarket off of the Internet, then great. They don't need to know GIS concepts for that because that's not GIS. That's a road map in digital form. The digital utopia to which I refer is the state in which we have unlimited resources to do whatever we want to do at whatever time we want to do it without regards to implication. The time when we can design GIS systems that don't make people understand basic geographic concepts while ignoring other major issues in the field like how to implement the now terabyte (and bigger) sized databases that we now have to implement or how to facilitate ways in which 150 different state agencies can cooperatively update the same data without technical or political ramifications. And no, I find argument for arguments sake to be neither enlightening, nor charming, nor even particularly enjoyable. (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2177) --------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*] [Delete*] Date: October 21, 1998 06:12 AM Author: Ronald William Ward (ronward@arches.uga.edu) Subject: Arguement or Discussion? Erik, "However, I don't think for one second that we should allocate our limited resources into designing some Microsoft Map for everyone." I put it to you that this is the only responsible direction for GIS research to take - and is taking for that matter. In terms of a 'trickle down' framework, much of what goes on in GIS is for everyone. For example, Lynne's research on precision farming is decidedly not an allocation of limited recources in the wrong direction, but a practical application for the benefit of GIS professionals (as an example of where GIS research can lead), farmers (by way of helping a group of people deal with their own resource limitations - and a wonderful example of how people everywhere are concerned with putting food in children's mouths), and the public (which will benefit from less chemicals in the environment, greater crop yields....). But this is rather out of context. The GIS industry cannot survive without money, hence the issue of limited finding - but without public interest (stemming from practical use development for the public), where do you think the money will come from? Think about trickle up - and more complex connections between the elements we are talking about. "...If they want to use GIS, then fine. But they need to learn..." Do people need to know how a fuel injection system works to drive an Audi? To people need to understand the cellular biology behind a grain of wheat to sow a few hundred hectres? Do GIS professionals need to fully understand the marvel of electricity before switching on a monitor? I'm looking forward to GIS and Society... Think of all the great discussion our mutual diatribe has generated. Arguement is not my purpose. My purpose is to generate discussion - wherein the intention is to learn. You've taught me much already. kazi kazi, (work work), Ron Ward (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2185) ---------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*] [Move*][Delete*] Date: October 21, 1998 06:44 AM Author: Erik Shepard (shepard@uga.edu) Subject: reply "Do people need to know how a fuel injection system works to drive an Audi? To people need to understand the cellular biology behind a grain of wheat to sow a few hundred hectres?" Do doctors need to know anatomy and physiology before they cut? (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2187) ----------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply] [Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 21, 1998 08:13 AM Author: Ronald William Ward (ronward@arches.uga.edu) Subject: semantics We're drifting here, Erik. I'm confused - who is distributed computing for? Isn't the public (they) entitled to partake in distributed computing? Keep in my that not all persons using GIS are GIS specific professionals (myself included - I'm basically an ecologist, although a spatial one - am I not entitled to use distributed computing technology [I know practically zero about pixels and datums and all the many aspects of GIS software-capabilities]). What is wrong with the public taking whatever aspect they need from a GIS and making use of it, without knowing the technical ins and outs of how the software/hardware operates. :-) Ron Ward (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2191) ------------------------------------ [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply] [Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 22, 1998 08:49 AM Author: Erik Shepard (shepard@uga.edu) Subject: re: semantics What we have here is a basic difference of opinion, and that's fine. I can see your point that you as an ecologist should be entitled to use GIS and I don't disagree with that. I still think that people need to be educated on some of the basic principles behind GIS to use it. Let me try to clarify what I am thinking though. If you have some GIS data on the net somewhere and someone queries it to make some sort of map, then some applications developer (who had better know something about GIS principles!) must have designed some sort of interface which hits the database and serves up the results. It's up to the developer at that point to make sure that the results are cartographically correct, etc. But although it may be hitting a GIS, to the end user this is just a different medium for map data. The distinction that I make is when you start trying to get into using GIS for decision making, you really need to know how it works. Analogously, if you did aspatial statistics, you need to know your assumptions a priori, right? If you don't then your results are necessarily suspect. It is the same for anyone who is using GIS to do analysis. If you don't understand how things like projection and distortion can affect your results, then you must question the validity of the results. Distributed computing itself is just another mechanism for delivering the capability. People should be free to use the distributed system, but I still maintain that while making GIS accessible is as it should be, I don't think we should allocate huge sums of money to building GIS kiosks in Penn station that will never be used. Maybe they would be used in other countries, and if that is the case then we need to look at this availability and demand on a culture-by-culture or country-by-country basis. I've rambled a little bit, but I hope that I've made my point. (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2213) ------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print] [Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 23, 1998 06:25 AM Author: Ronald William Ward (ronward@arches.uga.edu) Subject: point well taken Erik, Your observations are reasonable, yet, idealistic (something I greatly respect). My feeling is that few policy makers have a feel for GIS and statistical analyses. Take Lynne's case here with the superfund site. He was called in as an expert witness to sort out the data, which he did, but it was left up to the courts (a policy making sector) to make the final decision. It's like this in many cases isn't it - scientists are called in do perform analyses and give objective opinions in intelligible language, and the folks who couldn't perform the analyses, nor want to, are the bottom line. I partly agree with you - the policy folks probably should have a feel for kettle from which GIS analyses are served. Bias is a huge factor in all this - how many policy folks (and scientists for that matter) begin with an agenda and go out seeking the data that fits? Internal policy in big business is a good example. If you go to committee hearings what do you see - an corporate rep on one side with that set of data, and an activist rep on the other side with a different set of data. Distributed computing won't solve problems like this. Indeed, more efficient flow of information will probably make it easier for agenda bent groups to find the types of data they want. A necessary evil? Maybe not - but we see plenty of it now. beans and ricely, Ron Ward (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2226) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 20, 1998 08:19 AM Author: Blaine Hackett (hack0086@tc.umn.edu) This discussion has elicited many great comments. I have a comment about the technology needed to make distributed computing work. Jay Raiford alluded to this in his comments about everyone needing "T" cables. His comment brings to light an issue that I do not think has been fully addressed. With the complex tasks that are performed in GIS, how are people who are using regular phone lines supposed to do some of these operations. It may be fine for people who live in metropolitan areas and have access to high bandwith communication, but it seems that outside of that it might be a problem. The white paper said "Geographic decisions are often best made in the field." This is exactly what I am commenting on. "In the field" would mean to me that the person collecting the data is in a somewhat remote location. Besides we have pretty good data for metropolitan areas. It is these remote areas that most of the data collection would seem to focus. People were commenting about non-industrial or poor countries using this type of technology to help them. It seems that these places would not have the communication infrastructure to support distributed computing. One other comment. Since I am thinking that these complex GIS tasks would be difficult with the communication we have, is that what we are talking about: doing these tasks with distributed computing or are we just talking about having format independent data that people can access over the communication lines. This brings about another observation. If we have central repositories for format independent data, will people be allowed to alter the data as in a value-added situation. If this is the case, how can anyone be sure the data being added is good data. Also, who does the maintenance on this data. I don't want to sound cynical. I think this is a valid idea that must be researched. It just seems that even if this is implemented, most of the people who could really benefit from it would be left out given their current location or financial situation. Comments? (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2157) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 20, 1998 09:48 PM Author: Dawn Wright (dawn@dusk.geo.orst.edu) > His comment brings to > light an issue that I do not think has been fully > addressed. With the complex tasks that are > performed in GIS, how are people who are using > regular phone lines supposed to do some of > these operations. Good point Blaine. I think for now that people should not expect to do complex distributed computing unless they are on a T1 or a T3. It would be like trying to use Microsoft Office on a puny 486 machine. You might be able to get the software installed, but other that, hey, it just ain't gonna happen! ;-) > People were commenting > about non-industrial or poor countries using this > type of technology to help them. It seems that > these places would not have the communication > infrastructure to support distributed computing. > One other comment. Since I am thinking that > these complex GIS tasks would be difficult with > the communication we have, is that what we are > talking about: doing these tasks with distributed > computing or are we just talking about having > format independent data that people can access > over the communication lines. I think both - the distributed computing white paper is supposed to steer us toward ideas that would help alleviate the communication "bottlenecks" that are hampering distributed computing. On the other, format-independent data (as in OpenGIS) is an important, parallel goal. Standardized metadata (as in FGDC-style) are important as well. > > This brings > about another observation. If we have central > repositories for format independent data, will > people be allowed to alter the data as in a > value-added situation. I would think that this going down a dangerous path for the reason that you mentioned. How can people be assured of the same quality if anyone and everyone can randomly access AND alter the data. Maintenance would initially be in the form of the originators of the data making available updates (taking care to delete or archive the original dataset(s) being replaced). > I don't want to sound cynical. I think > this is a valid idea that must be researched. It > just seems that even if this is implemented, most > of the people who could really benefit from it > would be left out given their current location or > financial situation. Comments? People used to think that about web sites and now we have all kinds of folks of all ages and backgrounds creating and sharing web sites. Good thoughts Blaine! Comments from others? (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2184) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 22, 1998 07:42 AM Author: Jay Raiford (jraifor@lsu.edu) Subject: Microsoft Locked up? Has anyone tried to download SP4 from Microsoft? Kinda makes you wonder about how close we are to distributed computing as far as throughput and access. This might be a better way to test NT machines than Terra Server. (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2210) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 22, 1998 11:03 AM Author: Byong-Woon Jun (bwjun@arches.uga.edu) Subject: Application Areas of Distributed Computing and Web-based GIS I'm interesting in integrating Web technologies with GISs and geographic information. Currently, I do the initial part of my project. Could anybody suggest me optimal application areas of distributed computing and Web-based GIS? Any comment and reference are welcome. Very thanks in advance. Jun (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2215) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- [Top][Previous][Next][Print][Reply][Edit*][Move*][Delete*] Date: October 23, 1998 11:12 PM Author: Dawn Wright (dawn@dusk.geo.orst.edu) > I'm interested in integrating Web technologies > with GISs and geographic information. Currently, > I do the initial part of my project. Could > anybody suggest me optimal application areas of > distributed computing and Web-based GIS? Any development that increases speed and performance will be most welcome! Chapter 8 of Plewe's "GIS Online" has many good suggestions, as well as the final section of white paper. Good luck, Dawn (http://forums.library.orst.edu/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=7&Message_ID=2238)