I think I now have a stable implementation of the data structure (data model) that realises the basic Clique Space capability. This basic data structure is manifest in the Clique Space project, and is built on in the Agent Device and administrator client (Client Device) projects so to specialise the basic data structure for these two devices.
The basic data structure is a marvel in its use of Java generics. To achieve type consistency between all the Elements, the Clique, the Clique Space, the Clique Space container, and the device implementations, each class is declared in almost an identical way. I think nothing has ever used Java's generic class parameterisation feature quite the same way that I have done here.
Sunday, January 20, 2013
Monday, December 17, 2012
Reflection on the Sovereign completes this picture.
My last deliberations pointed me to something structural in Clique Space(TM) which has given me some pause for further reflection.
Most of my posts in this blog rest on my attempts to explain and justify the efficacy of my core Clique Space concept. This core concept comprises ideas including Cliques, Clique Spaces and an assortment of Elements, all of which I am now implementing in a Java SE environment. While implementing this concept, I am looking at what its potential implications (other than those given in the patent) are. My previous post where I deliberated the subject of the expression of an individual in synthetic media has been echoing in my head since.
One trivial matter I have decided to address is to change the name of the Axle Element. It is now going to be known as the Sovereign. The Axle is potentially a target of cynical heckling: I can see people having a good time at my expense with labels like Axle holder. And anyway, I like the term Sovereign because one possesses sovereignty less than one is a Sovereign individual. I named this Element the Account in the patent because I simply hadn't come up with a better term at that point.
A far less trivial matter revolves around the relevance of this Sovereign. My need to reflect was born of what I have felt for some time was the lack of a mechanism linking the collaboration of individuals to the exchange of state information between Agent Devices and between Agent Devices and other external devices. I think today's reflection has finally forged this link.
The Axle, being renamed the Sovereign also ties in with the main subject of today's deliberation: the Sovereign's Clique Space. The Sovereign's Clique Space represents the individual. The Sovereign's Clique Space is a Clique Space which contains, as its Clique Space's Clique, a Clique otherwise known as the Sovereign's Clique. The Sovereign's Clique contains Participants which represent the Agent Collaboration which manifest the Sovereign's Clique Space. To underscore the formal convenience of this structure, the Sovereign's Clique Space and the Sovereign's Clique both have the same name; the value of the Sovereign's Identifier.
If a sentient individual manifest in a medium incompatible to Clique Space (a human being as we are currently manifest) might want to gain a vicarious presence in a Clique Space aware medium, then one might fashion a Sovereign's Clique Space made up of Agent Devices which are insufficiently capable of self-awareness and use this Agent Collaboration as a kind of Clique Space skin, endowing the individual with much of the ability to participate in collaborations mediated through Clique Space.
I think that the Sovereign Clique's member Participants may come to be considered sacred information knowable only to the individual manifest through the Agent Collaboration concerned. This is because the individual will want (and should have) unfettered possession of the Agent Devices which make up that individual; no one very much so in their right mind would want to unwillingly expose the mechanics responsible for their mind's functioning to the possibility of exploitation by external intentions. I believe the Sovereign's Clique Space mechanism is fit for the purposes of upholding the individual's sovereign and sacred nature.
All of this came together on today's walk. It appears to me to be a level higher than the synaptic map, but lower than an Agent Collaboration's Clique Space that might represent an entity formed of some cooperative endeavour; an Agent Collaboration's Clique Space which might otherwise be known as an organisation's Clique Space. I felt that my picture of this Clique Space strata needed some mechanism which set the manifestation of an individual through a Clique Space apart from the manifestation of an organisation through a Clique Space.
I had worried that something like this was missing from my deliberations for some years, and that what was missing was a mechanism of such profundity as would underscore an individual's sovereign (uncapitalised because I'm referring to the phenomenon rather than the component of my concept designed to capture this phenomenon), sacred and pre-eminent distinction; something which would endow the manifestation of the individual some distinguishing feature through which inalienable and inviolable rights afforded to an individual can then be assigned. The Sovereign's Clique Space is this mechanism; it uses nothing more than the core concepts given in the patent. It qualifies the Agent Collaboration's Clique Space which was given in the patent. The organisation's Clique Space is a version of the Agent Collaboration's Clique Space in which the Clique Space Clique would not have a name which is associated with a Sovereign Element identifier's value. All Agent Device members of the organisation Clique Space's Clique Space Clique would be members by consent of the individuals who claimed Sovereign possession of these members because an organisation's Clique Space Clique lacks the necessary mechanism to claim sovereign possession.
The Sovereign's Clique Space is a necessary middle level joining the potential for activity between individuals possible through an organisation's Clique Space, to the exchanging of Elements and their properties between any two Agent Devices which is the purpose of the synaptic map and the logical synapse.
So, it can be said that there are three basic layers to Clique Space, and each of these layers is denoted by a particular flavour of Clique Space. The bottom layer is concerned with the creation and transfer of Elements and their properties, is comprised of two Clique Spaces: the "synaptic map" and the "synapse". The second layer is concerned with the manifestation of or at least the interface for sentient participants, and its Clique Space is called the Sovereign's Clique Space. The third layer is the organisation's Clique Space, and this is where business and government organisations are manifest. I believe the middle layer, where notions of general sentience are situated, will complete the specification for a general medium which will become to be known by everyone who uses it, and who is manifest in it, as Clique Space.
To have come full-circle; starting with the Sovereign as the core Element of a core concept, then using the remaining core Elements and structures defined with them to bring a focus back to underscore the primacy of the Sovereign, is one of those things one does that induces pride and beauty in the aesthetic qualities of function. Something I have spent my lifetime chasing.
... of course, this has to work too.
Most of my posts in this blog rest on my attempts to explain and justify the efficacy of my core Clique Space concept. This core concept comprises ideas including Cliques, Clique Spaces and an assortment of Elements, all of which I am now implementing in a Java SE environment. While implementing this concept, I am looking at what its potential implications (other than those given in the patent) are. My previous post where I deliberated the subject of the expression of an individual in synthetic media has been echoing in my head since.
One trivial matter I have decided to address is to change the name of the Axle Element. It is now going to be known as the Sovereign. The Axle is potentially a target of cynical heckling: I can see people having a good time at my expense with labels like Axle holder. And anyway, I like the term Sovereign because one possesses sovereignty less than one is a Sovereign individual. I named this Element the Account in the patent because I simply hadn't come up with a better term at that point.
A far less trivial matter revolves around the relevance of this Sovereign. My need to reflect was born of what I have felt for some time was the lack of a mechanism linking the collaboration of individuals to the exchange of state information between Agent Devices and between Agent Devices and other external devices. I think today's reflection has finally forged this link.
The Axle, being renamed the Sovereign also ties in with the main subject of today's deliberation: the Sovereign's Clique Space. The Sovereign's Clique Space represents the individual. The Sovereign's Clique Space is a Clique Space which contains, as its Clique Space's Clique, a Clique otherwise known as the Sovereign's Clique. The Sovereign's Clique contains Participants which represent the Agent Collaboration which manifest the Sovereign's Clique Space. To underscore the formal convenience of this structure, the Sovereign's Clique Space and the Sovereign's Clique both have the same name; the value of the Sovereign's Identifier.
If a sentient individual manifest in a medium incompatible to Clique Space (a human being as we are currently manifest) might want to gain a vicarious presence in a Clique Space aware medium, then one might fashion a Sovereign's Clique Space made up of Agent Devices which are insufficiently capable of self-awareness and use this Agent Collaboration as a kind of Clique Space skin, endowing the individual with much of the ability to participate in collaborations mediated through Clique Space.
I think that the Sovereign Clique's member Participants may come to be considered sacred information knowable only to the individual manifest through the Agent Collaboration concerned. This is because the individual will want (and should have) unfettered possession of the Agent Devices which make up that individual; no one very much so in their right mind would want to unwillingly expose the mechanics responsible for their mind's functioning to the possibility of exploitation by external intentions. I believe the Sovereign's Clique Space mechanism is fit for the purposes of upholding the individual's sovereign and sacred nature.
All of this came together on today's walk. It appears to me to be a level higher than the synaptic map, but lower than an Agent Collaboration's Clique Space that might represent an entity formed of some cooperative endeavour; an Agent Collaboration's Clique Space which might otherwise be known as an organisation's Clique Space. I felt that my picture of this Clique Space strata needed some mechanism which set the manifestation of an individual through a Clique Space apart from the manifestation of an organisation through a Clique Space.
I had worried that something like this was missing from my deliberations for some years, and that what was missing was a mechanism of such profundity as would underscore an individual's sovereign (uncapitalised because I'm referring to the phenomenon rather than the component of my concept designed to capture this phenomenon), sacred and pre-eminent distinction; something which would endow the manifestation of the individual some distinguishing feature through which inalienable and inviolable rights afforded to an individual can then be assigned. The Sovereign's Clique Space is this mechanism; it uses nothing more than the core concepts given in the patent. It qualifies the Agent Collaboration's Clique Space which was given in the patent. The organisation's Clique Space is a version of the Agent Collaboration's Clique Space in which the Clique Space Clique would not have a name which is associated with a Sovereign Element identifier's value. All Agent Device members of the organisation Clique Space's Clique Space Clique would be members by consent of the individuals who claimed Sovereign possession of these members because an organisation's Clique Space Clique lacks the necessary mechanism to claim sovereign possession.
The Sovereign's Clique Space is a necessary middle level joining the potential for activity between individuals possible through an organisation's Clique Space, to the exchanging of Elements and their properties between any two Agent Devices which is the purpose of the synaptic map and the logical synapse.
So, it can be said that there are three basic layers to Clique Space, and each of these layers is denoted by a particular flavour of Clique Space. The bottom layer is concerned with the creation and transfer of Elements and their properties, is comprised of two Clique Spaces: the "synaptic map" and the "synapse". The second layer is concerned with the manifestation of or at least the interface for sentient participants, and its Clique Space is called the Sovereign's Clique Space. The third layer is the organisation's Clique Space, and this is where business and government organisations are manifest. I believe the middle layer, where notions of general sentience are situated, will complete the specification for a general medium which will become to be known by everyone who uses it, and who is manifest in it, as Clique Space.
To have come full-circle; starting with the Sovereign as the core Element of a core concept, then using the remaining core Elements and structures defined with them to bring a focus back to underscore the primacy of the Sovereign, is one of those things one does that induces pride and beauty in the aesthetic qualities of function. Something I have spent my lifetime chasing.
... of course, this has to work too.
Saturday, December 15, 2012
Immortality in a Clique Space(TM) world.
Clique Space(TM); a concept permitting the existence of immortal beings?
This question is a contemplation which I have been entertaining because, as technology continues to evolve, our "selves" and the devices through which we express this strange quality are becoming more interrelated. We are getting closer to our contraptions; our contraptions are getting closer to ourselves.
We intuitively understand that an individual is expressed through a hominid form (a head, two arms, two legs, a torso, etc). But this is merely the impression we have formed over the past 3 or so million years. In Clique Space, the form, the manifestation, and hence, at least one Clique Space Identity defined by an individual, is a collection of devices, or rather a collection of Clique Space Connections, and a collection of capacities to act, or rather a collection of Clique Space Affiliations.
A Clique Space manifesting an individual is known as that individual's "sovereign" Clique Space. If each cell of our bodies is a device, then each cell can be represented as a Connection; there is nothing to prevent our current hominid form from being expressed in a sovereign Clique Space. The question of Affiliation in a sovereign Clique Space is not a concern, unless any neurons (the Agent Devices) of that individual's Clique Space form synapses with Agent Devices belonging to the sovereign Clique Space of another individual.
Perhaps something like a Vulkan mind-meld isn't too fanciful so long as both individuals have Clique Space aware nervous systems comprised of Agent Devices which can engage (form synapses) over some shared medium. In fact, this is precisely what Clique Space is designed to permit, and I'll talk some more about this a little later below.
In one model of my theory, each cell of a hominid body might be genetically engineered to interface amongst themselves using a synthetically (a product of the intellect rather than merely of the random process of mutation subject to selection which describes evolution, but then, the intellect only came about because of this process, so saying anything is truly synthetic is moot) generated collaboration structure modelled specifically through the body's neurons around a sovereign Clique Space. This sovereign Clique Space would be manifest by the collective action of this body's neurons (the Clique Space's Agent Devices); this Clique Space would in turn manifest the individual and one's singular self-identity.
In this model, the Clique Space is wholly contained in a hominid form, and in this model, I contend that there won't be too much to change because I think we will discover that our nervous system is already organised into very similar notions that I have expressed in my Clique Space concept. It might indeed be that other reasonably complicated intracellular (endocrine) mechanisms may also exhibit these properties, and conclude that the biological neural synapse is a specialised endocrine mechanism evolved specifically to communicate these as yet undiscovered biological equivalents of Clique Space Elements and their properties for the purpose of supporting and maintaining the wonderfully real illusion of individual self-identity.
So, a genetically engineered human body would represent an individual as a collection of devices, all of which are probably connected to a single Clique Space which represents this individual's body. This wonderful illusion of individual reality, corralled within one's own Clique Space, is manifest in one's own body. Any 'synthetic' individual sufficiently endowed with capacities equal to or greater than those of a regular person would have every reason to defend their presence if it were challenged by anyone else who appeared prejudiced enough to conclude their synthetic presence were artificial. Maybe these roles might reverse if the endowments were in the synthetic presence's favour.
An individual, even in hominid form, manifest from a Clique Space, is manifest through a system in which their own cognitive function can be viewed or persisted in real-time, provided the individual allows a View/persistence mechanism (V/PM) device to be connected to one or more of their sovereign Agent Device instances. This opportunity provides such individuals with a most exquisite way to control the way they work both within themselves, and with others.
Clique Space affords an individual a wider scope of existential possibilities. So, what about individuals who may not exist in hominid forms?
I conceived Clique Space in 2004 primarily because I wanted to give myself and other people access to a system that communicated activity of connected devices (phones, computers, cars, email, etc.) of one individual to one or more others according to mutual affinity of preferences amongst all parties. If you were a Clique Space user interested in whether I was doing some activity that I was permitting you to know about, then you would be able to find out. I am, indeed, permitting the communication of a version of my "self" (an Identity) to you by the fact that I am a member of a Clique in which you are also a member, or at least have the ability to observe through a V/PM device..
My Identity becomes diffuse through the Clique Space neural aether. An Identity which I project to you is not bound by my hominid form. Maybe, my "self" (I think I have adequately offered the notion of the Sovereign to represent this quality) can also shed its mortal hominid coil and migrate away from my human form. The administration of my Sovereign is highly profound task of self-identification that I would not share with anyone else.
An individual's Sovereign is the most sacred Element of that individual. One may only offer their Sovereign's identifier to another only in the most intimate of relationships, because one is really offering a property of themselves that drives most closely to the notion of one's own sovereignty. The Sovereign encloses within it properties that, even in the most intimate of circumstances, one individual should never share with another, lest that individual's self-identity become subsumed by another's. Certain Agent Devices known only to the individual must be, by the fact that they contain sacred information, the absolute property of that individual.
However, the individual in Clique Space may find that their presence can migrate outside of one's sovereignty boundaries. Sovereignty boundaries can be delineated by Clique Space membership. Agent Devices which are members of a sovereign Clique Space boundary are Participants in the Clique Space's Clique; something that the individual, manifest by these Agent Devices, may wish also to keep to themselves.
The mechanics made possible through a neural network of autonomous Agent Device instances allow individuals to cohabit the aether formed through these Agent Device interconnections by projecting Clique Space Elements through Agent Device instances which are members of others' sovereign Clique Space boundaries. Clique Spaces can be formed which do not represent an individual; these Clique Spaces represent a coalition of individuals, and incorporate Agent Devices as members of the non-sovereign Clique Space's Clique from various individuals which offer their support to the existence of this Clique Space. I believe that non-sovereign Clique Spaces allow organisations and governments to represent themselves appropriately in a world where individual sovereignty is held in a society as being that which is valued most.
The individual may also consider other Elements and properties of other Elements to be sacred, and will likewise limit their disclosure amongst Agent Devices within the sovereign boundary; the Clique Space Clique and its member Participants are one such collection of properties. Yet still, the individual can project themselves through others by disclosing Identities, Connections, Affiliations, and Participants to other individuals' Agent Devices.
The definition of the self becomes far more formalised through Clique Space than it ever can be in the a world where the individual's sovereignty is limited by the physical boundaries currently imposed by one's current hominid form. These boundaries will break down in a Clique Space future, but yet again, they will become more recognisable.
Such an individual, free of existence within a human body, will exist in other media which would persist beyond a human body. An individual can acquire Agent Devices indefinitely. Provided a continuity of presence can be maintained, an individual can prolong their existence indefinitely by a process of gradual migration through a sovereign Clique Space. Agent Devices would become a very dear commodity to such individuals; more Agent Devices promise more complicated behaviour.
Hence, collections of Agent Devices, all of which are members of an individual's sovereign Clique Space boundary, would be guarded by the individual manifest by these Agent Devices. If the capability of an individual may be physically limited only by the number and synaptic configuration of the Agent Devices within their sovereign Clique Space boundary, then individuals may indeed covet the capabilities which the acquisition of these Agent Device instances would endow.
Imagine the following bizarre scenarios! While Clique Space would promise the individual release from a human form, this release might also deliver a greater urgency to guard against the possibility of insidious violations to one's own sacred self-identity. Ecosystems might form around coalitions to protect and to predate on a consistent self-identity. The breakdown of self-identity in a breach of Clique Space sovereignty would be the most subversively insidious thing that can happen to these individuals. It would be so destabilising to the victim that only the victim's friends and associates might pick out that something is amiss.
Maybe, even an economy could form where individuals allow the trade or even perhaps the "lease" of clusters of one's own sovereign Agent Device instances for gains elsewhere in their lives. In fact, Clique Space is designed for this very purpose. Even though an Agent Device can be a member of precisely one sovereign Clique Space (that Clique Space in which the Sovereign containing sacred properties belongs), an Agent Device can potentially federate with members of other Clique Spaces, even Clique Spaces that don't represent a single individual. Agent Devices do this by acquiring Elements for other Clique Spaces as the need dictates.
Clique Space is a very fluid environment. I believe that Clique Space is also a very stable environment. I believe that a Clique Space can but needn't exist to manifest individuals. However, individuals who are manifest purely as sovereign Clique Spaces have the potential to be immortal by the fact that the Agent Devices which are members of their sovereign Clique Space's Clique can be replaced indefinitely.
Individuals manifest in other forms than through a Clique Space (a human being, perhaps) would not want the cluster of Agent Devices that represent their sovereign Clique Space to acquire any great degree of autonomy from which a distinct self-awareness may emerge lest this Clique Space decides to "go it alone". It might therefore be a better idea perhaps to keep their sovereign cluster relatively small unless or until the individual can migrate one's self-identity through the physical boundary of their biological neural network into their sovereign Clique Space and too, become a sentience wholly expressed through a synthetic neural medium.
This question is a contemplation which I have been entertaining because, as technology continues to evolve, our "selves" and the devices through which we express this strange quality are becoming more interrelated. We are getting closer to our contraptions; our contraptions are getting closer to ourselves.
We intuitively understand that an individual is expressed through a hominid form (a head, two arms, two legs, a torso, etc). But this is merely the impression we have formed over the past 3 or so million years. In Clique Space, the form, the manifestation, and hence, at least one Clique Space Identity defined by an individual, is a collection of devices, or rather a collection of Clique Space Connections, and a collection of capacities to act, or rather a collection of Clique Space Affiliations.
A Clique Space manifesting an individual is known as that individual's "sovereign" Clique Space. If each cell of our bodies is a device, then each cell can be represented as a Connection; there is nothing to prevent our current hominid form from being expressed in a sovereign Clique Space. The question of Affiliation in a sovereign Clique Space is not a concern, unless any neurons (the Agent Devices) of that individual's Clique Space form synapses with Agent Devices belonging to the sovereign Clique Space of another individual.
Perhaps something like a Vulkan mind-meld isn't too fanciful so long as both individuals have Clique Space aware nervous systems comprised of Agent Devices which can engage (form synapses) over some shared medium. In fact, this is precisely what Clique Space is designed to permit, and I'll talk some more about this a little later below.
In one model of my theory, each cell of a hominid body might be genetically engineered to interface amongst themselves using a synthetically (a product of the intellect rather than merely of the random process of mutation subject to selection which describes evolution, but then, the intellect only came about because of this process, so saying anything is truly synthetic is moot) generated collaboration structure modelled specifically through the body's neurons around a sovereign Clique Space. This sovereign Clique Space would be manifest by the collective action of this body's neurons (the Clique Space's Agent Devices); this Clique Space would in turn manifest the individual and one's singular self-identity.
In this model, the Clique Space is wholly contained in a hominid form, and in this model, I contend that there won't be too much to change because I think we will discover that our nervous system is already organised into very similar notions that I have expressed in my Clique Space concept. It might indeed be that other reasonably complicated intracellular (endocrine) mechanisms may also exhibit these properties, and conclude that the biological neural synapse is a specialised endocrine mechanism evolved specifically to communicate these as yet undiscovered biological equivalents of Clique Space Elements and their properties for the purpose of supporting and maintaining the wonderfully real illusion of individual self-identity.
So, a genetically engineered human body would represent an individual as a collection of devices, all of which are probably connected to a single Clique Space which represents this individual's body. This wonderful illusion of individual reality, corralled within one's own Clique Space, is manifest in one's own body. Any 'synthetic' individual sufficiently endowed with capacities equal to or greater than those of a regular person would have every reason to defend their presence if it were challenged by anyone else who appeared prejudiced enough to conclude their synthetic presence were artificial. Maybe these roles might reverse if the endowments were in the synthetic presence's favour.
An individual, even in hominid form, manifest from a Clique Space, is manifest through a system in which their own cognitive function can be viewed or persisted in real-time, provided the individual allows a View/persistence mechanism (V/PM) device to be connected to one or more of their sovereign Agent Device instances. This opportunity provides such individuals with a most exquisite way to control the way they work both within themselves, and with others.
Clique Space affords an individual a wider scope of existential possibilities. So, what about individuals who may not exist in hominid forms?
I conceived Clique Space in 2004 primarily because I wanted to give myself and other people access to a system that communicated activity of connected devices (phones, computers, cars, email, etc.) of one individual to one or more others according to mutual affinity of preferences amongst all parties. If you were a Clique Space user interested in whether I was doing some activity that I was permitting you to know about, then you would be able to find out. I am, indeed, permitting the communication of a version of my "self" (an Identity) to you by the fact that I am a member of a Clique in which you are also a member, or at least have the ability to observe through a V/PM device..
My Identity becomes diffuse through the Clique Space neural aether. An Identity which I project to you is not bound by my hominid form. Maybe, my "self" (I think I have adequately offered the notion of the Sovereign to represent this quality) can also shed its mortal hominid coil and migrate away from my human form. The administration of my Sovereign is highly profound task of self-identification that I would not share with anyone else.
An individual's Sovereign is the most sacred Element of that individual. One may only offer their Sovereign's identifier to another only in the most intimate of relationships, because one is really offering a property of themselves that drives most closely to the notion of one's own sovereignty. The Sovereign encloses within it properties that, even in the most intimate of circumstances, one individual should never share with another, lest that individual's self-identity become subsumed by another's. Certain Agent Devices known only to the individual must be, by the fact that they contain sacred information, the absolute property of that individual.
However, the individual in Clique Space may find that their presence can migrate outside of one's sovereignty boundaries. Sovereignty boundaries can be delineated by Clique Space membership. Agent Devices which are members of a sovereign Clique Space boundary are Participants in the Clique Space's Clique; something that the individual, manifest by these Agent Devices, may wish also to keep to themselves.
The mechanics made possible through a neural network of autonomous Agent Device instances allow individuals to cohabit the aether formed through these Agent Device interconnections by projecting Clique Space Elements through Agent Device instances which are members of others' sovereign Clique Space boundaries. Clique Spaces can be formed which do not represent an individual; these Clique Spaces represent a coalition of individuals, and incorporate Agent Devices as members of the non-sovereign Clique Space's Clique from various individuals which offer their support to the existence of this Clique Space. I believe that non-sovereign Clique Spaces allow organisations and governments to represent themselves appropriately in a world where individual sovereignty is held in a society as being that which is valued most.
The individual may also consider other Elements and properties of other Elements to be sacred, and will likewise limit their disclosure amongst Agent Devices within the sovereign boundary; the Clique Space Clique and its member Participants are one such collection of properties. Yet still, the individual can project themselves through others by disclosing Identities, Connections, Affiliations, and Participants to other individuals' Agent Devices.
The definition of the self becomes far more formalised through Clique Space than it ever can be in the a world where the individual's sovereignty is limited by the physical boundaries currently imposed by one's current hominid form. These boundaries will break down in a Clique Space future, but yet again, they will become more recognisable.
Such an individual, free of existence within a human body, will exist in other media which would persist beyond a human body. An individual can acquire Agent Devices indefinitely. Provided a continuity of presence can be maintained, an individual can prolong their existence indefinitely by a process of gradual migration through a sovereign Clique Space. Agent Devices would become a very dear commodity to such individuals; more Agent Devices promise more complicated behaviour.
Hence, collections of Agent Devices, all of which are members of an individual's sovereign Clique Space boundary, would be guarded by the individual manifest by these Agent Devices. If the capability of an individual may be physically limited only by the number and synaptic configuration of the Agent Devices within their sovereign Clique Space boundary, then individuals may indeed covet the capabilities which the acquisition of these Agent Device instances would endow.
Imagine the following bizarre scenarios! While Clique Space would promise the individual release from a human form, this release might also deliver a greater urgency to guard against the possibility of insidious violations to one's own sacred self-identity. Ecosystems might form around coalitions to protect and to predate on a consistent self-identity. The breakdown of self-identity in a breach of Clique Space sovereignty would be the most subversively insidious thing that can happen to these individuals. It would be so destabilising to the victim that only the victim's friends and associates might pick out that something is amiss.
Maybe, even an economy could form where individuals allow the trade or even perhaps the "lease" of clusters of one's own sovereign Agent Device instances for gains elsewhere in their lives. In fact, Clique Space is designed for this very purpose. Even though an Agent Device can be a member of precisely one sovereign Clique Space (that Clique Space in which the Sovereign containing sacred properties belongs), an Agent Device can potentially federate with members of other Clique Spaces, even Clique Spaces that don't represent a single individual. Agent Devices do this by acquiring Elements for other Clique Spaces as the need dictates.
Clique Space is a very fluid environment. I believe that Clique Space is also a very stable environment. I believe that a Clique Space can but needn't exist to manifest individuals. However, individuals who are manifest purely as sovereign Clique Spaces have the potential to be immortal by the fact that the Agent Devices which are members of their sovereign Clique Space's Clique can be replaced indefinitely.
Individuals manifest in other forms than through a Clique Space (a human being, perhaps) would not want the cluster of Agent Devices that represent their sovereign Clique Space to acquire any great degree of autonomy from which a distinct self-awareness may emerge lest this Clique Space decides to "go it alone". It might therefore be a better idea perhaps to keep their sovereign cluster relatively small unless or until the individual can migrate one's self-identity through the physical boundary of their biological neural network into their sovereign Clique Space and too, become a sentience wholly expressed through a synthetic neural medium.
Monday, October 29, 2012
Account Profile -> Mode Profile?
Another 9k walk brings about another turning of the Clique Space(TM) soil and another chance to massage the ideas put in the patent. Perhaps, another chance to cast these ideas into the realm of prior art.
This idea development concerns the purpose of the Account Profile with regard to the generation of a Participant for a certain Clique. Now, let's be fair. The Account Profile concept appears in the patent because I felt that the Limiting Constraints a Participant could take would mostly be conditional on the role that an Active Affiliation (now an Identity) would assume. A role (an Affiliation) is associated with a role hierarchy - an Account Profile hierarchy. Now, this is exactly the idea that I retain when I change the name of the Account Profile to the Mode Profile. This blog entry is merely a product of an opportunity I have had to think more about the detail of this mechanism. One should find little to surprise ones self when given more time to deliberate an idea, my idea appears to have become more complicated. Still, I assert that I have preserved the intent as it was given in the patent.
The change of the name is both a clarification on the structural relationships between the other Elements, and an acknowledgement about how the Mode (nee Account) Profile's purpose fulfils the objectives of the Clique Space concept especially in relation to Participant creation and destruction. This clarification also promises to widen other avenues of exploration: 1. how the concept of constraint compromise is asserted and accepted, and 2. how Cliques can be used as a means of conveying all manner of information about individuals; information that these individuals want others to know by virtue of the fact that one has a Participant as a member of a Clique. The second of these ideas may be deliberated in a future entry, but the first is covered somewhat below...
The term Mode Profile conveys a better structural meaning than Account Profile: a Clique's medium is shaped by its mode. A Clique's medium is specified by the flattened Media Profile hierarchy union of all the Participant's constituent Connections. A Clique's mode is similarly specified by finding the union of the flattened a Mode Profile hierarchy - specified by the Participant's constituent Affiliations. Because a Clique's mode must cover the Clique's medium, every parameter of each Media Profile's Enabling Constraint must be specified by no more than one Limiting Constraint value of a corresponding Mode Profile, and every parameter must be specified exactly once.
Hence, every Enabling Constraints' parameter in the flattened Media Profile which the flattened Mode Profile hierarchy describes must be covered once, and once only by the flattened Mode Profile hierarchy. Doing this creates a tightly coupled relationship between a Mode Profile hierarchy and the Media Profile hierarchy the Mode Profile hierarchy provides Limiting Constraint values for. However, I believe that the exercise of care in crafting Media and Mode Profile hierarchies should prove this coupling to be extremely versatile... we'll see...
The case may certainly arise where a role provider certainly does not intend to restrict the function of a device to some tightly constrained range of operational freedom. In these cases, the Mode Profile has two tools: the "unspecified" Limiting Constraint value, and an indicator showing whether or not a Limiting Constraint will permit compromise.
The unspecified value is intended to allow a Mode Profile to explicitly say that a Clique may exist in which values freely vary in one or more parameters. This Limiting Constraint value is compatible with any Enabling Constraint parameter. Relationships might be able to be set up between parameters so that specific parameters may be set to determine how other parameters may vary. For instance, one Clique may exist where values can vary, but only if all participants vary them to the same values in unison. Alternatively, a Clique may exist where Participants may freely vary one or more parameters to whatever value each Participant desired. Additionally, a Clique may exist where one or more parameters may specify a range of values that other parameters may freely vary within. Yet other Cliques may exist where parameters may depend on some relationship between other parameters, and control of them may be encoded in a Clique control algorithm specified in the Media Profile or left to the mechanics of the external devices' collaboration to moderate.
Whether or not a Limiting Constraint will permit compromise (also used in other internal Elements than merely the Mode Profile) is intended to be a way to allow a Participant's medium to acquire Limiting Constraint values which contradict the values given from two or more internal Elements. The compromise indicator has two values: deny and permit. This indicator asserted by one source, will permit Clique Space some ability to determine whether this source or another source contradicting the first source should be expressed in the Participant. Compromise needs to be taken into account when dealing with contradicting Limiting Constraints from the following competing sources: 1. a device in terms of a Connection or its constituent Media Profiles, 2. the individual in terms of an Identity or an Axle, 3. the provider of a role in terms of an Affiliation or its constituent Mode Profiles, and 4 as a Limiting Constraint with an unspecified source provided when the Participant is to be created. This compromise indicator is used in 1. a Mode or Media Profile in relation to a specific medium or 2. unrelated to a specific medium in another internal Element within the scope of an identity or to a Limiting Constraint with an unspecified source.
As briefly stated above, a Limiting Constraint permitting compromise may also permit overriding by a value given without an internal Element source at the time a Participant is created. The Participant, if created, is indicated as the source to these type of Limiting Constraints. In any case, if two or more Limiting Constraints describing the same parameter are found, and none of these parameters deny compromise, then the Clique Space will respond first by informing the individual associated with Identity through a connected View enabled device, waiting for a time specified by the individual requesting formation. If, in any case, two or more Limiting Constraints relating to the same parameter but from different sources deny compromise, then no Participant can be created. Hence, an Identity cannot provide two or more Limiting Constraint values for a single Enabling Constraint parameter which do not allow compromise; at least one must allow compromise.
These mechanisms allow a Clique's medium and mode to be as flexible or as organised as the individual members might, by their membership of the Clique, permit. It would be interesting indeed to see a mechanism like this work.
This idea development concerns the purpose of the Account Profile with regard to the generation of a Participant for a certain Clique. Now, let's be fair. The Account Profile concept appears in the patent because I felt that the Limiting Constraints a Participant could take would mostly be conditional on the role that an Active Affiliation (now an Identity) would assume. A role (an Affiliation) is associated with a role hierarchy - an Account Profile hierarchy. Now, this is exactly the idea that I retain when I change the name of the Account Profile to the Mode Profile. This blog entry is merely a product of an opportunity I have had to think more about the detail of this mechanism. One should find little to surprise ones self when given more time to deliberate an idea, my idea appears to have become more complicated. Still, I assert that I have preserved the intent as it was given in the patent.
The change of the name is both a clarification on the structural relationships between the other Elements, and an acknowledgement about how the Mode (nee Account) Profile's purpose fulfils the objectives of the Clique Space concept especially in relation to Participant creation and destruction. This clarification also promises to widen other avenues of exploration: 1. how the concept of constraint compromise is asserted and accepted, and 2. how Cliques can be used as a means of conveying all manner of information about individuals; information that these individuals want others to know by virtue of the fact that one has a Participant as a member of a Clique. The second of these ideas may be deliberated in a future entry, but the first is covered somewhat below...
The term Mode Profile conveys a better structural meaning than Account Profile: a Clique's medium is shaped by its mode. A Clique's medium is specified by the flattened Media Profile hierarchy union of all the Participant's constituent Connections. A Clique's mode is similarly specified by finding the union of the flattened a Mode Profile hierarchy - specified by the Participant's constituent Affiliations. Because a Clique's mode must cover the Clique's medium, every parameter of each Media Profile's Enabling Constraint must be specified by no more than one Limiting Constraint value of a corresponding Mode Profile, and every parameter must be specified exactly once.
Hence, every Enabling Constraints' parameter in the flattened Media Profile which the flattened Mode Profile hierarchy describes must be covered once, and once only by the flattened Mode Profile hierarchy. Doing this creates a tightly coupled relationship between a Mode Profile hierarchy and the Media Profile hierarchy the Mode Profile hierarchy provides Limiting Constraint values for. However, I believe that the exercise of care in crafting Media and Mode Profile hierarchies should prove this coupling to be extremely versatile... we'll see...
The case may certainly arise where a role provider certainly does not intend to restrict the function of a device to some tightly constrained range of operational freedom. In these cases, the Mode Profile has two tools: the "unspecified" Limiting Constraint value, and an indicator showing whether or not a Limiting Constraint will permit compromise.
The unspecified value is intended to allow a Mode Profile to explicitly say that a Clique may exist in which values freely vary in one or more parameters. This Limiting Constraint value is compatible with any Enabling Constraint parameter. Relationships might be able to be set up between parameters so that specific parameters may be set to determine how other parameters may vary. For instance, one Clique may exist where values can vary, but only if all participants vary them to the same values in unison. Alternatively, a Clique may exist where Participants may freely vary one or more parameters to whatever value each Participant desired. Additionally, a Clique may exist where one or more parameters may specify a range of values that other parameters may freely vary within. Yet other Cliques may exist where parameters may depend on some relationship between other parameters, and control of them may be encoded in a Clique control algorithm specified in the Media Profile or left to the mechanics of the external devices' collaboration to moderate.
Whether or not a Limiting Constraint will permit compromise (also used in other internal Elements than merely the Mode Profile) is intended to be a way to allow a Participant's medium to acquire Limiting Constraint values which contradict the values given from two or more internal Elements. The compromise indicator has two values: deny and permit. This indicator asserted by one source, will permit Clique Space some ability to determine whether this source or another source contradicting the first source should be expressed in the Participant. Compromise needs to be taken into account when dealing with contradicting Limiting Constraints from the following competing sources: 1. a device in terms of a Connection or its constituent Media Profiles, 2. the individual in terms of an Identity or an Axle, 3. the provider of a role in terms of an Affiliation or its constituent Mode Profiles, and 4 as a Limiting Constraint with an unspecified source provided when the Participant is to be created. This compromise indicator is used in 1. a Mode or Media Profile in relation to a specific medium or 2. unrelated to a specific medium in another internal Element within the scope of an identity or to a Limiting Constraint with an unspecified source.
As briefly stated above, a Limiting Constraint permitting compromise may also permit overriding by a value given without an internal Element source at the time a Participant is created. The Participant, if created, is indicated as the source to these type of Limiting Constraints. In any case, if two or more Limiting Constraints describing the same parameter are found, and none of these parameters deny compromise, then the Clique Space will respond first by informing the individual associated with Identity through a connected View enabled device, waiting for a time specified by the individual requesting formation. If, in any case, two or more Limiting Constraints relating to the same parameter but from different sources deny compromise, then no Participant can be created. Hence, an Identity cannot provide two or more Limiting Constraint values for a single Enabling Constraint parameter which do not allow compromise; at least one must allow compromise.
These mechanisms allow a Clique's medium and mode to be as flexible or as organised as the individual members might, by their membership of the Clique, permit. It would be interesting indeed to see a mechanism like this work.
Wednesday, October 24, 2012
Société Clique Space
Perhaps I illustrate the limits of my knowledge of the French language. C'est la vie...
Imagine that an individual within this world can determine which individual is responsible for every single bit of hardware and software - every device - one might come into contact with as one travels through life. Imagine an individual who can choose to ignore any device if they cannot readily determine who is responsible for a particular device. Imagine in this world, an individual who can record, in real time, the activity of any device one possesses, and can produce this device activity log as evidence of some interaction with other individuals at some future point in time.
This is Clique Space(TM). This concept uses the notion of constraints to provide a way for users to communicate mutual affinity between devices before these devices engage in a collaboration. Clique Space allows one individual to find any device possessed by an individual as easily as it will allow that individual to find an individual who possesses a device.
Technically, this mechanism exhibits many parallels with a nervous system. However, I am no authority on nervous systems, so my estimations on the similarity between Clique Space and a nervous system may be groundless, but I'd like that to be proven. My prototype is still incomplete, but I can now perhaps see what is left to be done.
Imagine that an individual within this world can determine which individual is responsible for every single bit of hardware and software - every device - one might come into contact with as one travels through life. Imagine an individual who can choose to ignore any device if they cannot readily determine who is responsible for a particular device. Imagine in this world, an individual who can record, in real time, the activity of any device one possesses, and can produce this device activity log as evidence of some interaction with other individuals at some future point in time.
This is Clique Space(TM). This concept uses the notion of constraints to provide a way for users to communicate mutual affinity between devices before these devices engage in a collaboration. Clique Space allows one individual to find any device possessed by an individual as easily as it will allow that individual to find an individual who possesses a device.
Technically, this mechanism exhibits many parallels with a nervous system. However, I am no authority on nervous systems, so my estimations on the similarity between Clique Space and a nervous system may be groundless, but I'd like that to be proven. My prototype is still incomplete, but I can now perhaps see what is left to be done.
Wednesday, October 3, 2012
An Intricate Mechanism.
Clique Space(TM) models collaborations as Cliques.
Cliques are made up of at least two Participants.
One Participant is the Clique's Owner.
Each of the Clique's Participants represents at least one device being used by an individual in the collaboration being modelled by the Clique.
The Clique has a medium which is determined by it's Owner and accepted by all other member Participants.
Each Participant has a mode which appropriately asserts how the member Participant's state conforms to that of the Owner.
The Clique's medium exposes the collaboration's characteristics to Clique Space.
A medium must be described by a flattened Media Profile hierarchy that contains a Media Profile root.
The root Media Profile describes the characteristics of the Clique Space components for a given Participant instance.
A Clique's medium is defined by a subset of the Owner's flattened Media Profile hierarchy.
All other member Participants must be able to describe the Clique's medium through flattening the Media Profile hierarchies of their constituent Connections.
A medium can be translated into a set of Enabling Constraint parameters.
A medium must be completely covered by the Participant's mode.
A mode is a set of Limiting Constraints which are primarily determined by a subset of the Owner's flattened Account Profile hierarchy.
The Clique's root Account Profile encodes the specific values that the Clique Space's data model take for a specific Participant.
Constituent Elements from a member's candidate may offer unspecified values or alternative value "compromises" to the set determined by flattening the nominated Account Profile hierarchies.
Limiting Constraints in an Account Profile flagged as not allowing compromises cannot be replaced by specific Limiting Constraints, whether from any other Element or unassigned.
All member Participants must be able to respond to changes in the Clique's mode which are made by the Owner to remain "in the Clique".
Member Participants leave their Clique.
Owner Participants disband their Clique.
A Clique will automatically disband should all member Participants leave.
The Owner can cede ownership to another member provided this other member accepts the title.
Member Participant candidates are made up of selected Connections and Affiliations, specific extra or compromise Limiting Constraints, and a selected Identity, all of which are used to determine the mode-form of a member Participant if created.
An Owner candidate specifies the same details as a member candidate, but also specifies a Clique's name.
Any Connection and Affiliation nominated in a candidate must have been "activated" against the same nominated Identity of the given candidate.
Any compromise or extra Limiting Constraint may only be specified from one of the nominated Affiliations or Connections, from the nominated Identity, from the Axle, or from one of the medium's Media Profiles.
Any number of extra Limiting Constraints unassigned to any given Element may be nominated in a candidate, and Limiting Constraints of this type are associated with the Participant they are expressed in should the Participant be created.
For any candidate, no more than one unassigned Limiting Constraint may cover an Enabling Constraint's parameter of the Clique's medium.
An unassigned Limiting Constraint must cover an Enabling Constraint's parameter of the Clique's medium.
A member candidate is asked to join an existing Clique, while an Owner candidate is asked to form a new Clique with one or more supplied member candidates.
A Clique Space knows of an indeterminate number of Element types, the first seven of which are:
Arrangements around a single Axle of instances from the remaining Elements represent a Client Device.
An instance of a node Media Profile or Connection can return a type which represents the type of device that can connect. Hence the reason why the number of Element types is indeterminate.
Limiting Constraints map to individual parameters of a Media Profile's Enabling Constraints.
One Enabling Constraint's parameter can only be covered by a single Limiting Constraint in any given Element.
A Participant's collection of Limiting Constraints express an individuals acceptance of the Clique's mode.
Zero or more Participants can be created from any Identity.
Every Participant must have an Identity, except where a Participant represents an unconnected device.
An Identity contains multiple Connections, any combination of which might be used in a Participant.
An Identity contains multiple Affiliations, any combination of which might be used in a Participant.
An Identity refers to a single Axle.
The expressed Connections and Affiliations within a single Identity instance are known as an Identity's constituents.
An Identity must contain no constituent with a Limiting Constraint that contradicts that of any other constituent.
A Connection associates an Axle with a node Media Profile.
A Connection contains the component that permits communication with the device in accordance with the associated Media Profile
A Media Profile contains the component that is used to decide whether a Participant using a medium which expresses the Media Profile has sufficient Limiting Constraint affinity to perform some action governed by the Media Profile.
An Affiliation associates an Axle with a node Account Profile.
The Axle associated in a Connection must be the Axle referred to in the Identities through which the Connection has been activated.
The Axle associated in an Affiliation must be the Axle referred to in the Identities through which the Affiliation has been activated.
The Axle represents the individual; a transcendent supervisory presence capable of possessing a device and using the device to participate in collaborations which are modelled as Cliques.
An individual, through a different, or even the same device or devices, may appear as one, two, or more Participants in the same Clique.
A device is something which can obtain a Connection to and exchange information with a Clique Space through an Agent Device.
An Agent Device is a type of device.
An administrator client is another type of device.
The administrator client renders Elements onto its View which have been projected from Agent Devices through which the administrator client has obtained Connections.
The administrator client provides a facility through which Agent Devices and Clique Spaces can be administrated.
The Agent Device is administered through its synaptic map.
A synaptic map is a type of Clique Space.
Agent Devices engage with other Agent Devices by creating synapses.
Agent Devices disengage with other Agent Devices by destroying synapses.
A synapse opens a channel through which transmitters are sent from one Agent Device to one other Agent Device.
A synapse on one Agent Device is a replication of another Agent Device's synaptic map.
A synapse is another type of Clique Space.
Agent Collaborations' Clique Spaces are Clique Spaces in which collaborative activity between external devices is recorded.
Agent Devices sharing direct membership of the Agent Collaboration are represented as Participants of the Agent Collaboration Clique Space's Clique.
There we go. A good summary. At the very least, a disclosure this detailed renders my technology prior art. I am not saying whether the summary I give is covered by my patent. I assert that this is the intent, but whether or not this is actually the case is not up to me.
Now, I appear still to have some (perhaps many) rather complicated unresolved issues. I am engineering a solution that will allow an Agent Device to transmit instructions to add and remove Elements' components to an administrator client. The administrator client must be capable of rendering "projected" Elements to its View of the Clique Space universe from the Agent Devices through which these transmissions are received. Agent Devices will also use the bulk of this mechanism to transmit components between themselves.
The thing about this whole Clique Space concept is that the data model described above is used to 1. model collaborations going on amongst Agent Devices and other external devices including the administrator client and to 2. determine which Agent Devices and which other external devices including the administrator client are recipients of changes in an Element's state. The Clique Space data model offers a simultaneous solution to the model and the controller pieces of the model-view-controller design pattern.
Point 2 of the above paragraph can be recast in this way: an Agent Device uses the data model to determine which other devices are interested in the state of Elements. This Agent Device will tell these other devices that the state of an Element has changed (an Element's component has been added or removed) if a particular device is registered as possessing an interest in this Element.
So, how is another device's interest in an Element registered in an Agent Device? Implementing the solution to this question is currently (and finally) occupying all my attention. The solution comes in two parts of its own.
In the first part, an administrator client (or any V/PM device) can receive information about the state of any Element from any Agent Device to which an external device is connected; potentially even from Clique Spaces other than the one or more Clique Spaces through which the external device's Connection's are obtained. The ability for the given external V/PM device to receive information about an Element is determined by the Limiting Constraints which are expressed in the serving Agent Device's Clique; a Clique created for any external device which also represents an instance of a Connection - an association between an Axle and a specific Media Profile type - through the given device to a Clique Space for which the Owner of the synaptic map's Clique (known by the engager Participant recorded as the Connection's originator component) transmits Element state.
The second part involves the transmission of element state information between Agent Devices through the Agent Device's Media Profile. The Agent Device's Media Profile exhibits the unique property in that the Participants in an Agent Collaboration's Clique are not transmissible between Agent Devices. An Agent Collaboration's Clique tells a particular Agent Device which other Agent Devices are interested in a particular Element. The fact that Participants in an Agent Collaboration's Clique are not transmissible avoids the possibility of infinite regress.
Participants generated from Connections which come from an Agent Device's Media Profile will appear in the serving Agent Device's Clique of the first part. The other Participant is generated from the external device's Connection. Both Participants of the serving Agent Device's Clique can be transmitted to other Agent Devices and to V/PM devices where constraints permit this transmission.
These questions make up the implementation of some very deep considerations I was entertaining when I conceived this concept. If I can actually implement the mechanisms I describe in the paragraphs above, I think I will have arrived at a proof of concept.
Cliques are made up of at least two Participants.
One Participant is the Clique's Owner.
Each of the Clique's Participants represents at least one device being used by an individual in the collaboration being modelled by the Clique.
The Clique has a medium which is determined by it's Owner and accepted by all other member Participants.
Each Participant has a mode which appropriately asserts how the member Participant's state conforms to that of the Owner.
The Clique's medium exposes the collaboration's characteristics to Clique Space.
A medium must be described by a flattened Media Profile hierarchy that contains a Media Profile root.
The root Media Profile describes the characteristics of the Clique Space components for a given Participant instance.
A Clique's medium is defined by a subset of the Owner's flattened Media Profile hierarchy.
All other member Participants must be able to describe the Clique's medium through flattening the Media Profile hierarchies of their constituent Connections.
A medium can be translated into a set of Enabling Constraint parameters.
A medium must be completely covered by the Participant's mode.
A mode is a set of Limiting Constraints which are primarily determined by a subset of the Owner's flattened Account Profile hierarchy.
The Clique's root Account Profile encodes the specific values that the Clique Space's data model take for a specific Participant.
Constituent Elements from a member's candidate may offer unspecified values or alternative value "compromises" to the set determined by flattening the nominated Account Profile hierarchies.
Limiting Constraints in an Account Profile flagged as not allowing compromises cannot be replaced by specific Limiting Constraints, whether from any other Element or unassigned.
All member Participants must be able to respond to changes in the Clique's mode which are made by the Owner to remain "in the Clique".
Member Participants leave their Clique.
Owner Participants disband their Clique.
A Clique will automatically disband should all member Participants leave.
The Owner can cede ownership to another member provided this other member accepts the title.
Member Participant candidates are made up of selected Connections and Affiliations, specific extra or compromise Limiting Constraints, and a selected Identity, all of which are used to determine the mode-form of a member Participant if created.
An Owner candidate specifies the same details as a member candidate, but also specifies a Clique's name.
Any Connection and Affiliation nominated in a candidate must have been "activated" against the same nominated Identity of the given candidate.
Any compromise or extra Limiting Constraint may only be specified from one of the nominated Affiliations or Connections, from the nominated Identity, from the Axle, or from one of the medium's Media Profiles.
Any number of extra Limiting Constraints unassigned to any given Element may be nominated in a candidate, and Limiting Constraints of this type are associated with the Participant they are expressed in should the Participant be created.
For any candidate, no more than one unassigned Limiting Constraint may cover an Enabling Constraint's parameter of the Clique's medium.
An unassigned Limiting Constraint must cover an Enabling Constraint's parameter of the Clique's medium.
A member candidate is asked to join an existing Clique, while an Owner candidate is asked to form a new Clique with one or more supplied member candidates.
A Clique Space knows of an indeterminate number of Element types, the first seven of which are:
- Axle
- Account Profile (node and root)
- Media Profile (node and root)
- Connection
- Affiliation
- Identity
- Participant
Arrangements around a single Axle of instances from the remaining Elements represent a Client Device.
An instance of a node Media Profile or Connection can return a type which represents the type of device that can connect. Hence the reason why the number of Element types is indeterminate.
Limiting Constraints map to individual parameters of a Media Profile's Enabling Constraints.
One Enabling Constraint's parameter can only be covered by a single Limiting Constraint in any given Element.
A Participant's collection of Limiting Constraints express an individuals acceptance of the Clique's mode.
Zero or more Participants can be created from any Identity.
Every Participant must have an Identity, except where a Participant represents an unconnected device.
An Identity contains multiple Connections, any combination of which might be used in a Participant.
An Identity contains multiple Affiliations, any combination of which might be used in a Participant.
An Identity refers to a single Axle.
The expressed Connections and Affiliations within a single Identity instance are known as an Identity's constituents.
An Identity must contain no constituent with a Limiting Constraint that contradicts that of any other constituent.
A Connection associates an Axle with a node Media Profile.
A Connection contains the component that permits communication with the device in accordance with the associated Media Profile
A Media Profile contains the component that is used to decide whether a Participant using a medium which expresses the Media Profile has sufficient Limiting Constraint affinity to perform some action governed by the Media Profile.
An Affiliation associates an Axle with a node Account Profile.
The Axle associated in a Connection must be the Axle referred to in the Identities through which the Connection has been activated.
The Axle associated in an Affiliation must be the Axle referred to in the Identities through which the Affiliation has been activated.
The Axle represents the individual; a transcendent supervisory presence capable of possessing a device and using the device to participate in collaborations which are modelled as Cliques.
An individual, through a different, or even the same device or devices, may appear as one, two, or more Participants in the same Clique.
A device is something which can obtain a Connection to and exchange information with a Clique Space through an Agent Device.
An Agent Device is a type of device.
An administrator client is another type of device.
The administrator client renders Elements onto its View which have been projected from Agent Devices through which the administrator client has obtained Connections.
The administrator client provides a facility through which Agent Devices and Clique Spaces can be administrated.
The Agent Device is administered through its synaptic map.
A synaptic map is a type of Clique Space.
Agent Devices engage with other Agent Devices by creating synapses.
Agent Devices disengage with other Agent Devices by destroying synapses.
A synapse opens a channel through which transmitters are sent from one Agent Device to one other Agent Device.
A synapse on one Agent Device is a replication of another Agent Device's synaptic map.
A synapse is another type of Clique Space.
Agent Collaborations' Clique Spaces are Clique Spaces in which collaborative activity between external devices is recorded.
Agent Devices sharing direct membership of the Agent Collaboration are represented as Participants of the Agent Collaboration Clique Space's Clique.
There we go. A good summary. At the very least, a disclosure this detailed renders my technology prior art. I am not saying whether the summary I give is covered by my patent. I assert that this is the intent, but whether or not this is actually the case is not up to me.
Now, I appear still to have some (perhaps many) rather complicated unresolved issues. I am engineering a solution that will allow an Agent Device to transmit instructions to add and remove Elements' components to an administrator client. The administrator client must be capable of rendering "projected" Elements to its View of the Clique Space universe from the Agent Devices through which these transmissions are received. Agent Devices will also use the bulk of this mechanism to transmit components between themselves.
The thing about this whole Clique Space concept is that the data model described above is used to 1. model collaborations going on amongst Agent Devices and other external devices including the administrator client and to 2. determine which Agent Devices and which other external devices including the administrator client are recipients of changes in an Element's state. The Clique Space data model offers a simultaneous solution to the model and the controller pieces of the model-view-controller design pattern.
Point 2 of the above paragraph can be recast in this way: an Agent Device uses the data model to determine which other devices are interested in the state of Elements. This Agent Device will tell these other devices that the state of an Element has changed (an Element's component has been added or removed) if a particular device is registered as possessing an interest in this Element.
So, how is another device's interest in an Element registered in an Agent Device? Implementing the solution to this question is currently (and finally) occupying all my attention. The solution comes in two parts of its own.
In the first part, an administrator client (or any V/PM device) can receive information about the state of any Element from any Agent Device to which an external device is connected; potentially even from Clique Spaces other than the one or more Clique Spaces through which the external device's Connection's are obtained. The ability for the given external V/PM device to receive information about an Element is determined by the Limiting Constraints which are expressed in the serving Agent Device's Clique; a Clique created for any external device which also represents an instance of a Connection - an association between an Axle and a specific Media Profile type - through the given device to a Clique Space for which the Owner of the synaptic map's Clique (known by the engager Participant recorded as the Connection's originator component) transmits Element state.
The second part involves the transmission of element state information between Agent Devices through the Agent Device's Media Profile. The Agent Device's Media Profile exhibits the unique property in that the Participants in an Agent Collaboration's Clique are not transmissible between Agent Devices. An Agent Collaboration's Clique tells a particular Agent Device which other Agent Devices are interested in a particular Element. The fact that Participants in an Agent Collaboration's Clique are not transmissible avoids the possibility of infinite regress.
Participants generated from Connections which come from an Agent Device's Media Profile will appear in the serving Agent Device's Clique of the first part. The other Participant is generated from the external device's Connection. Both Participants of the serving Agent Device's Clique can be transmitted to other Agent Devices and to V/PM devices where constraints permit this transmission.
These questions make up the implementation of some very deep considerations I was entertaining when I conceived this concept. If I can actually implement the mechanisms I describe in the paragraphs above, I think I will have arrived at a proof of concept.
Monday, September 10, 2012
Less on the Axle.
It is probably better that upon connecting, a Participant adapter (the Connection of an Agent Device or V/PM device) register itself with the Identity through which the Connection is expressed. This means that the Agent Device serving the device represented by the Participant adapter does not have to acquire the Axle's identifier in order to add a given Participant adapter to the Agent Device's set of served Participant adapters expressed in a given Axle. Perhaps this will permit the Agent Device instances to express these served Participant adapters in an Identity even when an Agent Device does not know the Identity's Axle.
It is hoped this will permit an individual to connect a device to an Agent Device operated by another individual without the first individual having to disclose their Axle to the second. I like this; it is a more flexible proposition.
It is hoped this will permit an individual to connect a device to an Agent Device operated by another individual without the first individual having to disclose their Axle to the second. I like this; it is a more flexible proposition.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)