General discussion

Locked

Homeland Defense and IT?

By FluxIt ·
Can information technology help solve many of the homeland defense issues? One of the main complaints about the events of 9/11 was a supposed failure of intelligence's ability to share information between disimiliar government and private organizations. Meanwhile one of the biggest stumbling blocks in IT is a lack of focus on information management. IT professionals seem to focus on hardware architectures and hardware problems predominantly. We need to shift our focus even in business to information management and the processes of manufacturing information.

Utilizing current management concepts and existing technologies, how can IT be leveraged to improve information sharing?

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

45 total posts (Page 1 of 5)   01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05   Next
| Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

I propose....

by FluxIt In reply to Homeland Defense and IT?

Using web / internet technologies and long standing and proven brick and mortar manufacturing concepts coupled with some emerging concepts.

I'll explain more once I hear about your ideas...

Collapse -

Spiritual machines?

by FluxIt In reply to Homeland Defense and IT?

Currently reading Ray Kurzweil's The Age of Spiritual Machines. Interesting concepts. I'll add more later. Let's hear yours?

Collapse -

What is out there?

by FluxIt In reply to Homeland Defense and IT?

I know of several concepts.

In IT:
Complex Adaptive Systems
Artificial Intelligence
Neural Technologies

In Manufacturing:
TQM
JIT
Production Types: ETO, Mass, Job Shop

Can any opf these be employed?

Collapse -

Can IT people breakout

by FluxIt In reply to Homeland Defense and IT?

Are IT people capable of thinking out-of-the-box in general? Or has the IT expert become overwhelmed by accountant myopia and pucker-butt thinking?

Collapse -

Tools - as good as the people using them

by maxwell edison In reply to Homeland Defense and IT?

Information Technology isn't the desired end result, per se, but rather a means to an end.

“Can information technology help solve many of the homeland defense issues”, you ask?

Of course it can help – just like many other things that can help - but only if people with that information utilize the technology. Bureaucratic protectiveness, distrust between competing government agencies, red tape and incompetence stripping the effectiveness between the private sector and government, outdated and ineffective laws, an overwhelmingly large bureaucratic structure (monster), and good old politics all play(ed) a part in the breakdown of communication and/or our defenses.

You stated that, “One of the main complaints about the events of 9/11 was a supposed failure of intelligence's ability to share information between dissimilar government and private organizations.”

It wasn’t the inability to share that information, but rather the reluctance to do so - and, in some cases, the outdated and/or ill-advised laws that made it illegal to do so. (The CIA and FBI, for example, were prohibited by law from sharing most information between those agencies.)

(continued&hellip

Collapse -

Very, Very well put

by darrellblackhawk In reply to Tools - as good as the pe ...
Collapse -

Now that I've back more

by pam In reply to Tools - as good as the pe ...

I see you already made my point. Thank you for putting it more eloquently.

Collapse -

Tools and People … continued

by maxwell edison In reply to Homeland Defense and IT?

You’re concerned about the, “lack of focus on information management”. The same problems as described above apply here as well, but that is, in my opinion, more of a past problem than a present (or future) one. That issue is indeedbeing addressed, so I don’t believe that there is a lack of focus to manage and coordinate intelligence information. And I’m sure that Tom Ridge would disagree as well.

Information Technology is a tool, no more, no less. IT, in and ofitself, is useless. It’s the people, the principles, and the purpose that will be the ultimate driving force in the efforts to prevail. And prevail we will.

As a side note, the primary responsibility of the United States government is, in my opinion, to provide security from all foes – both foreign and domestic. This primary responsibility has, in my opinion, been relegated to back seat status behind a plethora of social engineering issues that should not be government’s concern in the first place. It’s high time we, as a nation, redefine our priorities and responsibilities, and act accordingly.

Collapse -

I am in Agreement

by road-dog In reply to Tools and People … ...

In this day and age, there is a constant turnover of federal power between two parties who have distinctly different priorities.

It seems that social programs bloat during Democratic administrations at the expense of defense spending. When Republicans enter the White House, there is a huge expenditure in repairing the military. Meanwhile, they cannot curtail "entitlement" spending under threat of being accused of "trying to starve people". Thus, the federal budget grows ad nauseum.

The only way to stop this cycle of madness is to place EVERY federal program under Constitutional review. If a program falls outside Constitutional guidelines, then an amendment needs to be passed in order for it to continue in existence. Then a supermajority vote with state acceptance needs to occur. Hence, many social engineering programs will fail to be ratified and funded.

Yup, it's a pipe dream, but you gotta have faith in SOMETHING!

Collapse -

Road-Dog Re: Constitutional review

by maxwell edison In reply to I am in Agreement

That is indeed a great idea. But there would be endless debate over the meaning of this, that and the other thing. For example, the Constitutional phrase appearing in the preamble of the Constitution, "promote the general Welfare" is, perhaps, the most abused, misread, and misapplied phrase (word) in government and politics today.

Some, perhaps even most, people think that this phrase gives the government broad powers in that regard - even though James Madison (considered the father of the Constitution) argued in various Federalist Papers to the contrary, and even though the preamble is not a source of power for any department of the Federal Government.

This would be a great debate/discussion, but I wouldn't want to hijack and divert Mr.Miami's topic at hand.

(However, if someone were to start another discussion on that or a similar topic, I would certainly be an active participant. It's a topic very dear to my heart.)

Regards,

Maxwell

Back to Desktop Forum
45 total posts (Page 1 of 5)   01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05   Next

Related Discussions

Related Forums