I just saw an article on Data.gov and the move to move many of the feeds there into a map based environment. Kudos for the administration toward moving that direction and also making the information available in feed format for use by other applications.
Another article this morning touted agencies use of sensors over the coming years - lower prices, better communications capability, smaller size and increased capabilities make this approach a winner. The data is all structured when it comes from sensors, and an increasing number of them are incorporating standard transaction formats so that they can be automatically linked into existing applications.
Talk is cheap on both accounts, but I'm encouraged to see movement, however small. Building an interopeable environment will allow all organizations to effectively share information better and more effectively. Building the data bridges that will allow sharing worldwide will pay some amazing benefits to every type of application.
Thursday, June 24, 2010
Sunday, June 6, 2010
When is interoperability a sham?
Dr David Boyd testified in front of Congress that equipment developed under the P25 moniker doesn't mean it is interoperable.
What?
http://www.fiercegovernmentit.com/story/boyd-p25-doesnt-necessarily-mean-interoperable/2010-06-01
DHS (or their pre-cursors) has been working on this problem since people died on 9/11, and it seems we're n0 closer to a radio being able to interact seamlessly with others. Is radio truely more complicated than telephones or the IP networks that support the Internet? I don't think so.
Vendor self interest, good old boy networks, and a host of other reasons have continued to plague this whole area. When will it get fixed? Likely when a disaster happens, people die or property destroyed, and the public is shown by the news media that everything is pretty much incompatible and that we've spent billions as a country. There will be a hue and cry, a search for a scapegoat, immediate regulations proposed, lobbyists rushing to pour water on the flames, and little real change if history is our guide.
P25 has been around for 21 years an effort to standardize radios.
What?
http://www.fiercegovernmentit.com/story/boyd-p25-doesnt-necessarily-mean-interoperable/2010-06-01
DHS (or their pre-cursors) has been working on this problem since people died on 9/11, and it seems we're n0 closer to a radio being able to interact seamlessly with others. Is radio truely more complicated than telephones or the IP networks that support the Internet? I don't think so.
Vendor self interest, good old boy networks, and a host of other reasons have continued to plague this whole area. When will it get fixed? Likely when a disaster happens, people die or property destroyed, and the public is shown by the news media that everything is pretty much incompatible and that we've spent billions as a country. There will be a hue and cry, a search for a scapegoat, immediate regulations proposed, lobbyists rushing to pour water on the flames, and little real change if history is our guide.
P25 has been around for 21 years an effort to standardize radios.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
