Issues Related to the Emergence of the Information Superhighway and California Societal Changes, IISTPS Report 96-4

The Norman Y. Mineta International Institute for Surface Transportation Policy Studies (IISTPS) at San José State University (SJSU) conducted this project to review the continuing development of the Internet and the Information Superhighway. Emphasis was placed on an examination of the impact on commuting and working patterns in California, and an analysis of how public transportation agencies, including Caltrans, might take advantage of the new communications technologies. The document reviews the technology underlying the current Internet “structure” and examines anticipated developments. It is important to note that much of the research for this limited-scope project was conducted during 1995, and the topic is so rapidly evolving that some information is almost automatically “dated.” The report also examines how transportation agencies are basically similar in structure and function to other business entities, and how they can continue to utilize the emerging technologies to improve internal and external communications. As part of a detailed discussion of specific transportation agency functions, it is noted that the concept of a “Roundtable Forum,” growing out of developments in Concurrent Engineering, can provide an opportunity for representatives from multiple jurisdictions to utilize the Internet for more coordinated decision-making. The report also included an extensive analysis of demographic trends in California in recent years, such as commute and recreational activities, and identifies how the emerging technologies may impact future changes

Simplexity: A Hybrid Framework for Managing System Complexity

Knowledge management, management of mission critical systems, and complexity management rely on a triangular support connection. Knowledge management provides ways of creating, corroborating, collecting, combining, storing, transferring, and sharing the know-why and know-how for reactively and proactively handling the challenges of mission critical systems. Complexity management, operating on “complexity” as an umbrella term for size, mass, diversity, ambiguity, fuzziness, randomness, risk, change, chaos, instability, and disruption, delivers support to both knowledge and systems management: on the one hand, support for dealing with the complexity of managing knowledge, i.e., furnishing criteria for a common and operationalized terminology, for dealing with mediating and moderating concepts, paradoxes, and controversial validity, and, on the other hand, support for systems managers coping with risks, lack of transparence, ambiguity, fuzziness, pooled and reciprocal interdependencies (e.g., for attaining interoperability), instability (e.g., downtime, oscillations, disruption), and even disasters and catastrophes. This support results from the evident intersection of complexity management and systems management, e.g., in the shape of complex adaptive systems, deploying slack, establishing security standards, and utilizing hybrid concepts (e.g., hybrid clouds, hybrid procedures for project management). The complexity-focused manager of mission critical systems should deploy an ambidextrous strategy of both reducing complexity, e.g., in terms of avoiding risks, and of establishing a potential to handle complexity, i.e., investing in high availability, business continuity, slack, optimal coupling, characteristics of high reliability organizations, and agile systems. This complexity-focused hybrid approach is labeled “simplexity.” It constitutes a blend of complexity reduction and complexity augmentation, relying on the generic logic of hybrids: the strengths of complexity reduction are capable of compensating the weaknesses of complexity augmentation and vice versa. The deficiencies of prevalent simplexity models signal that this blended approach requires a sophisticated architecture. In order to provide a sound base for coping with the meta-complexity of both complexity and its management, this architecture comprises interconnected components, domains, and dimensions as building blocks of simplexity as well as paradigms, patterns, and parameters for managing simplexity. The need for a balanced paradigm for complexity management, capable of overcoming not only the prevalent bias of complexity reduction but also weaknesses of prevalent concepts of simplexity, serves as the starting point of the argumentation in this chapter. To provide a practical guideline to meet this demand, an innovative model of simplexity is conceived. This model creates awareness for differentiating components, dimensions, and domains of complexity management as well as for various species of interconnectedness, such as the aligned upsizing and downsizing of capacities, the relevance of diversity management (e.g., in terms of deviations and errors), and the scope of risk management instruments. Strategies (e.g., heuristics, step-by-step procedures) and tools for managing simplexity-guided projects are outlined

“Robin Hook”: The developmental effects of Somali piracy

Copyright @ 2011 Brunel UniversityNaval counter-piracy measures off Somalia have failed to change the incentives for pirates, raising calls for land-based approaches that may involve replacing piracy as a source of income. This paper evaluates the effects of piracy on the Somali economy to establish which (domestic) groups benefit from ransom monies. Given the paucity of economic data on Somalia, we evaluate province-level market data, nightlight emissions and high resolution satellite imagery. We show that significant amounts of ransom monies are spent within Somalia. The impacts appear to be spread widely, benefiting the working poor and pastoralists and offsetting the food price shock of 2008 in the pirate provinces. Pirates appear to invest their money principally in the main cities of Garowe and Bosasso rather than in the backward coastal communities

Cyberterrorism: A postmodern view of networks of terror and how computer security experts and law enforcement officials fight them.

The purpose of this study is to investigate how cyberterrorists create networks in order to engage in malicious activities against the Internet and computers. The purpose of the study is also to understand how computer security labs (i.e., in universities) and various agencies (that is, law enforcement agencies such as police departments and the FBI) create joint networks in their fight against cyberterrorists. This idea of analyzing the social networks of two opposing sides rests on the premise that it takes networks to fight networks. The ultimate goal is to show that, because of the postmodern nature of the Internet, the fight between networks of cyberterrorists and networks of computer security experts (and law enforcement officials) is a postmodern fight. Two theories are used in this study: social network theory and game theory.This study employed qualitative methodology and data were collected via in-depth conversational (face-to-face) interviewing. Twenty-seven computer security experts and law enforcement officials were interviewed. Overall, this study found that cyberterrorists tend not to work alone. Rather, they team up with others through social networks. It was also found that it takes networks to fight networks. As such, it is necessary for experts and officials to combine efforts, through networking, in order to combat, let alone understand, cyberterrorist networks. Of equal relevance is the fact that law enforcement agents and computer security experts do not always engage in battle with cyberterrorists. They sometimes try to interact with them in order to obtain more information about their networks (and vice versa). Finally, four themes were identified from the participants' accounts: (1) postmodern state of chaos, (2) social engineering, (3) know thy enemy, and (4) the enemy of my enemy is my friend

Protecting the Right to Exist as a People: Intellectual Property as a Means to Protect Traditional Knowledge and Indigenous Culture

The dominant Western culture has created a legal system premised upon an individualistic and commercial foundation for intellectual property rights (IPR). This system necessarily excludes the protection of traditional knowledge and other components of Indigenous cultures, as well as concepts of communal responsibility for the keeping and transfer of such ideas and knowledge. These concepts are foundational to Indigenous knowledge systems in Alaska, as well as throughout the world. Today, a focus on this issue is critical to the preservation of indigenous cultures and their ways of knowing. We examine where national and international intellectual property rights systems are in addressing Indigenous cultural and intellectual property rights (Indigenous CIPR). We also examine opportunities for expansion of such rights in Alaska and around the world.Ye