Interoperability Quotes

A massively scaled and interoperable network of real-time rendered 3D virtual worlds that can be experienced synchronously and persistently by an effectively unlimited number of users with an individual sense of presence, and with continuity of data, such as identity, history, entitlements, objects, communications, and payments.

To date, there is no strong empirical support for claims that automating medical record keeping will lead to major reductions in health-care costs or significant improvements in the well-being of patients. But if doctors and patients have seen few benefits from the scramble to automate record keeping, the companies that supply the systems have profited. Cerner Corporation, a medical software outfit, saw its revenues triple, from $1 billion to $3 billion, between 2005 and 2013. Cerner, as it happens, was one of five corporations that provided RAND with funding for the original 2005 study. The other sponsors, which included General Electric and Hewlett Packard, also have substantial business interests in health-care automation. As today’s flawed systems are replaced or upgraded in the future, to fix their interoperability problems and other shortcomings, information technology companies will reap further windfalls.

United States is committed to protecting privacy. It is an element of individual dignity and an aspect of participation in democratic society. To an increasing extent, privacy protections have become critical to the information-based economy. Stronger consumer data privacy protections will buttress the trust that is necessary to promote the full economic, social, and political uses of networked technologies. The increasing quantities of personal data that these technologies subject to collection, use, and disclosure have fueled innovation and significant social benefits. We can preserve these benefits while also ensuring that our consumer data privacy policy better reflects the value that Americans place on privacy and bolsters trust in the Internet and other networked technologies. The framework set forth in the preceding pages provides a way to achieve these goals. The Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights should be the legal baseline that governs consumer data privacy in the United States. The Administration will work with Congress to bring this about, but it will also work with privatesector stakeholders to adopt the Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights in the absence of legislation. To encourage adoption, the Department of Commerce will convene multistakeholder processes to encourage the development of enforceable, context-specific codes of conduct. The United States Government will engage with our international partners to increase the interoperability of our respective consumer data privacy frameworks. Federal agencies will continue to develop innovative privacy-protecting programs and guidance as well as enforce the broad array of existing Federal laws that protect consumer privacy. A cornerstone of this framework is its call for the ongoing participation of private-sector stakeholders. The views that companies, civil society, academics, and advocates provided to the Administration through written comments, public symposia, and informal discussions have been invaluable in shaping this framework. Implementing it, and making progress toward consumer data privacy protections that support a more trustworthy networked world, will require all of us to continue to work together★ 45 ★

In medicine, as in art, the value of any piece of information is often related to its rarity.

The popularity of SOAP-based APIs has declined, mostly due to the inherent complexity of the WS-∗ standards. SOAP promised interoperability, but many ambiguities arose among different implementation stacks.

Domain concern Architecture characteristics Mergers and acquisitions Interoperability, scalability, adaptability, extensibility Time to market Agility, testability, deployability User satisfaction Performance, availability, fault tolerance, testability, deployability, agility, security Competitive advantage Agility, testability, deployability, scalability, availability, fault tolerance Time and budget Simplicity, feasibility

Programming languages, their features, readability, and interoperation Code reuse across platforms (server vs web vs mobile) Early error detection (compile-time vs runtime error detection, breadth of validation) Availability and cost of hiring the right talent; learning curve for new hires Readability and refactorability of code Approach to code composition, embracing the change Datastore and general approach to data modeling Application-specific data model, and the blast radius from changing it Performance and latency in all tiers and platforms Scalability and redundancy Spiky traffic patterns, autoscaling, capacity planning Error recovery Logging, telemetry, and other instrumentation Reducing complexity User interfaces and their maintainability External APIs User identity and security Hardware and human costs of the infrastructure and its maintenance Enabling multiple concurrent development workstreams Enabling testability Fast-tracking development by adopting third-party frameworks

Mergers and talent acquisitions would indicate that Apple and Microsoft were onto something similar, and to me, that indicated a possible emerging-trend candidate in ubiquitous virtual assistants. This trend—ubiquitous virtual assistants—meant that our machines would soon learn about us, anticipate our needs, and complete tasks in the background, without our direct request or supervision. The ubiquitous virtual assistant trend would be pervasive, spanning mobile phones at first before moving to other ambient interfaces and operating systems. Perhaps in the future, we might subscribe to a single assistant capable of interoperating with all of the people, devices, and objects in our lives.

It could enable an open and interoperable new generation of the web—a Web 3.0 era that secures the privacy and property rights of individuals while ensuring secure and trustworthy interactions and transactions between the human, machine, and virtual economies. This future literally adds a new dimension to the web. It enables —The Spatial Web.

Here’s another fascinating example of Amazon enabling and anticipating customer needs despite traditional views of competition. As this book was going to press, Amazon announced on September 24, 2019 that it was joining 30 different companies in the “Voice Interoperability Initiative” to ensure as many devices as possible will work with digital assistants from different companies. Amazon is pulling together with its competitors to create an industry standard for voice assistant software and hardware. Notably, Google, Apple, and Samsung are so far sitting out the initiative. “As much as people would like the headline that there’s going to be one voice assistant that rules them all, we don’t agree,” says Amazon’s SVP of devices and services Dave Limp in The Verge. “This isn’t a sporting event. There’s not going to be one winner.” “The

Five interconnecting rings for the “Faster, higher, stronger” of Cloud Computing System. The “Cloud Computing Rings” represent: Performance, Resilience, Data Sovereignty, Interoperability and Reversibility of a successfully integrated Cloud System.

One of the more interesting recent consortiums was the Enterprise Ethereum Alliance. It went public in late February 2017, and its founding members include Accenture, BNY Mellon, CME Group, JPMorgan, Microsoft, Thomson Reuters, and UBS. 25 What is most interesting about this alliance is that it aims to marry private industry and Ethereum’s public blockchain. While the consortium will work on software outside of Ethereum’s public blockchain, the intent is for all software to remain interoperable in case companies want to utilize Ethereum’s open network in the future.

SOA actually means that components of an application act as interoperable services, and can be used independently and recombined in other applications. The

The law required the CDC to “establish a near real-time electronic nationwide public health situational awareness capability through an interoperable network of systems to share data and information to enhance early detection of rapid response to, and management of, potentially catastrophic infectious disease outbreaks and other public health emergencies that originate domestically or abroad.”30 As Levin observed, “the simplest way to describe the CDC’s response to this binding legal mandate was that it just ignored it. It did nothing.

Ethereum and other smart contract platforms specifically gave rise to the decentralized application, or dApp. The backend components of these applications are built with interoperable, transparent smart contracts that continue to exist if the chain they live on exists. dApps allow peers to interact directly and remove the need for a company to act as a central clearing house for app interactions. It quickly became apparent that the first killer dApps would be financial ones.

Information is widely used in physics, but appears to be very different from all the entities appearing in the physical descriptions of the world. It is not, for instance, an observable – such as the position or the velocity of a particle. Indeed, it has properties like no other variable or observable in fundamental physics: it behaves like an abstraction. For there are laws about information that refer directly to it, without ever mentioning the details of the physical substrates that instantiate it (this is the substrate-independence of information), and moreover it is interoperable – it can be copied from one medium to another without having its properties qua information changed. Yet information can exist only when physically instantiated; also, for example, the information-processing abilities of a computer depend on the underlying physical laws of motion, as we know from the quantum theory of computation. So, there are reasons to expect that the laws governing information, like those governing computation, are laws of physics. How can these apparently contradictory aspects of information be reconciled?

Here, then, is what I mean when I write and speak about the Metaverse: “A massively scaled and interoperable network of real-time rendered 3D virtual worlds that can be experienced synchronously and persistently by an effectively unlimited number of users with an individual sense of presence, and with continuity of data, such as identity, history, entitlements, objects, communications, and payments.

Interoperability may not be a technical metaverse requirement per se, but it should be. OMA3, O3DF, MSF, etc, are doing a great job in discussing standards, however, we still haven't fixed some of the Web 2.0 interoperability issues (your iMessage app is pretty useless on an android phone), let alone metaverse's.

Metaverse interoperability s a nuanced concept, and to a certain extent, we don't even need full interoperability. We may be ok with not being able to wear our Chewbacca skins during the virtual Monday meeting with our boss, but when it comes to metaverse interoperability, that's where I draw the line.

Interoperability is the biggest challenge for brands trying to enter the metaverse. The risk of betting in the wrong m-world and being left empty-handed in five years is real. Interoperability of platforms is not a prerequisite for the metaverse, but without it, we'll end up working in silos with the same (disastrous) Web 2.0's paradigm. We must make sure that environments, objects, avatars, NFTs, avatar skins, etc. can be moved from one platform to the other. I should be able to play Axie Infinity, sell my Axie on OpenSea, get paid in Ethereum, buy an avatar skin in Minecraft, and then wear it in Decentraland. That's the central concept of decentralization (and the core idea of Web 3.0). Are we there yet? Definitely not.

Consider one scenario that some envisage in an IoT world, where a self-driving car that needs to get somewhere in a hurry can make a small payment to another self-driving car to let it pass. As discussed, you’ll need a distributed trust system to verify the integrity of the transaction, which may involve a lot more information than just that of the money transfer before it can be processed—for example, you may need to know whether the overtaking car is certified as safe to drive at the faster speed, or whether one car’s software can be trusted not to infect the other with malware. These kinds of verifications, as well as that of the fund balance in the paying car’s wallet, could be run through a blockchain log to check the validity of each side’s claims, giving each the assurances they need without having to rely on some certifying central authority. The question, though, is: would this transaction be easily processed if it were based on a private blockchain? What are the chances, in a country of more than 230 million cars, that both vehicles would belong to the same closed network run by a group of permissioned validating computers? If they weren’t part of the same network, the payment couldn’t go through as the respective software would not be interoperable. Other car manufacturers might not want to use a permissioned verification system for which, say, GM, or Ford, is the gatekeeper. And if they instead formed a consortium of carmakers to run the system, would their collective control over this all-important data network create a barrier to entry for newer, startup carmakers? Would it effectively become a competition-killing oligopoly? A truly decentralized, permissionless system could be a way around this “walled-garden” problem of siloed technology. A decentralized, permissionless system means any device can participate in the network yet still give everyone confidence in the integrity of the data, of the devices, and of the value being transacted. A permissionless system would create a much more fluid, expansive Internet of Things network that’s not beholden to the say-so and fees of powerful gatekeepers.

Putin does not dream of conquering Warsaw or re-occupying Riga. On the contrary, his policies, to repeat, are an expression of aggressive isolationism, an attempt to consolidate one’s own civilizational space. They embody his defensive reaction to the threat to Russia posed by global economic interdependency and digital interoperability as well as the seemingly unstoppable diffusion of Western social and cultural norms.

It is unlikely that there will be only one Metaverse, and it is more probable that there will be several specialized one, such as one for work, one for socializing with friends, one for dating, and more. As long as interoperability is guaranteed, I am pretty ok with that.

The development of an open format for a whole model is hardly relevant anymore, as long as you are able to move data around.

To fulfill this vision, the VERSES Foundation is proposing a set of universal standards and open protocols for Web 3.0 designed specifically to enable standards for defining and enforcing digital property ownership, data privacy and portability rights, user and location-based permissions, cross-device and content interoperability, and ecosystem marketplaces by enabling the registration and trustworthy authentication of users, digital and physical assets, and spaces using new standardized open formats, and shared asset indices secured by spatial domains, in which rights can be managed by a spatial programming language, viewed through spatial browsers, and connected via a spatial protocol.

Embrace Efficiency, Elevate Flavor: Smart Kitchen Tools for Culinary Adventurers The kitchen, once a realm of necessity, has morphed into a playground of possibility. Gone are the days of clunky appliances and tedious prep work. Enter the age of the smart kitchen tool, a revolution that whispers efficiency and shouts culinary liberation. For the modern gastronome, these tech-infused gadgets are not mere conveniences, but allies in crafting delectable adventures, freeing us to savor the journey as much as the destination. Imagine mornings when your smart coffee maker greets you with the perfect brew, prepped by the whispers of your phone while you dream. Your fridge, stocked like a digital oracle, suggests recipes based on its ever-evolving inventory, and even automatically orders groceries you've run low on. The multi-cooker, your multitasking superhero, whips up a gourmet chili while you conquer emails, and by dinnertime, your smart oven roasts a succulent chicken to golden perfection, its progress monitored remotely as you sip a glass of wine. But efficiency is merely the prologue. Smart kitchen tools unlock a pandora's box of culinary precision. Smart scales, meticulous to the milligram, banish recipe guesswork and ensure perfect balance in every dish. Food processors and blenders, armed with pre-programmed settings and self-cleaning prowess, transform tedious chopping into a mere blip on the culinary radar. And for the aspiring chef, a sous vide machine becomes a magic wand, coaxing impossible tenderness from the toughest cuts of meat. Yet, technology alone is not the recipe for culinary bliss. For those who yearn to paint with flavors, smart kitchen tools are the brushes on their canvas. A connected recipe platform becomes your digital sous chef, guiding you through each step with expert instructions and voice-activated ease. Spice racks, infused with artificial intelligence, suggest unexpected pairings, urging you to venture beyond the familiar. And for the ultimate expression of your inner master chef, a custom knife, forged from heirloom steel and lovingly honed, becomes an extension of your hand, slicing through ingredients with laser focus and lyrical grace. But amidst the symphony of gadgets and apps, let us not forget the heart of the kitchen: the human touch. Smart tools are not meant to replace our intuition but to augment it. They free us from the drudgery, allowing us to focus on the artistry, the love, the joy of creation. Imagine kneading dough, the rhythm of your hands mirroring the gentle whirring of a smart bread machine, then shaping a loaf that holds the warmth of both technology and your own spirit. Or picture yourself plating a dish, using smart portion scales for precision but garnishing with edible flowers chosen simply because they spark joy. This, my friends, is the symphony of the smart kitchen: a harmonious blend of tech and humanity, where efficiency becomes the brushstroke that illuminates the vibrant canvas of culinary passion. Of course, every adventure, even one fueled by smart tools, has its caveats. Interoperability between gadgets can be a tangled web, and data privacy concerns linger like unwanted guests. But these challenges are mere bumps on the culinary road, hurdles to be overcome by informed choices and responsible data management. After all, we wouldn't embark on a mountain trek without checking the weather, would we? So, embrace the smart kitchen, dear foodies! Let technology be your sous chef, your precision tool, your culinary muse. But never forget the magic of your own hands, the wisdom of your palate, and the joy of a meal shared with loved ones. For in the end, it's not about the gadgets, but the memories we create around them, the stories whispered over simmering pots, and the laughter echoing through a kitchen filled with the aroma of possibility.

Instead of each team shipping code into some giant repository that somebody else would deploy and run on servers, each team would run their own code as a service that other teams could interoperate with. Because each team was small, the surface area of their service was typically somewhat limited as well. Over time, these became known as “microservices” because each individual service typically did one thing, and did it well.

The real threat is not superintelligent machines or AI; the threat comes from dumb systems. Dumb systems often create friction, are typically designed with weak user interfaces, and frequently promote a lack of interoperability. Today, the evidence is overwhelming that superior results are obtained through thoughtful pairing of humans and machines.

•     An architecture of participation means that your users help to extend your platform. •     Low barriers to experimentation mean that the system is “hacker friendly” for maximum innovation. •     Interoperability means that one component or service can be swapped out if a better one comes along. •     “Lock-in” comes because others depend on the benefit from your services, not because you’re completely in control.

Given the historical importance and exponential power ascribed to Convergence technologies, a comprehensive vision is required that describes how these technologies will be best aligned with our core human values and what the implications will be if they are not. Piecemeal descriptions and industry-centric narratives do not provide the holistic vantage point from which we must consider how best to make the critically important decisions regarding matters of privacy, security, interoperability, and trust in an age where powerful computing will literally surround us. If we fail to make the right societal decisions now, as we are laying the digital infrastructure for the 21st century, a dystopic “Black Mirror” version of our future could become our everyday reality. A technological “lock-in” could occur, where dysfunctional and/or proprietary technologies become permanently embedded into the infrastructure of our global systems leaving us powerless to alter the course of their direction or ferocity of their speed. A Web 3.0 that continues its march toward centralized power and siloed platforms would not only have crippling effects on innovation, it would have chilling effects on our freedom of speech, freedom of thought, and basic human rights. This should be enough to compel us to take thoughtful but aggressive action to prevent such a lock-in from occurring at all costs. Thankfully, there is also a “white mirror” version of Web 3.0, a positive future not well described in our sci-fi stories. It’s the one where we intentionally and consciously harness the power of the Convergence and align it with our collective goals, values, and greatest ambitions as a species. In the “white mirror” version, we have the opportunity to use these technologies to assist us in working together more effectively to improve our ecologies, economies, and governance models, and leave the world better than the one we entered.

Future of Prepaid Instruments Merchants continue to have their closed loop wallets as an easy way for pushing refunds, a tactic for increasing customer stickiness. But with instant refund solutions, these wallets also may lose their charm. Only a few types of prepaid cards have some value: Gift Cards (because these are a lazy person’s gifting choice), Forex cards (Quintessential for overseas trips) and Specialised cards (Sodexo). But this status is changing with the growth of a particular sector – NBFC/LendingTech. As NBFC/LendingTech companies cannot issue credit cards so prepaid cards are used as instruments to lend the money (by doing just in time funding to the prepaid card). In Apr’21, RBI have issued new guidelines for prepaid cards/wallets: Balance limit is increased to Rs. 2,00,000 Interoperability among PPI instruments Cash withdrawal at ATM and POS PPI entities can set-up operations for NEFT/RTGS transfers With these new guidelines and boom in neo-banks & LendingTech companies, prepaid cards and wallets may get another shot at not just revival but a remarkable growth. Let’s wait and watch!

we will demonstrate how a short list of concrete design guidelines and a small vocabulary can be used to create APIs that expose enough information to be usable by a completely generic API browser. Based on a simple prototype, we will show how easily such a, at first sight, disruptive approach can be integrated in current Web frameworks and how it can be used to build interoperable and evolvable APIs in considerably less time.

Fort Huachuca was home to the army Network Enterprise Technology Command (NETCOM), the Military Auxiliary Radio System (MARS), the Joint Interoperability Test Command, the Information Systems Engineering Command (ISEC), the Electronic Proving Ground, the United States Army Intelligence Center, and Libby Army Airfield. The fort covered seventy-six thousand acres of mountains and desert grasslands.

Fig. 2.3  Why interoperability is hard

Implementation of better standards and tools of interoperability could help improve health care efficiency and reduce wasted expenditures, to take one example. “My pizza parlor is more thoroughly computerized than most of health care,” notes medical quality expert Donald Berwick.

non-functional tests such as performance, security, reliability, inter-operability, scalability, etc.

Specific Architectural Topics Is the overall organization of the program clear, including a good architectural overview and justification? Are major building blocks well defined, including their areas of responsibility and their interfaces to other building blocks? Are all the functions listed in the requirements covered sensibly, by neither too many nor too few building blocks? Are the most critical classes described and justified? Is the data design described and justified? Is the database organization and content specified? Are all key business rules identified and their impact on the system described? Is a strategy for the user interface design described? Is the user interface modularized so that changes in it won’t affect the rest of the program? Is a strategy for handling I/O described and justified? Are resource-use estimates and a strategy for resource management described and justified for scarce resources like threads, database connections, handles, network bandwidth, and so on? Are the architecture’s security requirements described? Does the architecture set space and speed budgets for each class, subsystem, or functionality area? Does the architecture describe how scalability will be achieved? Does the architecture address interoperability? Is a strategy for internationalization/localization described? Is a coherent error-handling strategy provided? Is the approach to fault tolerance defined (if any is needed)? Has technical feasibility of all parts of the system been established? Is an approach to overengineering specified? Are necessary buy-vs.-build decisions included? Does the architecture describe how reused code will be made to conform to other architectural objectives? Is the architecture designed to accommodate likely changes? General Architectural Quality Does the architecture account for all the requirements? Is any part overarchitected or underarchitected? Are expectations in this area set out explicitly? Does the whole architecture hang together conceptually? Is the top-level design independent of the machine and language that will be used to implement it? Are the motivations for all major decisions provided? Are you, as a programmer who will implement the system, comfortable with the architecture?

Bruce Horn: I thought that computers would be hugely flexible and we could be able to do everything and it would be the most mind-blowing experience ever. And instead we froze all of our thinking. We froze all the software and made it kind of industrial and mass-marketed. Computing went in the wrong direction: Computing went to the direction of commercialism and cookie-cutter. Jaron Lanier: My whole field has created shit. And it’s like we’ve thrust all of humanity into this endless life of tedium, and it’s not how it was supposed to be. The way we’ve designed the tools requires that people comply totally with an infinite number of arbitrary actions. We really have turned humanity into lab rats that are trained to run mazes. I really think on just the most fundamental level we are approaching digital technology in the wrong way. Andy van Dam: Ask yourself, what have we got today? We’ve got Microsoft Word and we’ve got PowerPoint and we’ve got Illustrator and we’ve got Photoshop. There’s more functionality and, for my taste, an easier-to-understand user interface than what we had before. But they don’t work together. They don’t play nice together. And most of the time, what you’ve got is an import/export capability, based on bitmaps: the lowest common denominator—dead bits, in effect. What I’m still looking for is a reintegration of these various components so that we can go back to the future and have that broad vision at our fingertips. I don’t see how we are going to get there, frankly. Live bits—where everything interoperates—we’ve lost that. Bruce Horn: We’re waiting for the right thing to happen to have the same type of mind-blowing experience that we were able to show the Apple people at PARC. There’s some work being done, but it’s very tough. And, yeah, I feel somewhat responsible. On the other hand, if somebody like Alan Kay couldn’t make it happen, how can I make it happen?