All news, All about Intellipedia!

I referred to the INSA Analytic Tansformation conference in a previous post and a friend sent me a link to the INSA Analytic Transformation presentations in video. (Thanks friend!)

I haven't had a chance to watch them yet, but feel free to take a look at them and post your thoughts and comments (good or bad) here. 

The one that might be interesting is: A-Space: Bringing Web 2.0 to IC Collaboration by Robert Cardillo

I'm listening to it and one interesting stat is that 61% of employees at DIA have been at DIA under 5 years. Interesting!

Another quote (which is kinda scary, but true) is "we don't know what we know." 

One question that was presented was curious: "What tests have been done to demonstrate the utility of A-Space?" 

My answer: how can you really test a social network? You can test its features, but the most important part of social software is the people that will on the network. A social network could have the greatest features in the world, but if noone uses it, it's worthless.

another question presented to Mr. Cardillo: "Do you see a place for a Second Life-like concept in the IC?"

his answer: "That's where these people have these fictitious lives on the Net. I don't think so, I hope not."

my answer: He probably doesn't really know what it is so he may have been a little premature in stating that he doesn't think especially since Sean Dennehy, the CIA's Chief of Intellipedia development, recently was in FCW article:

Dennehy added that some users are asking for a virtual world for the intelligence community similar to Second Life.

“I think it is a no-brainer,” he said. “We could use it for training and other things.”

Hey if the CDC has Hygeia Philo, the virtual public health worker in the "virtual CDC" (in Second Life), why can't the IC have virtual workers?

An even better reason why the US Intelligence Community should be on Second Life is here. Scary... The US IC may need to speak with their Aussie counterparts...

Posted by eMarv at 11:06 PM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)

Just saw this on InformationWeek's website where Dr. Wertheimer explains A-Space further:

In December, the DNI will launch A-Space, a portal that will eventually include everything from wikis, blogs, social networking and personalization to RSS feeds, collaborative Web-based word processing, mash-ups, and content tagging all built atop an underlying services-oriented architecture.

A-Space will begin life as a portal that includes a Web-based word processing tool akin to Google Docs, a wiki-based intelligence community encyclopedia known as Intellipedia [self-referencing link, I gotta get links somehow :) ] and access to three "huge, terabyte databases" of current raw intel for analysts to sift through. It'll be scaled for 10,000 users at day one. By the end of 2008, the DNI hopes to bring in other resources like intelligence blogs, social networking capabilities akin to a Facebook for spooks, secure Web-based e-mail, better search functionality, and much more.

So the reality is that true social networking capabilities will not be available until 2008. That's disappointing... More on this later (if I remember), I really need to get some sleep. (It's 4AM.)

BTW, I suggest that you read the entire article. One particularly curious thing I found: "The DNI has even been in talks with IBM about how to put 3-D gaming to work to do analytical problem solving."

Why only IBM, why aren't they talking to MMOGs?

Posted by eMarv at 02:52 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Don't get me wrong. I don't think that blind friend requests are necessarily a bad thing (after all I do accept practically all friend requests on LinkedIn)... I'm pretty sure there probably won't be too many SPAM profiles on it...

Anyways, I must say that I have some mixed feelings about A-Space (maybe because I'm not on it...). On the positive note, I think it is great that the Intelligence Community is expanding its thinking on need to share/write to release vs need to know/write to captivity. I think that A-Space could really enable folks to come closer together online while they are disbursed throughout. And the more people know each, the easier it is for them to share information with their friends.

Actually thinking about this further, this could help enable the Intelligence Community to become more disbursed (so that many agencies do not have to be so close to DC), which in turn could have many other effects including movement of jobs away from DC and (since I'm in real estate, I have to think about real estate) a potentially greater flattening of real estate values in the DC area (maybe I'll write a post about this on the real estate blog). But I'm getting ahead of myself, back to A-Space...

Rethinking my original mixed feelings, I don't think there is anything incredibly negative about it. Sure, people will have to learn a new system, but guess what, this system has not been created for the backwards-thinkers that purely think that "Loose Lips Sink Ships" because in reality loose lips among friends with the same access and that are generally working together for a better world is a good thing. Other arguments against may be: "I already have soooo much to do, now you're giving me another place to check for stuff." My rebuff to that would be, firstly, (if A-Space is like outside social networks), it will not necessarily be a place to create content... ooops... I reread the FT.com article and noticed the following (probably from Dr. Wertheimer's comments):

A-Space will be equipped with web-based email and software that recommends areas of interest to the user just like Amazon suggests books to its customers. The site will also allow users to create and modify documents, and determine user privileges, in a similar fashion to Google Documents.

So actually this could be a competitor for Intellipedia, but I sure hope it isn't. I don't think folks need another place to create items of interest. So the "another place to check" argument could be valid. I wonder how they will address that...

Looking at the rest of the extract above, I think that the Amazon-like recommendations could be helpful. However, I think that the true value of a social network is in connecting people because others can find out about people they don't know through their interests, past experiences, etc and then connect with them.

It will be interesting to see how quickly the community adopts A-Space and what percentage of the community will actually create a profile on A-Space so that they can reach critical mass because a social network without a good percentage (maybe in the Intel Community, that's 50% or so) of members is worthless. All they would be doing is connecting with people they know.  

So we'll see what happens...

BTW, I think I'd like to attend the conference that Dr. Fingar referred to in the article:

In September, the DNI and the Intelligence and National Security Alliance, a public-private intelligence group, will hold a conference to enlist support and ideas from the private sector and academia.

Found it on the INSA site, costs $695 for non-government non-INSA members, 5-day conference held in Chicago (9/4-9/6), online and in DC (10/11). 

One final thought, I wonder what role the Program Manager of the Information Sharing Environment played, if any, in the implementation of A-Space and for that matter Intellipedia and the IC del.icio.us equivalent. It says on their website that they are "responsible for information across the federal government..." But they haven't had a press release since April 2007.

BTW, I first found out about A-Space on the TechDirt Blog. And saw the article they referenced on FT.com.

Posted by eMarv at 01:18 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I saw a reference to Intellipedia on Dvorak Uncensored and thought it was interesting. The first thing that caught my eye and one of the reasons why I categorize the Dvorak blog post as mixed feedback (on Intellipedia) is because of the blog post title: "Will the Feds succeed in keeping hackers out of Intellipedia?" By writing this title, I think the author already assumes that Intellipedia will be cracked. (Whether that is true or not, I don't know, but I'd like to think that it is not possible to crack Intellipedia from the outside.) Now I know that doesn't say much about the usefulness of Intellipedia, but they chose to look the potentially negative aspects as opposed to the positive...

Well anyway, what do you think? Can Intellipedia be cracked?

Also, when you read through the post, make sure to read the comments. There are some interesting ones...

One other thing that I thought was interesting observation in the blog post was the following paragraph:

Of course, the evocative remark is Wertheimer worrying about American citizens learning what intelligence [sic] experts really tell the hacks in the White House and Congress. No fear — otherwise!

The author is referring to Dr. Wertheimer's comment:

“We’re taking a risk,” acknowledged Michael Wertheimer, the intelligence community’s chief technical officer. “There’s a risk it’s going to show up in the media, that it’ll be leaked.” 

The only issue that I have with the author's comment above is that if US citizens can read it so can anyone else in the world so I wouldn't say that Dr. Wertheimer is necessarily only worried about things getting leaked the people of the US...

Thoughts? 

Posted by eMarv at 10:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

I found this article after seeing it bookmarked in kirbyp's del.icio.us bookmarks. Thanks kirbyp!

Now for the quotes and comments:

"...officials from the 16 U.S. spy agencies — and even some beyond that — are increasingly using a new internal website called 'Intellipedia'..."

"...even some beyond that..." Interesting! At least one of the beyond that is the TSA which they refer to further down in the article.

"All of these tools ... are in their Model T stage," conceded Sean Dennehy of the CIA's Directorate of Intelligence, who helped develop the Intellipedia.

Congrats Sean! (You will be in the history books, for sure.) Regarding the Model T comment, it is great to hear that the Intelligence Community is not waiting to develop a perfect solution (which doesn't exist) and wait to deploy it (when it is obsolete). Agile methodology at its best! Throw something out there, let people pound on it, massage it, throw it out there again and repeat. BTW, it looks like Sean is becoming the king of the memorable sound bite. Remember his other quote in the LA Times article: "It moves us away from homogenized intelligence..." (I also saw an interesting quote in Influence: The Pyschology of Persuasion that extends Sean's comment: "Where all think alike, no one thinks very much." Walter Lippman. I wonder if that is what happened in the past...)

"When New York Yankees pitcher Cory Lidle crashed his plane into a Manhattan apartment building this month, officials from the Transportation Security Administration and eight other agencies updated information on the accident 80 times in two hours."

Can you say success story? Imagine if this were to happen with any other potential terrorist event. Actually, who's to say it hasn't happened already?

"Don Burke, a CIA officer from the Directorate of Science and Technology, said more than 3,600 users have created log-ons to use the site..."

I wonder how many are active users or what percentage of the registered users are actually active. My guess is that they haven't tapped into the Long Tail yet since as mentioned further in the article there are "tens of thousands of users."

Getting some traditionalists to contribute takes encouragement. Intellipedia's architects have resorted to sending small, black garden shovels to contributors.

"I dig Intellipedia!" says the handle. "It's wiki, wiki, Baby."

Want to see what it looks like? That you'll have to Google.

Why not just get rid of the traditionalists? (Just joking, I know there will always be traditionalists but it doesn't hurt to ask... :) As you all know, you need not look further than this blog's Intellipedia shovel category to see the pic. We also know that they aren't giving them only to traditionalists as Kevin is proof.

Posted by eMarv at 10:37 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

As I mentioned in the last post, mainstream media is starting the onslaught of Intellipedia articles. The LA Times article is one of them.

Here's some interesting quotes from the article:

After being criticized for downplaying dissenting views on Iraq's alleged weapons programs, "we're trying to transform the way we do business," said Michele Weslander, a senior official overseeing the initiative for the director of national intelligence, John D. Negroponte.

Transformation in the Intelligence Community is good. Don't ya think? (BTW, in case you didn't know, Michele Weslander is the Deputy CIO of the ODNI.)

Here's another excerpt:

Officials said that the program is still under development and has not replaced existing procedures used to create intelligence reports delivered to President Bush and other policymakers. But it is being used to assemble preliminary judgments for a forthcoming National Intelligence Estimate on Nigeria and could someday supplant the more cumbersome mechanisms used to create such reports.

I wonder why it hasn't replaced existing procedures and why it hasn't already "supplant[ed] the more cumbersome mechanisms?" If you had a choice on whether to select a process that was more cumbersome or efficient, what would you choose?

Another quote:

"I think in the future you'll press a button and this will be the NIE," said Michael Wertheimer, assistant deputy director of national intelligence for analysis.

Hooray for Dr. Wertheimer! We need more forward thinking leaders like him in the government! Imagine that press a button and out pops the NIE. Who woulda thunk?

Another: "In a meeting with reporters at the Office of the Director for National Intelligence..."

So this must have been the by-invitation-only meeting on 31 October 2006, which the Homeland Security Watch referred to and that I wrote the last post about.

Another: "...officials showed how analysts from multiple agencies had used the network to post frequent updates on recent events, including the crash of a small plane into a New York City apartment building last month and North Korea's test of a missile in July."

Awesome! Real-time intelligence!

Another:

Officials said they were not making the network available to members of Congress or other policymakers, largely because of a reluctance to disseminate material that analysts view as a work in progress.

If the material expressly states that it is a work in progress, what's the problem? Anyway, isn't everything a work in progress?

Another:

But they stressed that disseminating material to the widest possible audience of analysts is key to avoiding mistakes like those that contributed to erroneous assessments that Iraq possessed stockpiles of banned weapons and was pursuing a nuclear arsenal.

"erroneous assessments": I'm not going to comment on this since I really don't want to start a political debate, but we'll see where the blog takes us... :)

And the final and most awesome quote:

"It moves us away from homogenized intelligence," said Sean Dennehy, a CIA official involved in creating the new system.

I was going to say that the only thing I want homogenized is milk, but I drink soy milk. ;-) Being different and diverse is good, especially, IMO, when dealing with intelligence!

So what do you think about the government officials comments? 

Posted by eMarv at 12:03 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)