Intelligent Information Systems
Perusal of industry and research sources shows increasing evidence of IIS. We have appraised some of these resources to look for similarities and differences in the classification of IIS. It is interesting to note that each of these instances of IIS have some variations in this taxonomy. The technology industry puts IIS closer to AI and engineering applications on the IS – AI continuum. The research and academic worlds, however, include DB in the classification.
Also significant is that the formal research in IIS appears to have begun in 2000, when increasing digitization of information and Moore’s law had revolutionized information creation and accessibility. We see this as an indication of beginnings of a new field in response to the needs of applications of AI that involve IS.
3.3. Copy out:
key words from every paragraph of the text
sentences that convey the main idea of every paragraph.
3.4. Retell the text in your own words using the key words and sentences.
3.5 Read the following words and phrases and explain in what situations you can use them.
|
The problem raised by … assumed a place of prime importance … |
|
In an effort to arrive at a just appreciation of the course of events it is necessary to … |
|
It is impossible to gain an understanding of (events) without a clear appreciation of … |
|
It is difficult to accept this reasoning |
|
It is difficult to interpret the details |
|
It was underestimated |
|
It was overestimated |
|
The emphasis has been largely on … |
|
Of special interest was … |
|
The importance of the chapter lies in … |
|
One should not exaggerate that … |
|
What is more important is … |
|
The important point is that … |
|
Another extremely important form of … is … |
|
The significance of this work can hardly be overestimated |
|
In the light of what’s been said, perhaps you’d reconsider your offer? |
|
Would you like to think again about the original offer? |
|
Perhaps it would be worth looking at the offer again? |
|
There is still time to reconsider the offer |
|
We could do it as long as … |
|
We can’t do that unless … |
|
I’ll only do it on condition that … |
|
If you could only … |
|
Provided you can … we can … |
|
We can agree as long as … |
|
We can agree provided … |
3.6 Think over an outline of your speech at the scientific conference during the discussion at the round table. The discussion is devoted to Intelligent Information Systems. Use the phrases given above.
Lesson 4
4.1 Read the text and express your opinion on the question if proprietary software is better than open source. Provide your arguments.
Open Source vs. Closed Source
The software industry is divided over the pros and cons of open-source versus proprietory "closed-source". Closed-source advocates say that it offers more secure platforms, cleaner applications and products. It also offers higher financial incentives to the charmed circle of developers with access to the code.
Open-source advocates say it offers more secure platforms, helps develop more and cleaner apps, and offers financial incentives to a larger base of developers. Bugs get patched quicker again because of the larger population of developers.
What works better in terms of marketshare and profitability? The closed-source Apple platform has few users and much fewer apps than the "semi-open" Windows. Microsoft has consistently generated far higher revenues and profitability than Apple. One reason is that MS simply makes it easier for third-party developers.
But totally free, open-source platforms such as Linux (and the free, open-source Firefox browser) have won marketshare off Windows (and IE). Many apps (both free and paid) have been developed for Linux. A multitude of Firefox plug-ins combined to better security has made it the browser of choice for many.
Bug-discovery and fixes are the most critical aspect of the debate for users. A bug is discovered; it is patched. From day-zero, when the bug is discovered to the day it's patched, it's open season for crackers.
Do open-source bugs get patched quicker? The jury's out. But it does seem full disclosure accelerates the patching process. If you discover a bug in some software you use, it's better not to complain privately to the vendor. Scream loudly about it in every Web forum you can access.
Last year, Microsoft issued about 55 critical patches for Windows XP. According to the Washington Post, it reacts very significantly quicker on public complaints. On average, MS took 134 days to patch privately-reported vulnerabilities whereas it responded inside 46 days for publicly-reported bugs.
Oracle (which works off open-source platforms) issued over 80 patches in 2005. That suggests that, even if open-source has more bugs, those bugs are also addressed efficiently. Apple has taken much more time than either Oracle or MS in addressing known issues in the QuickTime player.
MS took just 10 days to patch a very serious flaw in the Windows Meta File (WMF) that was flagged in late December. That's commendably quick by corporate standards. But it's glacially slow in the context of the Web. By the time the official MS patch arrived, independent security consultants had written "hot-fixes"; the crackers had written new malware and antivirus vendors had updated signatures to deal with new malware.
The urgency was because unpatched Windows systems are exposed every time an image file is viewed. There is a way to get WMF to run code off a remote location by simply clicking on a picture sent by e-mail or placed on a website. Hundreds of these "poisoned" images are now floating around.
The amazing thing is that WMF flaw has been there for at least five years. It's embedded in every MS operating system since Win2000. Several other flaws and vulnerabilities in WMF have been picked up earlier.
There must have been a collective blindness across the computer security industry for this to stay under the radar so long. The flaw is so basic, it's sparked off a debate as to whether it was deliberate.
Steve Gibson (writer of the popular SpinRite and Shields up! utilities) suggested that it was a backdoor written into the system by MS. Mark Russinovitch of Sysinternals, (the man who flagged the Sony rootkit) thinks WMF code wasn't deliberately written as a backdoor.
Windows isn't open-source but it's close to it because there are millions of beta-testers and people with access to the software development kit (quite a few of whom have demonstrably malicious intent). So this is a peculiar test-case for the debate. Would a completely open-source OS have triggered quicker discovery and patching? Would a totally closed-source OS have left the problem undiscovered and hence, unexploited?
4.2. Act out a role play “A round table discussion on the theme Proprietary And Open Source Software”. Use the expressions given below :
|
time-limit |
|
to break time-limit |
|
to keep to (within) |
|
to set up (to fix) time limit |
|
subject; topic: |
|
subject (topic) of the discussion |
|
point of view; viewpoint; views: |
|
to give one's point of view |
|
I should (would) like to ask you... |
|
I should (would) like to ask you a question...; I am going to ask you a question... |
|
I have a question. |
|
I have a question and a comment (a remark) to make. |
|
I should (would) like to know... |
|
I should (would) like to point out (to emphasize) that... |
|
I think (suppose, presume) that... |
|
I believe that... |
|
I must say that... |
|
I have (every good) reason to believe that... |
|
Do you consider that...? |
|
What is your opinion on...? |
|
in my opinion...; as to me...; as for me...; to my mind; I think... |
|
What in your opinion is the reason for...? |
|
I hold (am of) the same opinion. |
|
I could comment on the question. |
|
Would you tell us how... |
|
that's right; exactly; quite so; |
|
quite right; quite true If I understand you correctly... If I am not mistaken... Do I understand you correctly? |
|
that...? Do you agree to that? |
|
to provide time and space for informal discussion |
|
private wide-ranging |
|
animator of a discussion |
|
subject of a discussion outcome/purpose (aim) of a discussion |
|
to provoke |
|
to close |
|
to direct |
|
to initiate (to open) |
|
to postpone (to adjourn) |
|
to suspend |
|
to interrupt |
|
to hold |
|
to declare the discussion open to allow time for discussion to proceed to (to take up, to come to) a discussion |
|
opinion: |
|
dissenting |
|
exchange of opinions to voice one's opinion to share smb's opinion in my opinion |
|
motivation |
|
to motivate |
|
motion |
|
to make (to propose, |
|
to move, to bring |
|
forward) to reject to adopt (to carry) |
|
to put the motion to vote |
|
debate subject of a to resume a to close the |