The "Fourth Tier" Is Born - Internet/Web/Online Service
Information
Solving the
problem of disparate content types
Web content
began as static HTML pages and evolved to include client-side scripting,
proprietary content technologies, and application programming interfaces.
HTML has
remained the basis of all Web content-until now. We are about to witness the
revolutionary move of content from HTML to XML (Extensible Markup Language).
XML is a set of
rules for defining a document using tags in a self-described vendor- and
platform-neutral manner.
XML has
numerous advantages over HTML. It is easily transformable and can describe any
type of content.
HTML is a
rendered presentation of data for a specific set of clients (namely HTML-based
browsers), while XML can be data, its presentation, or a combination of both.
Metaphorically
speaking, HTML is a picture of a 3D object (Data, Presentation, and Flow Logic)
while XML is the 3D object itself.
Viewing an HTML
object from a different perspective will produce a fuzzy picture at best
because the object's entire data set is unavailable.
Cell phones,
PDAs, or embedded devices may have problems with HTML, which often has
extraneous or missing data.
Content in XML
can be transformed into a wide range of other content (like voice based
content) and made available to a wider range of devices (like digital cell
phones).
XML content can
be rendered in one way for cell phones (like WML for WAP) and in another way
for PC-based browsers (like XHTML).
The Complexities Of
Content
Content, more
complex than ever before, is currently provided by a variety of servers. It
exists in three distinct formats: data, audio (including voice), and visual
(including video).
Each content
type requires different mechanisms and systems for storage, processing, and
serving.
Content
combinations depend on user specifications, device capabilities, and available
content. Configuring the combination correctly is a complex process and is not
accounted for in the current development model.
Today's systems
solve only one problem: data. Audio and visual components must be integrated
and content mixtures served to clients must be synchronized.
The variety of
Internet clients has multiplied considerably.
Five years ago,
users only expected to access content from different PC browsers.
Today users
expect to tap into the same content from multiple devices with vastly different
capabilities.
These devices
range from cell phones to PDAs to web browsers. Each client can process
different amounts and combinations of each type of data. Web browsers, for
example, typically have a keyboard/mouse/monitor interface while cell phones have
a phonepad/voice interface. Hybrid devices combine the capabilities of devices:
PDAs have cell phones integrated into them and cell phones possess many PDA
capabilities.
When building
today's systems, future requirements must be considered, including content
form.
Most audio and
video systems have switched from analog to digital. Most digital, visual, and
aural based content is served in proprietary formats.
There has been
no equivalent to non-proprietary HTTP until recently, with the development of
XML.
Audio, data,
and video content can be described by metadata in XML.
Clients can
easily process data if video or audio streams are wrapped inside XML with some
meta data about the stream.
VoiceXML, for
example, allows voice-based content to be described by XML, encapsulating the
data concerning the content.
This data can
then be used to "introduce" the content to any client wanting to use
it.
Content can be
customized at run-time using an XML description of the client, user settings,
and content structure.
Approaching
content in this way gives birth to a new software layer separating the user
interface and the application server (the middle-tier).
This layer
enables us to author content once using the new presentation layer: then the
formats and logical flows required for various clients can be created. This new
system will separate the data, presentation, and logic of the user interface.
The Move From Three-Tier To Four-Tier
Architecture
Three-tier
architecture has been the prevailing design for Internet systems during the
past few years. In this design, there are three primary components:
Database,
Application server, and
Client.
Three-tier
architecture was considered an evolutionary step over the client server model.
It removed
business logic from the client and the database and placed it into an
application server.
It became
responsible for the processing work that implemented the business logic in the
system.
It enabled
systems to scale larger and become more reliable by implementing various forms
of fail-over at a lower cost.
By clearly
defining an API (Application Programming Interface) at each tier in the
architecture, it allowed for a more sophisticated development cycle.
System
development could now be broken down and distributed among three groups:
database engineers, software engineers, and user interface developers. New
features could be added in a faster, more methodical way.
20.Particle-antiparticle pairs can annihilate
each other, producing photons
21.Antiparticles are produced
naturally in beta decay, and in the interaction of cosmic rays
in the Earth's atmosphere.
On the 3rd of the March
1998 The US Department of Agriculture and cotton seed breeders Delta and Pine
Land Company acquired US patent 5,723,765 for their "Technology Protection
System" (TPS). This system for genetically engineering a suicide mechanism
into seeds of the next generation was dubbed the "terminator"
technology.. On May 11th Monsanto announced its intention of buying
Delta and Pine Land Co. for $1.76 billion. This was widely seen as a move to
gain the terminator patent.
This technology offers no benefit
for farmers or consumers. The only advantage would be to commercial seed
companies hoping to force farmers back to market each season to purchase
seeds.70% of the worlds farmers, mostly in the south, are reliant upon farm-saved
seed. The potential threat to small farmers has caused widespread outrage and
protests. Indian farmers who uprooted and burned Monsanto's GE cotton test
plots were fuelled by their anger about the terminator, even though these were
not themselves terminator crops. There are 100 million farmers in India and 80%
are dependent on farm-saved seed. In December 1998 the Indian Agricultural
Minister Som Pal was forced to assure the Upper House that terminator would not
be allowed in India.
On September 15th 1998
Astra Zeneca received US patent 5,808,034 on its own terminator type
technology. This was branded the "verminator" as the genes were taken
from brown rats. All five companies developing GE seeds have now applied for
their own terminator style patents. In November of 1998 The Consultative Group
on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR), the world network of publicly
funded plant breeding research centres announced that none of its centres would
develop "any genetic system designed to prevent germination".
In April 1999 Monsanto announced the
postponement of the commercialisation of the terminator pending an independent
review. Astra-Zeneca followed in May announcing it would not develop
"technology which results in sterility in second generation seed".
For the time being the tide seems to be turning against the terminator. If
these companies are allowed to go ahead with commercialisation of this
technology, the profit potential of the terminator trait dictate it would soon
be included in all GE crops.
Switchable promoters
The willingness of Astra-Zeneca to
abandon the terminator may have something to do with its interest in
genetically engineering plants whose traits are controlled by a
"switchable promoter". This system allows traits to be switched on or
off by application of a chemical catalyst. Sterility is just one of the traits
which could be under the control of such promoters. Astra-Zeneca have at least
seven patent applications on different promoter systems.
This technology could be used to
create plants whose desirable traits would be switched on only by the
application of a chemical. Farmers will have to buy seed and the chemical that
goes with it. What could be more logical for companies than to put the required
chemical in its own herbicide or pesticide?
Astra-Zeneca's patent WO 973983
covers a system which creates GE plants that require continuous exposure to a
chemical for germination and healthy growth. GE companies aim to enforce the
link between seeds and chemicals and extract further costs from farmers.
GE companies will be able to produce
seed that contains multiple GE traits, farmers will have to pay for the
chemical to activate each specific trait. RAFI who originally coined the name
terminator call this "traitor technology".
Apomictic seed
Apomixis is a naturally occurring
form of asexual reproduction in which plant embryos grow from egg cells without
fertilisation by pollen. Genetic engineers have transferred the genes
conferring apomixis from a wild grass species into maize. By using GE apomixis
breeders could dramatically reduce the high cost of producing hybrid seed.
The combination of switchable
promoters with apomixis enables the creation of seed that would produce viable
plants that would grow and produce viable seed only when treated with
chemicals. Rather than the annual cost of producing hybrid seed, the GE giants
would simply need to produce the seed once, and then extract the costs from
farmers through the chemicals to switch on the traits, including the apomictic
trait, each season.
This would
spell massive profits for the GE companies and their complete control over
non-subsistence agriculture.
