First computers seem to have been called "recorders". I'd call computers "recorders" again, because users care less about the computations performed by these machines than about the records and recordings they manage with their help.
We input into computer databases such replicas: words, drawings and recordings. We try to describe reality, as we've done in accounting, science, and art. Scientists are meant to describe reality and artists to represent it; they are important teachers. Some so-called scientists and artists work in institutions; we have defiled many people whom we paid with "public" money. When we earn our money, we do our best. I suggest that we privatise everything, so that we have fewer murderers among doctors, fewer "poisoners" among teachers, fewer base people among artists, and fewer destroyers among scientists. There are e.g. county hospitals, but few people from an entire county influence the activities carried out in these hospitals. What happens when every adult in a county can vote on how they are treated?
Some of the data we keep collecting: locations, times, changes to entitlements, recordings.
We input many data into tables. We associate each datum with at least one other datum: its label; in this case, the table column.
It is usual for the data inputter to provide data about themselves. Each person has a name including at least two parts. Many people bear the same name as at least one other person, so it is usual for a government to assign each person an identification number. From a person's traits we focus on their face; a recording of a person's face is a usual means to identify a person.
My team is creating a network of global databases. Maybe one day any human being will be able to access all information using one program. (I'd agree to other scenarios that are as useful.)
We will use some software to collect and process some information. But some information will be input manually. We are used to bidimensional relational databases and think of designing tridimensional reticular databases. It takes a lot of (brain) power to build them, but they can help us understand more, and save much time and energy. Some possible effects:
We organise data better.
When we present history, it is easier to present both subsequent and concurrent events, and to add spatial views to timelines. It seems easier to present the context of a documentary film and its relationships to the people who participated in those events.
Instead of looking at fragments, we have points of view.
We plot more data and see things more clearly, e.g. when we show an area and an intensity / percentage, we could use height instead of colour coding; add movement to such an image and you might love it!
It has been said many times that it is good to do things that help us achieve a goal. We do them with other people when we share a certain goal. First we must talk about our goal. When we hire a helper, we must provide all the data that we have and enable them to work with us toward that goal. When we trade something, we team up with at least one more person in order to achieve something. Many transactions are not goals, but means or plan stages.
How should we choose a provider?
When we choose our first provider of something, we know the least about such transactions and providers. In most cases we choose them based on little trust or on some trust. We trust people whom we feel that:
1. understand us, our goal, and our context;
2. are open, open-minded, honest;
3. can meet our requirements.
We like people thinking about solutions for us.
Facts influence our psyche heavily, so we are inclined to believe that a team will provide to us services similar to those that they have provided to somebody else.
I suggest that service providers express their needs after the service user.
I suggest that buyers prove that they will have the payable amount of money in the agreed currency in the indicated account when the payment is due.
These two parties are equal. (When we are ready to give others some of our money, we don't become "more equal than others".)
We can provide information to service providers in three stages:
1. general information
2. a description after the first 2 stages from above
3. Full information when we choose the provider.
One thing that we avoid this way is repeating ourselves, which we don't like and decreases the quality of communication.
In order for a team (e.g. a service user and a service provider) to use the same information, they should use the same data and programs, starting with the most general information (public databases) and ending with the project information. Service providers have more information from their trade (e.g. maintaining carburettors), while service users have more information from their trade (e.g. teaching biology).
Service users and service providers can agree on:
1. what information the service provider shares with the service user;
If the service user buys the transaction documentation, they can perform the described operations themselves or hire another service provider on another occasion.
I suggest that we combine valuable and useful information in very large databases, in order to reduce e.g. redundancy and the consumption of resources, and to make it much easier and cheaper to retrieve. One scenario that has repeated itself very many times in many shapes is that some people have tried to achieve something and have:
failed,
suffered,
lost something,
missed opportunities, or
wasted time, money etc.
We manage for instance a global database for transportation, in which we sort data e.g. by language. In such a database, transportation by air can have its own networks of information and users. Such networks can be connected with those for flying cars and with those for tourism. Step by step, after many years of work, we might leave nothing isolated. Vehicle mechanics will be less isolated from each other. Some professionals might receive more from the respect they deserve. Many people can become more knowledgeable.
2. what information the service user shares with the service provider.
If the service user owns other vehicles, too, they can negotiate other transactions.
To the extent that the service provider understands the service user's trade, they can decide to use their services. It is cheaper to exchange services than to buy services.
Many thoughts are connected and I have expressed some incompletely because I have started with this thought: Can we stop filling forms? Yes. We'll fill tables.
Inputting data into a database is work. More and more people are doing it. The entire team should see the tables they need in their project. This includes the service user, even if it's only one person and they only provide the information and the money.
Both the service user and the service provider should be able to include project data in their data flows. Forms don't allow them to.
It is recommended to build rapport before talking business. According to what I wrote above, we fill tables with data in the third stage. Many people ask others to fill forms at the very beginning.
The service user and the service provider should build the project databases together. The service provider should offer to do as much of this work as possible; some possible methods: they take notes, copy data, and process files.
The two parties must agree on the contents of the project databases.