Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Data Sharing, Government Style

timothy posted more than 8 years ago | from the popular-and-fun-just-like-ada dept.

96

rowama writes "The Department of Homeland Security and the Justice Department have been collaborating to develop an XML-based model for data sharing. After less than a year since the initial release, in October 2005, the National Information Exchange Model (NIEM) 1.0 Beta is out. It's big, really big. There are no less than 9 namespaces and plans for future expansion. Contact your local government contractor, with resume in hand, and you may be one of the lucky developers to implement NIEM-capable software."

cancel ×

96 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

FP (-1, Offtopic)

neo8750 (566137) | more than 8 years ago | (#15733922)

FP

Re:FP (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15734013)

FP's Child

Bonus advantage (4, Funny)

nizo (81281) | more than 8 years ago | (#15733923)

Contact your local government contractor, with resume in hand, and you may be one of the lucky developers to implement NIEM-capable software.


As an added bonus you can add a wee bit of code to make sure your name never ends up in these databases.

Re:Bonus advantage (2, Funny)

tb3 (313150) | more than 8 years ago | (#15733987)

Hey, don't laugh. This could be bigger than Ada.

Re:Bonus advantage (4, Interesting)

Lally Singh (3427) | more than 8 years ago | (#15733998)

There are some large ethical questions programmers have to ask themselves when taking on jobs these days. After my last DoD gig, I've really started filtering what opportunities I'll consider. Mass surveillance, for example, is something most of my contacts know I won't touch.

As for the 9 namespaces, it's actually pretty reasonable. From TFA:
xmlns:u="http://niem.gov/niem/universal/1.0"
xmlns:s="http://niem.gov/niem/structures/1.0"
xmlns:c="http://niem.gov/niem/common/1.0"
xmlns:j="http://niem.gov/niem/domains/justice/1.0"
xmlns:emer="http://niem.gov/niem/domains/emergency -management/1.0"
xmlns:im="http://niem.gov/niem/domains/immigration /1.0"
xmlns:ip="http://niem.gov/niem/domains/infrastruct ureProtection/1.0"
xmlns:int="http://niem.gov/niem/domains/intelligen ce/1.0"
xmlns:it="http://niem.gov/niem/domains/internation alTrade/1.0"

Re:Bonus advantage (5, Funny)

Kesch (943326) | more than 8 years ago | (#15734038)

They need more terrorist references. I also see a distinct lack of Thinking of the Children(TM). Also, the namepsace count just isn't bloated enough. I don't believe this spec is up to government work yet.

Re:Bonus advantage (1)

Saint Stephen (19450) | more than 8 years ago | (#15734652)

I dunno, this example from like page 2 seems up to Government standards:

        Fred Smith
   

Re:Bonus advantage (1)

Saint Stephen (19450) | more than 8 years ago | (#15734667)

(Try it again)

I dunno, this example from like page 2 seems up to Government standards:

<Person s:id="P1">
    <PersonName>
        <PersonFullName>Fred Smith</PersonFullName>
    <PersonFullName>
</Person>

there is an error in that XML (1)

freaker_TuC (7632) | more than 8 years ago | (#15736379)

You opened PersonName and closed it with PersonFullName ; your xml won't be parsed good like that ;)

Re:there is an error in that XML (1)

Saint Stephen (19450) | more than 8 years ago | (#15739991)

I copied it from the document; that's why I said "it's up to Government standards."

Re:Bonus advantage (3, Funny)

Quiet_Desperation (858215) | more than 8 years ago | (#15734170)

After my last DoD gig, I've really started filtering what opportunities I'll consider.

I also go looking for the projects that have the potential to kill the most people, but then again I'm an utter misanthrope. :D

Although I have to admit that cybernetic, remote controlled stealth shark thing DARPA announced a while back had my interest. No killing the enemy, but it's fricken stealth sharks, man! You know I'd fight for comm lasers to burst the data back to base.

Don't worry, I'll take those mass surveillance jobs. I'll do them really well, too. Sleep tight. :)

No shortage of people willing to do it. (1)

Kadin2048 (468275) | more than 8 years ago | (#15737341)

I know you're joking (well, maybe), but I often think that the Slashdot crowd fails to appreciate how many people there are in the world -- very smart people, in fact, in many cases -- who are more than willing to take the "dirty" jobs.

Particularly if they're interesting dirty jobs.

The fact that what you're doing can be used to kill people fades away into relative unimportance pretty quickly, if there's a cool technical challenge to be solved, and the salary is right, and the people you get to work with are similarly goal-oriented.

There are a lot of people in the world who spend their days thinking of new and interesting ways to kill others, and I'm willing to bet that most of them probably don't lose sleep at night over it. The human mind has an amazing ability to rationalize -- if not flat-out ignore -- almost anything, and social mores regarding the value of others' lives are no exception.

Re:Bonus advantage (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15734952)

They missed some of the classified ones:

xmlns:wc="http://niem.gov/niem/domains/warCrimes/1 .0"
xmlns:t="http://niem.gov/niem/domains/torture/1.0"
xmlns:uca="http://niem.gov/niem/domains/unConstitu tionalActivities/1.0"

or do they just fall into the 'common' namespace?

Re:Bonus advantage (2, Insightful)

Soong (7225) | more than 8 years ago | (#15735121)

under which namespace will I find the <pork/> tag?

Re:Bonus advantage (1)

Da_Weasel (458921) | more than 8 years ago | (#15735884)

There is no <pork/>...all government spending is necessary!  By the way where is the <sarcasm/> tag?

Re:Bonus advantage (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15735716)

That looks typically consistent: one uses hyphens to separate words, and another uses camelCase.

xmlns:emer="http://niem.gov/niem/domains/emergency -management/1.0"
xmlns:ip="http://niem.gov/niem/domains/infrastruct ureProtection/1.0"

Re:Bonus advantage (1)

meldroc (21783) | more than 8 years ago | (#15734111)

Or better yet, think of this project in the same way you'd think of implementing an Obfuscated C Code contest entry - how horrible can you make the code, and still get paid. Make it as painful as possible for Big Brother to go data mining.

That, or use some ethics and don't take work like this.

thank Government for databases (4, Insightful)

yagu (721525) | more than 8 years ago | (#15733935)

Meanwhile grandma is still taking off her shoes and getting wanded at the airport. Nice to know yet another debacle is launched. Here's hoping they're as successful as they have been with the new Air Traffic Control System.

Re:thank Government for databases (3, Interesting)

DoubleRing (908390) | more than 8 years ago | (#15734117)

Meanwhile grandma is still taking off her shoes and getting wanded at the airport.

As objectionable as this is, I think the bigger problem is the racial scanning that goes on at these airports. There are large groups of Middle Eastern people living in the US. Have they attempted any massive terrorist operation? To grandma, it's just an inconvenience. To these people, this is prejudice. Why do people go crazy over some dumb psp ad (which didn't even make it to the US) and skip over these issues?

Re:thank Government for databases (2, Interesting)

jrumney (197329) | more than 8 years ago | (#15734490)

which didn't even make it to the US

Yeah, well neither do the people [wsj.com] who've been racially profiled onto the no-fly-list once they've left. (registration free link [informatio...house.info] )

Re:thank Government for databases (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15734736)

Let me guess... U are from the middle east.

Re:thank Government for databases (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15734862)

As objectionable as this is, I think the bigger problem is the racial scanning that goes on at these airports.
No, the bigger problem is making government agents into robots. They only follow procedures and aren't allowed to think for themselves (or heaven forbid, take initiative), for fear that someone could say that they were performing racial profiling. We are more afraid of the political repercussions of a few racial discrimination cases than the repercussions of planes being bombed or flown into major landmarks.

Re:thank Government for databases (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15734246)

yagu sez",
"...as successful as they have been with the new Air Traffic Control System."

Pls to further define, what is this "new Air Traffic Control System" of which you speak?
Are you referring to the monitoring/management of airplane density in the national air space or
to the completely unrelated issue of passenger security screening? (If the former, any URLs
would be appreciated)

Re:thank Government for databases (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15734275)

Meanwhile grandma is still taking off her shoes and getting wanded at the airport.

The knowledge that she will get the same treatment as the rest of us is the one thing keeping grandma from demanding body cavity searches for the rest of us.

I, for one, am glad that we don't live in a world where grandma gets waved through security with a smug little smile on her face while I get directed to the body cavity search room to take it in the rear to appease grandma's paranoid fears of "all those terrorists".

Re:thank Government for databases (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15737405)

I'm not so sure grandma wouldn't enjoy that. As my grandma ages (and Alzheimer's progresses), she's been telling more stories about watching Jerry Springer and how she and my wife should jokingly go onto the show as lesbian lovers. She might just be up for a cavity search.

Jim

Nigga please (1)

ArchieBunker (132337) | more than 8 years ago | (#15737472)

Statistically who is more likely to carry a weapon on an airplane? Grandma or Mohammed Habib over there?

http://library.thinkquest.org/CR0212088/tertime.ht m [thinkquest.org]

Re:troll vs troll (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15739052)

Statistically who is more likely to carry a weapon on an airplane? Grandma or Mohammed Habib over there?

Considering grandma has dementia and a drug habit, I'm betting on grandma. That bitch is crazy!

Aliens? (3, Funny)

SatanicPuppy (611928) | more than 8 years ago | (#15733943)

Okay...I can see the need for u:SuperType->u:ActivityType->c:ActivityType->im:Al ienEncounterType...I mean, we're bound to encounter aliens at some point, right?

But im:AlienStudentDisciplinaryActionType? Planning for Alien encounters is one thing, but planning for dealing with them in our school systems seems like bureaucratic bloat to me. I don't think the Red Staters will be down with their taxes going to teach godless little green people.

(end humor tags)

Re:Aliens? (3, Funny)

creimer (824291) | more than 8 years ago | (#15733984)

You got to account for AlienIllegal, AlienET and AlienOfTheWeirdAndPissedOffVariety to cover all your bases. Assuming that some AlienET doesn't already own all your bases.

Re:Aliens? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15733993)

Comment Parse Error: [105] Humor Tags contain End without Begin
Humor not added to comment.

Re:Aliens? (1)

pla (258480) | more than 8 years ago | (#15734071)

I don't think the Red Staters will be down with their taxes going to teach godless little green people.

Godless??? How do you think the Red Staters will respond to learning that the little green people, arriving in their brand new model 6006 JHVH craft, seeded all life on Earth - Thus making them our gods?

Enki forbid that their advanced civilization might have very neatly solved the whole abortion issue by promoting homosexual activity as a form of birth control... ;-)

I can hear their cute little heads popping right off their cute little red necks... Pop! Pop! Popopop!

Re:Aliens? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15734551)

Wow..

Parent post is a textbook definition of troll

Re:Aliens? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15734783)

Why on earth should we belive the aliens if/when they make that claim? If they are so powerfull, how can you know that they are not fooling you? If their technology are so superior, how can you know that they are who they claim to be?



I have an idea about who they are. The Bible says this about idols, including your little green men: "What say I then? that the idol is any thing, or that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is any thing? But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils." And about the man of sin, probably the beast: "Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God." Do not get me wrong. If you are alive at that time, you will probably see heads "pop off": "...I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years."

Re:Aliens? (1)

pla (258480) | more than 8 years ago | (#15734894)

If they are so powerfull, how can you know that they are not fooling you? If their technology are so superior, how can you know that they are who they claim to be?

When a cop, or soldier, or alien overlord, tells you to believe 1+1=3 and that the sun sets in the North - You'd do well to believe the guy with the gun, whether you do or not.


The Bible says this about idols, including your little green men:

Idols? Ummm... Okay, I probably took a weak joke a bit too far. I think you've taken it and run from "too far" all the way back to "funny".


Laugh - If not at my joke, at me for making such a sad attempt at one. ;-)

Re:Aliens? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15760288)

Relax, I did understand it was a joke. :) But people actually belive stuff like what you said, and some of them could be reading Slashdot. Not to mention all the people that are programed to welcome our new alien overlords and assume all they say is true since "they" have superior tech. So, just in case it should happend (The Bible mentions great deception in the end times, at least some of it wearing the mask of Christianity like your YHVH spacecrafts), this was meant as a friendly reminder that the aliens could be quite different from what they claim to be (they could be deamons) and that Might is not the same as Truth. And this is from someone who do believe he is on the side of The Almighty. ;)

Re:Aliens? (0)

DarthStrydre (685032) | more than 8 years ago | (#15734189)

I think your real question should have been.. how does alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk map into these namespaces?

Re:Aliens? (1)

berbo (671598) | more than 8 years ago | (#15736583)

I, for one, welcome our new flonking-alien-vamipire XML standards.

Re:Aliens? (1)

catworld (989489) | more than 8 years ago | (#15734971)

As an hsitorian and far less of a programmer, I must say you penetrate both worlds with the same vector clear in sight. Dry wit always most appreciated too, whoever you are my compliments. Nice to see others in numerous locales awakening to the "bloat" to which I must too often refer, historically most frequently labeled "government."

Use XML. (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15733958)

The solution to every problem begging for more markup and extra layers of abstraction.

Re:Use XML. (1)

elFarto the 2nd (709099) | more than 8 years ago | (#15735688)

From someones comment on slashdot
XML is like violence: if it doesn't solve your problem, you aren't using enough of it
Regards
elFarto

TSDB (2, Informative)

9x320 (987156) | more than 8 years ago | (#15733967)

Neato. Maybe now they'll make less errors in that Terrorist Screening Database they have. You know, the one that has the names of over 250,000 people tagged as terrorists used in everything from no-fly lists to border crossings ever since the administration wanted all such watchlists to be consolidated into a single big one. That one the NSA probably uses. That one that, according to Department of Justice Inspector General reports [iphide.com] , may be riddled with errors.

Read the Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security Inspector General reports. They redact sensitive information in some cases, but based on context you can identify information in some places they've failed to redact in others. Keep on reading and you'll remember things to fit together a bigger picture.

Re:TSDB (3, Informative)

9x320 (987156) | more than 8 years ago | (#15734082)

3,673 records had been removed from the Terrorist Screening Database since its creation in June 2004 until this DOJ Inspector General report came out in May 2005. The page of the Inspector General report clarifies that when a possible misidentification of a suspect with Terrorist Screening Database records is found by the Terrorist Screening Center, the Quality Assurance team reviews the information with the agency (either the National Counterterrorism Center or a certain FBI unit) that nominated the record to be included in the database. Removal of the name from the Terrorism Screening Database is an option.

Previously, two databases were maintained, a Terrorist Threat Integration Center database that was classified, which would have information from files removed before being moved to an unclassified Terrorist Screening Database for use by law enforcement.

Local law enforcement centers, and certain international airports, would get a copy of the database, and if they saw a face and name that matched up with a file in their copy, they would call a phone number. The Terrorist Screening Center would advise them on what to do based on four handling codes, which were redacted by the FBI as sensitive information in Department of Justice Inspector General reports, but I have them right here [216.239.51.104] . There was a computer malfunction that resulted in Handling Code 4's being tagged as "armed and dangerous" in the database due to an error in the programming language of a program that was supposed to automatically merge together a certain database into the larger one. I wonder if this resulted in any false arrests. The handling codes have been updated since they were first released.

Handling Code 1: WARNING - APPROACH WITH CAUTION. Arrest this individual. This individual is
associated with terrorism. Once this individual is arrested, immediately contact the Terrorist Screening
Center at (866) 872-9001 for additional information and direction. If you are a border patrol officer
immediately call the NTC [National Targeting Center]

Handling Code 2: WARNING - APPROACH WITH CAUTION. Please detain this individual for a
reasonable amount of time for questioning. This individual is of investigative interest to law enforcement
regarding association with terrorism. Immediately contact the Terrorist Screening Center at (866) 872-9001 for additional direction. (As appropriate, the TSC will facilitate an immediate response from an FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force [JTTF] or other appropriate law enforcement entity.) If you are a border patrol officer immediately call the NTC.

Handling Code 3: DO NOT ALERT THIS INDIVIDUAL TO THIS NOTICE. The person queried through
this search may be an individual identified by intelligence information as having possible ties with terrorism. Contact the Terrorism Screening Center at (866) 872-9001 for additional identifying information available to assist you in making this determination. DO NOT ARREST THIS INDIVIDUAL UNLESS THERE IS EVIDENCE OF A VIOLATION OF FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL STATUTES. Conduct a logical
investigation using techniques authorized in you jurisdiction and ask probing questions to determine if this individual is identical to the person of law enforcement interest. WARNING - APPROACH WITH CAUTION. If you are a border patrol officer immediately call the NTC.
Handling Code

4: DO NOT ALERT THIS INDIVIDUAL TO THIS NOTICE. The person queried through
this search may be an individual identified by intelligence information as having possible ties with terrorism. DO NOT ARREST THIS INDIVIDUAL UNLESS THERE IS EVIDENCE OF A VIOLATION OF
FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL STATUTES. Attempt to obtain sufficient identification information to
positively identify this individual in a manner consistent with the techniques authorized in you jurisdiction. You may be contacted at a later date and asked to forward this information. Note: If your contact with this individual warrants further investigation based on circumstances consistent with terrorist activity, contact the
Terrorist Screening Center at (866) 872-9001. WARNING - APPROACH WITH CAUTION. If you are a
border patrol officer immediately call the NTC.
It is imperative that the officer contacting the suspect carefully read the caveats and adhere to the NCIC instructions.

4400 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15736218)

Does this sound like NTAC operations in The 4400 to anyone?

Re:TSDB (1)

9x320 (987156) | more than 8 years ago | (#15734260)

Now, according to an August 2004 redacted DHS Inspector General report [backfox.com] , the Terrorist Screening Center has a phone number and e-mail address where "federal and local organizations," presumably by which they mean law enforcement, can call about mistakes in the Database, suggesting there has been mistakes in this Database. A Washington Post story says an anonymous official said a 'very, very small fraction' of the names in this database are U.S. citizens.

If these names are used by the NSA in deciding whose phone calls to track and who to look up in SWIFT, very probably they could accidentally, or "accidentally," infringe on citizens' rights. There is no way to know this, because the database is classified, and there is also no way to know for certain that this database is used in those operations, although I would guess they probably are.

In order to get into the database, minimum information includes your name and personally identifying information, such as a birthdate, in the director of the Terrorist Screening Center's words. Coincidentally perhaps, this is the information taken when boarding a flight at two international airports. Information is sent to the Transportation Security Authority, and who knows what happens there, though they claim not to keep it forever. The length information obtained at international airports may be preserved and kept by the government is determined by the National Library and Archives in a certain file of theirs. That file is not available online, but I would suppose they'd keep it indefinitely for certain reasons. I learned this through this [dhs.gov] report. The more you know, eh?

Anyway, hope I've not abused Slashdot karma. Thanks for reading.

Re:Less errors? (1)

symbolic (11752) | more than 8 years ago | (#15737480)


How can less errors help with a method that was completely flawed from the start? I mean, didn't it ever occur to anyone in DHS that normal, law-abiding American citizens might have names similar to at least some of those that are on "the list," and that because of this, they'd be subject to baseless abuse by those relying on it? After all, someone would never attempt to identify themselves as someone other than who they really are...nah, that would never happen.

bah (1)

celardore (844933) | more than 8 years ago | (#15733985)

National Information Exchange Model

On some level, information has always been exchanged between these powers. Now they're using XML. Cool.

Re:bah (2, Funny)

deathy_epl+ccs (896747) | more than 8 years ago | (#15734271)

On some level, information has always been exchanged between these powers. Now they're using XML. Cool.

Yes, but see... with the advent of XML, that information exchange is now more than just "Uh-uh, not gonna tell ya!"

Now, they have a name-space that includes the ability to tack a "NYAH NYAH" on to the end of the statement.

Re:bah (1)

castoridae (453809) | more than 8 years ago | (#15734295)

Well, NIEM does incorporate and glom together some existing XML "standards" - Global Justice XML, for example. But there's nobody in gov't who's really up to speed with that either.

I think you'd be shocked at how little information really is being exchanged currently.

Wait! There's more (1, Funny)

overshoot (39700) | more than 8 years ago | (#15733996)

The Senate is going to convene hearings on why Microsoft's new Office Open XML format shouldn't be used instead.

Of was that a different Senate?

first person to implement a logic bomb (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15733997)


wins teh grand prize !

freedom for their entire country

Re:first person to implement a logic bomb (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15734999)

I'd give you a plus one insightful if I had mod points.

ATTENTIONS! DO NOT MOD DOWN! +5 INSIGHTFUL (-1, Offtopic)

Asshat_Nazi_v2.0 (989409) | more than 8 years ago | (#15734003)

I submit David Hasselhoff is the AntiChrist
And I have the proof

How can one explain the phenomenal global success of one of this country's least talented individuals? There are only three ways.

* Mr. Hasselhoff actually is talented, but this goes unnoticed in his own country.
* Mr. Hasselhoff has sold his soul to Satan in return for global success.
* David Hasselhoff is the AntiChrist.

I vote for the latter -- and perhaps, after seeing the facts involved, the rest of the world will agree.

The Facts First, the obvious. Add a little beard and a couple of horns -- David Hasselhoff looks like the Devil, doesn't he? And the letters in his name can be rearranged to spell fad of devil's hash.

What does this mean? Well, Baywatch is David's fad. David is the devil. The Hash is what makes Knight Rider popular in Amsterdam.

(I was actually hoping to make the letters in his name spell out he is of the devil, which would be possible if his middle name was "Ethesis," which it might be. I'm sure his publicist would hide such a middle name if it were true.)

Second -- and most importantly -- David Hasselhoff and his television series were foretold in the Bible. Biblical scholars worldwide may quibble over interpretations, but they all agree on this. For a few telling examples let's skip to the end of the Bible. If any book of the Bible will tell us who the AntiChrist is, it's the Revelation of Saint John, which basically describes the AntiChrist and the Armageddon He causes. I'll just give you the verse, and the current theological interpretation of that verse.

Who is the Beast?
Rev 13:1 And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns The Beast, of course, is David Hasselhoff. The Heads are His separate television incarnations. Young and the Restless, Revenge of the Cheerleaders, Knight Rider, Terror at London Bridge, Ring of the Musketeers, Baywatch and Baywatch Nights. The ten horns represent His musical releases: Crazy For You, David, David Hasselhoff, Do You Love Me?, Du, Everybody Sunshine, I Believe, Looking For Freedom, Night Lover and Night Rockers. Not only does Mitch The Lifeguard literally "rise out of the sea" on Baywatch, but David's musical career has mostly occurred in Europe, a metaphoric rise to fame from across the sea. Rev 13:3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast. Of course, this is a reference to his third head: Knight of the Phoenix, the first episode of Knight Rider. In this episode, "Michael Long, a policeman, is shot and left for dead. The shot is deflected by a plate in his head, but ruins his face. He is saved and his face reconstructed. He is reluctant, but agrees to use K.I.T.T. to help the Foundation for Law and Government fight criminals who are 'beyond the reach of the law'. " Knight Rider has been shown in 82 countries. Rev 13:5 And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months. The following blasphemies are actual quotes from David Hasselhoff -- I read these while he was 42 years old.
"I'm good-looking, and I make a lot of money."

"There are many dying children out there whose last wish is to meet me."

"I'm six foot four, an all-American guy, and handsome and talented as well!"

"Before long, I'll have my own channel -- I'll be like Barney."

"(Baywatch) is responsible for a lot of world peace." which the Hoff said at the Bollywood Oscars. Don't believe me? Read the original article!

And here's a blasphemy that came from David's recent (Feb 2004) visit to the Berlin Wall museum. I couldn't have made something this great up by myself. He was upset that the museum didn't spend more time devoted to his personal role in the fall of Communism. You can read more about it here, if you don't believe me.

The Second Beast: Television
Rev 13:11-13And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon. And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed. And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men,

The Second Beast, with it's dual antennae, is obviously the Television -- merely a pawn in Hasselhoff's underworldly regime. His stereo speaker (the dragon's voice) spews forth the blasphemy of Baywatch until He has caused all people of the earth to worship and watch Baywatch and Baywatch Nights. How well has he done? Baywatch is now seen by about one billion viewers in 140 countries -- the most watched series ever.

You probably never knew this, but the entire historical purpose of television has been to attract a worldwide audience for the eventual syndication of Baywatch. And how does it accomplish this global distribution? Via satellite - from heaven to the Earth.

Rev 13:15 And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed. How does television work? By giving life unto Hasselhoff's image. I'm pretty sure the second part hasn't happened yet.

Lifeguards: Denizens of the Underworld

These biblical revelations will show that the lifeguards on Baywatch are foretold as servants of the Devil. (Need I say who that is again?)
Rev 20:11And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them

Rev 20:13And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them...
Doesn't this sound like an exact description of what the lifeguards on Baywatch do? They sit on their big white wooden throne, and watch out over the sea -- waiting for a dying person to get cast up. Rev 9:6 And in those days shall men seek to find death, and shall not find it; and shall desire to die, and death shall flee from them.

One word: CPR
Rev 10:2 And he had in his hand a little book open: and he set his right foot upon the sea, and his left foot on the earth, Sounds like a lifeguard, eh? Standing on the beach reading a paperback?

Rev 17:3-5 ...and I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns. And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication: And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.

and if that wasn't enough, try Ezekiel 23:17 And the Babylonians came to her into the bed of love, and they defiled her with their whoredom, and she was polluted with them, and her mind was alienated from them.

The fabled "Whore of Babylon." Well, people have been calling Hollywood "Babylon" since long before I was making web pages. And of all the women in Hollywood, whose wedding night video is the most popular? Hmmm.... Did someone say "Barb Wire?"
Rev 18:11 And the merchants of the earth shall weep and mourn over her; for no man buyeth their merchandise any more Do you know any merchants who invested heavily in the acting career of this "whore of Babylon?" I've seen that "VIP" show of hers, and I'd be weeping if I had spent money on the merchandising rights.
Rev. 18:21 ... a mighty angel took up a stone like a great millstone, and cast it into the sea,...

Speaking of lifeguards chucking rocks at innocent people, listen to this excerpt from a recent lawsuit against his Hasselness: "while Plaintiff was in the audience of the Rosie O'Donnell Show, Defendandt DAVID HASSELHOFF came on stage and threw a stack of cards depicting himself into the audience, striking Plaintiff in the eye. . . [he] should have known that throwing cards into an audience could cause injury to the audience."
Rev 18:14 And the fruits that thy soul lusted after are departed from thee, and all things which were dainty and goodly are departed from thee, and thou shalt find them no more at all. He stands to lose money in this lawsuit -- or maybe even all those dainty and goodly things he bought.

The Number of the Beast
The Bible shows us another way to prove a person is the AntiChrist, namely through numerology. Rev 13:18 says: "Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six."

That's a bit cryptic, to be sure. One score is twenty, so threescore is 60, the number of the beast is 666.

Now, the way biblical scholars and numerologists usually convert the names of men into their numbers is through a simple numerical code. Let's assign the 26 letters of the alphabet the numbers 1 through 26. It looks like this:

a 1 i 9 q 17 y 25

b 2 j 10 r 18 z 26

c 3 k 11 s 19

d 4 l 12 t 20

e 5 m 13 u 21

f 6 n 14 v 22

g 7 o 15 w 23

h 8 p 16 x 24

Now, we take the letters from Mr. Hasselhoff's name, assign numbers to them, and calculate his number.

D A V I D H A S S E L H O F F

4 1 22 9 4 8 1 19 19 5 12 8 15 6 6

Now, since thirteen is such a fitting number for evil, let's multiply the first 13 numbers together. The total (65,874,124,800) is approximately 6.6 billion. Tack on the remaining 6's from the end of his name, and you've got yourself the mark of the beast.

Another tactic you could use would be to add the letters in "David" (I think you should get 40) and the letters in Hasselhoff (99) and then multiply them together. 40 x 99 = 3960. Now, 3960 is 660 x 6. And of course, 660 plus 6 is -- again -- the mark of the beast.

Not enough proof for you? Well, let's see what else the winning combination of the Bible and numerology have in store for David.....

As he explains it in his interview, David Hasselhoff first decided to act at the age of 7 when he saw a local production of Rumplestiltskin. His acting debut was in Peter Pan. Knight Rider ended its run in 1986, when Hasselhoff was 32. Baywatch debuted in 1989, when Hasselhoff was 35. His first televised role was as Snapper Foster on the Young and the Restless at the age of 19. If we look at the 37th chapter of the 19th book of the Bible (Psalms) -- at verses 32 and 35, we notice an interesting phenomenon. Take a look:

32. The wicked watcheth the righteous, and seeketh to slay him.
35. I have seen the wicked in great power, and spreading himself like a green bay tree.

Viewers of Baywatch may have thought they were watching the good leader Mitch Buchannon -- whose main job as head lifeguard is to watch over the righteous babes at the beach, and save them. According to the Bible, he is really trying to slay them. But can we be sure that the show in question is actually Baywatch? Well, count the number of letters in Rumplestiltskin and Peter Pan. 15 and 8, right? Now look at those bible verses again. Find the 15th word of verse 35 - and the 8th word from the end of verse 32. Put them together. 35. I have seen the wicked in great power, and spreading himself like a green bay tree. 32. The wicked watcheth the righteous, and seeketh to slay him.

Re:ATTENTIONS! DO NOT MOD DOWN! +5 INSIGHTFUL (1)

LuminaireX (949185) | more than 8 years ago | (#15734534)

You put entirely too much thought into that, despite it being completely off-topic.

It's big, really big... bloatware (0, Troll)

creimer (824291) | more than 8 years ago | (#15734005)

Is the government following the Microsoft model of bloatware or it was it Microsoft following the government's model of bloatware. I keep getting the two mixed. There should only be one standard form of bloatware. I wouldn't be surprised if some OSS twits are starting their own bloatware.

Re:It's big, really big... bloatware (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15734068)

More likely Oracle or Accenture or SAIC and yes, possibly Microsoft or a similar organization lobbied to get the agencies to legislate the bloatware which in reality was modeled after an umaintainable proprietary app of their own. Thereby ensuring that only they are eligible for these contracts because only they have the mindless cruft they've bloated that old app with.

Re:It's big, really big... bloatware (1)

Ingolfke (515826) | more than 8 years ago | (#15734086)

Um, you're strange. You're not that funny... and uh... I was going to make a comment about that but then I read your website and the /. FAQ and saw your picture and thought to myself... this guys got balls and so I agree with you about "OSS Twits" and "bloatware" and if you think about it, part of MS' problem and part of the governments problem is the attempt to please end-users without much of an understanding of the consequenses, particularly long term and cumulative, of their actions. So uh... good site.

Re:It's big, really big... bloatware (1)

creimer (824291) | more than 8 years ago | (#15734278)

Sometimes I'm funny, sometimes not, and occasionally I'm "ballsy". :) But most people think my Slashdot F.A.Q. [creimer.ws] is funny.

How big? (1)

erice (13380) | more than 8 years ago | (#15734011)

The National Information Exchange Model (NIEM) 1.0 Beta is out. It's big, really big.

But that's peanuts to space.

Re:How big? (5, Funny)

Tackhead (54550) | more than 8 years ago | (#15734060)

> > The National Information Exchange Model (NIEM) 1.0 Beta is out. It's big, really big.
>
> But that's peanuts to space.

I mean you think there's a long list of entities in the markup for your CSS/AJAX/Web2.0 project's folksonomy, but that's just peanuts to the NIEM," and so on.

After a while, the spec settles down a bit and tells you things you really want to know, like the fact that the fabulously corrupt city of Washington D.C. is now so enamored of the cumulative fiscal erosion by ten billion visiting lobbyists a year that any net imbalance between the amount you donate and the amount you receive in federal contracts whilst on the take is surgically removed from your bank account when you leave: so every time you go to K Street, it is vitally important to get a receipt... and falsify it.

Obvious bloat. (4, Insightful)

SatanicPuppy (611928) | more than 8 years ago | (#15734050)

Just glancing at it, I can see problems. XML is too often used for databases when it shouldn't be, but there are similarities, and just looking at it I can see that it violates one of the most basic database design principles: normalization [wikipedia.org]

Just as an example, there are three different namespaces dedicated to the various FIPS (Federal Information Processing Standards)...To three different STANDARDS.

I'm no expert on government info, and I just looked at this thing for the first time, so maybe it's brilliant and I'm ust not seeing it, but it sure looks a lot like they've fallen victim to a database noob mistake, and created a monster tree with disproportionate crazy branches everywhere, and that is bound to cause relational problems, redundant data, and warped design challenges.

Re:Obvious bloat. (4, Insightful)

punkinabox (922181) | more than 8 years ago | (#15734122)

Well, they said data sharing, not data storage.

Re:Obvious bloat. (3, Insightful)

truthsearch (249536) | more than 8 years ago | (#15734137)

Exactly. We're talking about data interchange between systems, not single system efficiency.

Re:Obvious bloat. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15734967)

And, posting as someone who's working on another hair-brained DOD XML-based discover system (simpler than this one, believe it or not), it'll eventually wind up being used as a data storage format anyway. The idiots who designed the database I work with made it so that every parent/child relationship is implemented using a one-to-many relation, even children that only occur at most once.

(Think someone making a DB out of an HTML DOM, and allowing multiple <head>, <title>, and <body> tags in the DB for no apparent reason.)

Re:Obvious bloat. (1)

SatanicPuppy (611928) | more than 8 years ago | (#15736046)

Normalization is still desirable, just because of its efficiency. No wasted space.

Just looking at the tree representation of the class structure, I don't know what they're thinking...Tier 1, the "Supertype" level, has two nodes (not counting the units-of-measure bits). Okay... Tier 2 has more than a hundred! More than all the Tier 3s combined! That's not moving from simple to complex, which is what the goal of structured data should be! It's just throwing stuff in a pile, and telling people what the pile looks like.

People at government agencies all over the country are going to be writing parsers to pull data out of this train wreck of a format, and it's not going to be easy, because there is no easy way to traverse to the data that you need. You can say this is just an interchange format, but the reality of it is, some joker is out there right now putting together the code to read an "XML database" with this structure. If your goal is to create yet still more bloated systems with yet still more arcane data constructs, this is a good start. Otherwise, it's a joke.

Securing future business (1)

Kadin2048 (468275) | more than 8 years ago | (#15737385)

If your goal is to create yet still more bloated systems with yet still more arcane data constructs, this is a good start.

Well, it's proved to be a pretty good business model so far ... why mess with a good thing?

Re:Obvious bloat. (2, Funny)

kfg (145172) | more than 8 years ago | (#15734123)

that is bound to cause relational problems, redundant data, and warped design challenges.

Do me a favor, don't tell them.

KFG

Re:Obvious bloat. (1)

CuratorTom (181103) | more than 8 years ago | (#15734561)

The NIEM is for data exchanges only. It is explicitly not intended as a guide for structuring your internal data storage.

Support for multiple standards like FIPS tables is intentional. (No one wants to try and fiat one.) A mechanism for marking one as preferred is in the works.

Re:Obvious bloat. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15735570)

Bloated all right: You are wise and correct. It looks like the British NHS design people have moved on, - their handiword is evident in the specs.

Did someone ask 'Does XML scale?', Does XML do stored procedures?, Does XML work? - Maybe not.
There again, it is still possible to have a normalised database, and wedge in foreign keys, and end up crap, replicated data full of errors.

No doubt they will build in the usual online 'Huge Online Batch Search' that cripples it, and performance for everyone else.
Typically, these projects run to about 2000 DB2 tables, but as HL security was made up of many, the raw number may be 10000 tables. Throw that into COGNOS or Oracle for some 3 Dimensional 'Cubes', and things get porky and make bloated sound efficient. Now add a layer of XML, transaction recovery, and copious security logging, and edit checks, and the whole federated data model becomes a quagmire. KISS was not observed.

If they really want to stop things, then ETL, to stitch together incompatible data, and to promulgate data integrity errors is just the shot. The solution is all things to all stakeholders, aka, a schema designed by a committee, will be unworkable in the real world, but only after much has been spent, and after several phases.

Re:Obvious bloat. (1)

kabocox (199019) | more than 8 years ago | (#15735946)

Just as an example, there are three different namespaces dedicated to the various FIPS (Federal Information Processing Standards)...To three different STANDARDS.

I'm no expert on government info, and I just looked at this thing for the first time, so maybe it's brilliant and I'm ust not seeing it, but it sure looks a lot like they've fallen victim to a database noob mistake, and created a monster tree with disproportionate crazy branches everywhere, and that is bound to cause relational problems, redundant data, and warped design challenges.


I work for a local city police department. Let me tell you it takes near miracles for data to be shared among different agencies. What's really bad is that things that should be complete digital files that move around systems, have to be re-entered for 3-4 different systems that won't talk to each other. Some like this is normal for government specs.

Re:Shhhhh (1)

symbolic (11752) | more than 8 years ago | (#15737646)


Maybe they're using the same company that cost the IRS a few hundred million a few years ago- for something that was eventually scrapped. With the current "it's fer terrism" mentality, and all the illegal spying and end-runs around various "obstacles" imposed by the constitution, I'd hope for a repeat performance.

another format eh? (0)

rucs_hack (784150) | more than 8 years ago | (#15734134)

Which is worse, the government making their own format, or them using a microsoft one? I vote the latter. The format is open to public scrutiny, and that's a very good thing. I rather like this.

If nothing else this advances the idea that people should have control over the format they use. OK the people in this case is the government, but we shouldn't complain about anything that may improve communication of data.

It looks pretty competant too.

Time for Open Source people to leap forward and develop tools for it.

the open source tool that will be being used most (1)

Unlikely_Hero (900172) | more than 8 years ago | (#15734264)

PURGE DATABASE

War of the Worlds (3, Insightful)

Lord Grey (463613) | more than 8 years ago | (#15734258)

XML is, in part, supposed to make it easier to manipulate data by providing unambiguous definitions. It clarifies the data. So we throw the U.S. Government into the mix and wind up definitions like the following (pulled at random from the 'Definition' column within the niem-1.0beta.xls spreadsheet buried in the download):
Authorized dissemination control portion mark abbreviation(s). Either (a) a single abbreviation or (b) a space-delimited list of abbreviations in the order shown in the CAPCO Register. Exception: For the REL abbreviation, omit the country code trigraph(s) and instead place the trigraph(s) in the releasableTo attribute value.
WTF? This is perhaps a use of the word "Definition" that I am not acquainted with. It reminds me strongly of trying to decode the income tax rules while filling out those yearly forms. Possibly, those that actually understand the above will believe it to be a brilliant explanation. I guess I won't be one of those "lucky" contractors looking to implement NIEM-compliant software. Unless it's a "spook->human" translator.

Re:War of the Worlds (2, Informative)

EQ (28372) | more than 8 years ago | (#15734602)

Actually that statment is pretty clear to someone with domain knowledge. Like any other knowlege domain, its probably very abstruse to the outside. Remember, Feynman was not famous for only being a physicist, but for being a physicist that could make himself understood to those outside of his domain of expertise (c.f. Feynman's lectures).

Its actually a very concise and clear explanation of that part of the data plan. The problem for you is that you do not have the context, nor subject matter expertise, so it appears to make no sense to you. I, on the other hand, have handled and created classified compartmented documents "back in the day", so its meaning is perfectly clear to me. Its also quite obvious this is from a section about how to carry across message-handling markings ("Classification" and "Dissementation" restrictions & caveats) from one agency to another, or even intra-agency stuff. This indicates to me that you probably pulled it from the Intelligence part of the namespace.

Bascially, the part you quoted says, in more coloquial English:

To control who gets to see this portion of data, the document is marked over-all AND portions are marked individually. To properly mark a portion of a document, (usually a paragraph), ther may be some paragraphs in a document that are "secret", some may be "unclassified", some may be US-only, some may be releasable to NATO, or various and sundry combinations of these types of things. To designate these "portion classifications, caveats and dissementation controls" and properly "mark" this portion fo the document, there is either (a) a single abreviated term, or else (b) a list of abbrevaited terms delimited by spaces. These terms can be found in a document called the "CAPCO Reigster". The only exception to this rule is the "REL" term, which means "Releasable To". Therefore, the values normally found after the REL term in a portion of a document should be put into the "releasableTo" attribute of this portion of a document, instead of the normal dissemenation control data block part of the document.

Thats a lot of context that isnt needed by someone reading a spec, governmentor otherwise. The spec assumes a given level of subject matter and domain expertise. To dumb it down would be wrong - that is the best way to lard up and bloat a spec, or else allow a spec so loose as to be useless in constraining the data properly. And, as you mention, "XML is upposed to make it easier to manipulate data by providing unambiguous definitions". The quoted text in your post is an example of a *very* _un_ambiguous definition of a data field. And contrary to your belief, its not just goverment that created such hard-to-scan (for outsiders) documents/specs, I've seen banks, health companies, telecom companies, aerospace [and other places that cannot afford a "loose" data type] write very similar specifications that contain similar definitions.

You'll see much of the same once you get out into the world.

HTH.

Re:War of the Worlds (1)

russellh (547685) | more than 8 years ago | (#15735141)

You write as if the government hasn't been in the business of data or high tech standards. This is light years better than EDI.

Rhetorics (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15734315)

It's big, really big.

Yankee style rhetorics seems pretty stupid to me. Leaving out empty and pointless sentences improves readability and gives the reader a more positive image of the writer. Also, a neutral presentation would bring up the idea in a more efficient way.

Re:Rhetorics (1)

rowama (907743) | more than 8 years ago | (#15734757)

Sorry I wasn't more clear. I originally intended to say, "It's big...big big..really big" Would you then have recognized it as a Barney Fife quote? Yes, I'm a TAGS fan. No, I'm not a Yankee in the remotest sense.

BTW, the south WILL rise again.

Schema by Beuracracy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15734475)

XML schema by beuracracy.
This oughta be sweet.
Somebody oughta keep records on the SDLC of this thing. It should be enlightening in a huge trainwreck kind of way.

Look! No Tables! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15734515)

Is it just me or is this the first government website in CSS? ... and it just about validates!

58 pages of spec; 3 instances of "security"... (2, Insightful)

kneecapd (735579) | more than 8 years ago | (#15734878)

I skimmed through the 58 page spec document which was mostly filled with describing the vast levels of bureaucracy that they're putting place to manage this beast. I also did a simple word find on the word "security". I only found 3 instances of the word that weren't coupled with the word "homeland" as in the Department of. No instances of the word "authentication".

I know this is doc isn't intended to show the exact structure of the messages to be passed, but gee whiz, wouldn't you think they would address the topic of "how do we make sure that only members with access to the NIEM can retrieve/exchange this data."????

All I found was a quick reference to one of the committees that they're going to form - who has the responsibility of (paraphrasing) "helping member organizations handle data security".

That's kinda scary. Or does this thing just run on the super-duper-secret world-wide government inter-network? I mean, they never have any problems with data security on that thing. (see: Los Alamos Lab, Dept. of Veteran Affairs, etc.)

Re:58 pages of spec; 3 instances of "security"... (1)

CuratorTom (181103) | more than 8 years ago | (#15735101)

Security of the payload being passed is out of scope. All transport-ish layers are. The NIEM is all about the payload, not how it gets there. (The scope is large enough as is.)

Yes, plenty of others have complained about this, too.

Why would security be addressed (1)

wiredog (43288) | more than 8 years ago | (#15735464)

at this level? It's an XML data-interchange format. A stylesheet. It covers the format data has to be in to be transferred from system A in agency X to system B in agency Y, the security would be handled at the connection level, not the data level. When you log in to a website, slashdot for example, I doubt the CSS says much (if anything) about the security of the connection.

Re:58 pages of spec; 3 instances of "security"... (1)

berbo (671598) | more than 8 years ago | (#15736735)

Mostly out of scope, but see this comment by another poster [slashdot.org]

Lay down your arms (1)

k1mgy (980756) | more than 8 years ago | (#15735037)

>>Contact your local government contractor, with resume in hand, and you may be one of the lucky >>developers to implement NIEM-capable software. Lucky? When are good and decent programmers and other tech folks going to lay down their arms, so to speak, and refuse to further enable these turds? In an ideal world there would be a severe shortange of people who help enable the current US mal-administrations aims through technology. I'll starve before I help them commit any more crimes. Anyone else?

Besides the obvious? (1)

tarogue (84626) | more than 8 years ago | (#15735081)

The most effective form of data sharing so far seems to have been the storage of that data on laptops leaving the building ...

What is wrong with Comma-Delimited? (1)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 8 years ago | (#15735191)

XML is often poorly normalized such that you have to go out of your way to remove nesting, redundancies, etc. Why not clean up comma-delimited a bit so that it offers better meta-data (column types, etc.) and multi-schemas per file. Comma-delimited is also more compact. For some ideas, see:

http://www.c2.com/cgi/wiki?RelationalAlternativeTo Xml [c2.com]
       

Gotta keep the profits up for the hardware vendors (1)

plopez (54068) | more than 8 years ago | (#15735416)

All the bloat will demand more storage, memory and faster cpus. With Vista late, XML is the only thing driving hardware sales these days. I used to say "XML is a solution looking for a problem". Now I understand the problem was flat hardware sales and XML is the solution.

Yes, it will end up being used as database using XQuery, or worse custom implemetations of similar beasts.

And yes, since it is not normalized data consistency will be lost leading to false psoitives and false negatives.

And since it is so bloated wait for a plethora of stripped down 'sub' versions with varying degrees of incompatibility.

Oh what a joy!

Re:Gotta keep the profits up for the hardware vend (1)

mshurpik (198339) | more than 8 years ago | (#15737569)

Meanwhile, the FBI is still running the story that their computer system is screwed up. They've been running this story for 10 years. Is that believable in the context of this rollout?

Re:Gotta keep the profits up for the hardware vend (1)

CuratorTom (181103) | more than 8 years ago | (#15739233)

Having the NIEM guide database design is a danger. But, if an agency models their database on it, it won't because they weren't warned against it. (Not sure if there's the correct number of negatives there. The point is that agencies are being explicitly warned against using the NIEM as the basis for their databases.)

Still, many make the initial assumption that the NIEM should guide their internal databases. Continual education is needed to prevent that misconception.

Regarding stripped-down versions, there is a mechanism, and supporting tool, for doing just that. It doesn't totally prevent the problem, but tries to keep it manageable.

But, but, but, I thought they ALREADY did this... (1)

The_REAL_DZA (731082) | more than 8 years ago | (#15736144)

I thought the government already had an "information sharing" program in place. Several of 'em, in fact:
  • This [cnn.com] (scroll down to "Other breaches revealed")
  • This [bbc.co.uk] (keep your stick safe!)
  • This [nytimes.com] (Yeah, I still hate the NYT... but even a bad example can be of some use...)
  • This [newsmax.com] (which has possible tie-in's to the previous...)
  • And, of course, this [google.com] (just to close with a "catch-all"...)


Either way, never understimate the power of the government to screw something up .

Changelog (1)

mrogers (85392) | more than 8 years ago | (#15736852)

Here's a summary of the major changes since version 0.9:
  • Boolean property niem.gov/niem/domains/intelligence/isPrisonerOfWar has been replaced by enumeration { YES, NO, DEPENDS }
  • Likewise for boolean property niem.gov/niem/domains/immigration/isMexican
  • Namespace niem.gov/niem/domains/emergency-management/ now duplicates large portions of other namespaces - many functions appear to be documented but not implemented
  • Namespace niem.gov/niem/domains/justice/billOfRights has been deprecated in favor of niem.gov/niem/domains/infrastructureProtection/ thinkOfTheChildren

Lucky??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15736922)

I worked with the Global Justice XML Data Model, or GJXDM for short. It is endorsed by the DoJ. By endorsed I mean that the DoJ only gives out grant money to projects that use it. GJXDM is getting folded into NIEM. Anti-Terrorism is where the money is at from the feds, so everyone is chasing it. Anyway, my whole point to this post was to state that I would not consider myself 'Lucky' to work with NIEM XML specs. GJXDM is horrible. It is too large, too complex and too ambigious just to name a few problems. California did it's own version called the Second Generation Electronic Filing Standards, or 2GEFS. It's simple, well documented and easy to work with. They both are used to meet similar needs, but you can only use the federal version if you want grant money. To me, NIEM represents a HUGE waste of tax payer money. I have no doubt the specifications will be needlessly complex and technically inefficient. But that won't stop our government from wasting billions of dollars endorsing it!

Re:Lucky??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15740985)

Hi Gary.

My company is currently working with NIEM (1)

MetaJimbo (989596) | more than 8 years ago | (#15738891)

We are currently working with several government agencies that wish to expose data via the NIEM standard. The MetaMatrix product is being used to map current data sources into NIEM compliant views of that data without ever writing a line of code.

We have a NIEM specfic example that demonstrates this capability by using a pre-fab Derby database. Our product is downloadable for a free trial for anyone who might be interested. Here is the link to the example:

http://devcentral.metamatrix.com/products/examples /Home [metamatrix.com]

Actually, there is some value (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15738989)

I've worked on this a bit, and it has some real value despite it's obvious shortcomings. It is the case today that data exchange between different kinds of agencies essentially never happens, whereas within one flavor of agency (police, fire, ems, 9-1-1, emergency management, FEMA, .....), there often exists data interchange standards. I've been working on emergency calling (9-1-1) and I can tell you that the lack of data standards between different kinds of organizations really hurts, and some of us have some hope NIEM will help.

Don't knock it until you have been in the trenches and have a better answer.
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>