I'm trying to formulate here one thought (maybe it's not new): when we're
discussing about complexity, we assume a role of the subject reflecting on the
"objective reality". But we are evolving ( if we are lucky :-) ) and one time
we recognize our ability to play a role of the new subject inside
ere is a subtle problem with BI (data mining, data
>> visualization, etc.). Usually we assume that our data reflect adequately
>> business issues (customer behavior), and in the same time we update
>> (patch) our data-collecting software very often, which re
y to estimate it 1) to improve our software;
> 2) to make our business decision more accurate. It looks like both our
> data-collecting software and BI are linked together forming a business
> (and cybernetic!) model.
>
>
>
> Any comments?
>
I don't quite understand the details, but sounds link a kind of 'ah ha'
observation of both natural systems in operation and the self-reference
dilemma of theory. My rule is try to never change the definition of
your measures. It's sort of like maintaining software compatibility.
if you arbitrar
