Comments on: The Search for Meaning http://allantyoung.com/2008/09/28/the-search-for-meaning/ A Latticework of Thought, Action & Joyful Foibles Tue, 02 Nov 2010 05:29:23 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: kanika chaudhary http://allantyoung.com/2008/09/28/the-search-for-meaning/comment-page-1/#comment-8911 kanika chaudhary Fri, 14 Aug 2009 16:09:13 +0000 http://allantyoung.com/2008/09/28/the-search-for-meaning/#comment-8911 i want to know the meaning of a sentence..... how can i? i want to know the meaning of a sentence….. how can i?

]]> By: Sean Pennington http://allantyoung.com/2008/09/28/the-search-for-meaning/comment-page-1/#comment-2361 Sean Pennington Tue, 13 Jan 2009 23:20:46 +0000 http://allantyoung.com/2008/09/28/the-search-for-meaning/#comment-2361 hi, i was just curious what is a semantic web. thanks in advance for any replys to my quesion. hi, i was just curious what is a semantic web. thanks in advance for any replys to my quesion.

]]> By: Nick http://allantyoung.com/2008/09/28/the-search-for-meaning/comment-page-1/#comment-1287 Nick Wed, 15 Oct 2008 16:39:01 +0000 http://allantyoung.com/2008/09/28/the-search-for-meaning/#comment-1287 @Allan thanks for stopping by my blog. I too, am a little skeptical about the Semantic web, mainly because I am not too sure I trust the tech yet. This will probably change over time, however as people begin to rely on it more. Human interpretation can be confused by emotion and agenda... two things no computer has. @Allan thanks for stopping by my blog. I too, am a little skeptical about the Semantic web, mainly because I am not too sure I trust the tech yet. This will probably change over time, however as people begin to rely on it more. Human interpretation can be confused by emotion and agenda… two things no computer has.

]]> By: Gregory Yankelovich http://allantyoung.com/2008/09/28/the-search-for-meaning/comment-page-1/#comment-1248 Gregory Yankelovich Sun, 12 Oct 2008 20:19:15 +0000 http://allantyoung.com/2008/09/28/the-search-for-meaning/#comment-1248 It is very interesting topic and discussion. IMHO the main reason people have such difficulties in communicating complex concepts is a lack of discipline/training/protocol of the communication process. In academic circles the discussions used to have very specific format where the moderator would carefully frame the purpose and focus of the communication, define in great detail the terminology used for this particularly discussion, methodologies and terms were agreed and therefore to remove a lot of potential ambiguity from the start. In "normal" business or personal communications people violently disagree about totally disjointed topics without even noticing it. I am involved in a start up, Amplified Analytics, which managed to resolve some of these challenges IMHO, to produce useful and actionable information in a very specific field. We are just about to go into private beta testing, but raising capital, to go to market, in this economic environment might become even more challenging. Allan, thank you for leaving very thoughtful comment on my blog. I would love to get your opinion about my start-up. Let me know if we can talk. It is very interesting topic and discussion. IMHO the main reason people have such difficulties in communicating complex concepts is a lack of discipline/training/protocol of the communication process. In academic circles the discussions used to have very specific format where the moderator would carefully frame the purpose and focus of the communication, define in great detail the terminology used for this particularly discussion, methodologies and terms were agreed and therefore to remove a lot of potential ambiguity from the start. In “normal” business or personal communications people violently disagree about totally disjointed topics without even noticing it.

I am involved in a start up, Amplified Analytics, which managed to resolve some of these challenges IMHO, to produce useful and actionable information in a very specific field. We are just about to go into private beta testing, but raising capital, to go to market, in this economic environment might become even more challenging.

Allan, thank you for leaving very thoughtful comment on my blog. I would love to get your opinion about my start-up. Let me know if we can talk.

]]> By: Matt http://allantyoung.com/2008/09/28/the-search-for-meaning/comment-page-1/#comment-1130 Matt Wed, 01 Oct 2008 16:19:41 +0000 http://allantyoung.com/2008/09/28/the-search-for-meaning/#comment-1130 Hi Allan, You commented on my blog and said you wanted to pick my brain about my search + display post. You can send me an email at mlillig2002 (@) yahoo (dot) com Hi Allan,

You commented on my blog and said you wanted to pick my brain about my search + display post. You can send me an email at mlillig2002 (@) yahoo (dot) com

]]> By: Wallen's http://allantyoung.com/2008/09/28/the-search-for-meaning/comment-page-1/#comment-1113 Wallen's Tue, 30 Sep 2008 10:41:00 +0000 http://allantyoung.com/2008/09/28/the-search-for-meaning/#comment-1113 Agree, the simplified "competitor" example I used above is easy to do. Let me try to be more precise. The meaning of a given information is different depending on its context (historical, cultural, etc.), its author's and readers' framing (e.g., type of logic, personal history, emotions, etc.). To take this into account, it would mean that a computer would be able to understand the different contexts and framings of all internet users. This what I am doubting is feasible... Let's face it as human beings we have challenges to understand each other so how could we build a technology that would overcome these challenges. A developer working on a semantic project has his own framing which will influence his code whether he wants it or not. The above does not mean that semantic is useless ; on the opposite it can be extremely useful. My point is that it's not the panacea as some people say it will be. Let's see what the future says. Agree, the simplified “competitor” example I used above is easy to do. Let me try to be more precise. The meaning of a given information is different depending on its context (historical, cultural, etc.), its author’s and readers’ framing (e.g., type of logic, personal history, emotions, etc.). To take this into account, it would mean that a computer would be able to understand the different contexts and framings of all internet users. This what I am doubting is feasible… Let’s face it as human beings we have challenges to understand each other so how could we build a technology that would overcome these challenges. A developer working on a semantic project has his own framing which will influence his code whether he wants it or not. The above does not mean that semantic is useless ; on the opposite it can be extremely useful. My point is that it’s not the panacea as some people say it will be. Let’s see what the future says.

]]> By: Allan http://allantyoung.com/2008/09/28/the-search-for-meaning/comment-page-1/#comment-1110 Allan Tue, 30 Sep 2008 03:29:25 +0000 http://allantyoung.com/2008/09/28/the-search-for-meaning/#comment-1110 @Wallen's - I think what you described, which is a worthy direction of pursuit, can actually be accomplished through Semantic methodologies. @Wallen’s – I think what you described, which is a worthy direction of pursuit, can actually be accomplished through Semantic methodologies.

]]> By: Wallen's http://allantyoung.com/2008/09/28/the-search-for-meaning/comment-page-1/#comment-1106 Wallen's Mon, 29 Sep 2008 18:51:02 +0000 http://allantyoung.com/2008/09/28/the-search-for-meaning/#comment-1106 I have to say that I am skeptic about semantic web. It's true that it can be helpful but it's far from the panacea. Semantic web can be helpful to put together different data sets, i.e. hard facts. But the context of a sentence or a text gives it a different meaning. The messenger also. The framing of the reader also. The history of a person changes the understanding he has also. Etc. Take a simple example with the word "competitor". It has a totally different meaning depending on who you are. If you are google CEO, it's Yahoo or Microsoft. If you are GM CEO, it's Toyota & co. You actually point to this in your post "Left vs.right" where depending of the viewer, he/she looks at things differently(though there are much more than 2 ways to look at the world). I doubt that computers will ever be able to capture the complexity of every human thinking. What would be really game changing in search is something that would allow a person to be directed to contents by like-minded people and not to the "most popular" contents, even if partially contextualized. That's what would increase relevancy. I have to say that I am skeptic about semantic web. It’s true that it can be helpful but it’s far from the panacea.

Semantic web can be helpful to put together different data sets, i.e. hard facts. But the context of a sentence or a text gives it a different meaning. The messenger also. The framing of the reader also. The history of a person changes the understanding he has also. Etc.
Take a simple example with the word “competitor”. It has a totally different meaning depending on who you are. If you are google CEO, it’s Yahoo or Microsoft. If you are GM CEO, it’s Toyota & co. You actually point to this in your post “Left vs.right” where depending of the viewer, he/she looks at things differently(though there are much more than 2 ways to look at the world). I doubt that computers will ever be able to capture the complexity of every human thinking. What would be really game changing in search is something that would allow a person to be directed to contents by like-minded people and not to the “most popular” contents, even if partially contextualized. That’s what would increase relevancy.

]]>