Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: First Order Logic and Semantic Web RE: NPR, Godel, Semantic W eb
 There were earlier incidents. In October, 1960, we almost launched based on radar signals bouncing off the moon. The saying is, always a human between the radar and the fire control. We do have to be careful and that same issue of the speed, latency and criticality of task has come many times over the years so most folks are aware of it. It may be a problem for the free-wheeling web where people are allowed to put anything on the system, but that is the risk and the freedom. The harder problem is semantic drift where the original meaning gets lost and the intent warps. Look at the early texts on eugenics and then look at the warped politics that followed. Still, I think most of this will come down to vetted services. Just as you have to look critically at your government processes and officials, you have to look critically at the services. Semantic systems are services and I suspect the most useful ones will be very local. Things like Google are indexing systems, not semantic services. The difference may be a little subtle, but essentially, Google only returns lists, it doesn't answer questions. It is a browsing assistant, not an expert system. Nobility. Well, it is hard to legislate that isn't it? We are working hard on HumanML to enable standard sets of human properties to be added to services. Could one pervert such properties? Sure. Does it mean we shouldn't do it? No, it means we should do it as well as we can. I believe the better we understand each other, the more we are able to detect and work successfully with the ambiguity and drift produced by our usefully diverse cultures and origins. Len http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti. Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h -----Original Message----- From: Jeff Lowery [mailto:jlowery@s...] > I fear people who can't tell the difference > between a person's opinion and a machine's opinion > or think that either has facts believable out > of context. Whatever the SW is or is supposed > to become, it ain't magic. Again, it's not the people I fear, it the machine's acting on peoples' behalf. If SW ain't about automation of decision making based on understanding (machine understanding, not human understanding, the twain shall never meet), then we should be careful. Then again, maybe we should fear people. Saw a factoid show last night giving the once over to the incident in 1995 where the Russians interpreted the radar signature of a Norwegian rocket test firing as an ICBM attack from the U.S. Got down to the last 2 minutes of a 10 minute launch procedure. Even if that wasn't entirely accurate, I think putting blind trust in we clever monkeys and our machines is ill advised. We have to carefully verify our perceptions and the interpretation of facts from our systems; get too damned clever for our own good sometimes. Literally damned clever. Does that mean we shouldn't pursue noble ends? No, noble ends is what's got us here now, and it is good. Powerful stuff, this SW, and let's take the full measure of it. 
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! 
Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|
|||||||||
