In a message dated 9/18/08 10:22:54 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> You'll love this, Cheerskep > > http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=080918073717.xvg33wf1&show_article=1 > > Actually, you will. As I understand it, the "meaning" of the words > will be constructed from semantic connections, not from inert lexical > definitions. > Jeez! The millenium is upon us! The thing will "accurately understand my CONCEPT!" (I don't think so.) All search engines do what your brain does to this extent: They associate. "The Internet got smarter this week with the release of a semantic map that teaches computers the meanings behind words -- and gives the machines a vocabulary far larger than that of a typical US college graduate." I have here at home a number of fat volumes that allegedly already do that: They are called "dictionaries". And they don't yield "meanings" -- they give "definitions". One of the great things about search engines is that, by associating, they go beyond "definitions" -- because they have to. We often find what we're after by associations that aren't definitional at all. Suppose you want to find "the oldest medal-of-honor winner". The answer is a guy named John Finn. That phrase is not the "definition" of John Finn. Moreover, suppose what you wanted was not the oldest currently living person who has the medal, but the person who, of all those who ever were awarded the medal, was the oldest when he performed the feat that got him the medal. I guarantee the "semantic map" will not help much. And notice: the semantic map will be effectively useless in answering such a question without the huge inventory of FACTS that something like Google has. The map is only a supplement to current search machines -- and I doubt Google would find it helps them do something they don't already do. We may, if for some reason we are loathe to reach for a dictionary, occasionally go to a search engine to look up the definition of a word. But most of the time it's to gain factual information. Suppose you hear that Bouguereau is Derek Allan's favorite painter (heh-heh!) and you want to learn something about him, see some of his work. Google, Yahoo et al would do such jobs for you no better if they had the "semantic map". The story you cited makes Microsoft seem naive and desperate if the actually pay $100M for the map. Here's the one hard example in the story of what the map can do for you. All I can say is, "Oy.": "For example, a semantic online search for "melancholy songs with birds" would know to link sadness in lyrics with various species of birds." ************** Psssst...Have you heard the news? There's a new fashion blog, plus the latest fall trends and hair styles at StyleList.com. (http://www.stylelist.com/trends?ncid=aolsty00050000000014)
