Matt, On 12/4/08, Matt Mahoney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- On Wed, 12/3/08, Steve Richfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I appears "obvious" to me that the first person who proposes the > following things together as a workable standard, will "own" the future > 'web. This because the world will enter the metadata faster than anyone is > going to build a "semantic web" or anything like it without these items. In > short, this is a sort of calculated retrograde step to get the goodies NOW > and not sometime in the future. > > I disagree. Google has already figured out the "semantic web". People > communicate in natural language 100 to 1000 times faster than in any > artificial language. Time is money.
We seem to have a disconnection here, which we each blame on the other. I'll reiterate my point in different words to hopefully drill down into the disconnection... If only people included two absolutely critical pieces of metadata in their postings, then you and Google would be absolutely right. Unfortunately, they do NOT ever include this metadata, and it simply cannot be gleaned from the postings themselves. As explained before, these include: 1. The syntax of statements of differential symptomology, in short, what people/machines/countries who/that have a particular condition typically say to communicate a symptom that is DIFFERENT what what people say who have a similar symptom of something quite different. This typically requires an EXPERIENCED human expert to code. 2. Carefully constructed questions to elicit statements meeting criteria #1 above. No one has yet proposed ANY way of "mining the Internet" to engage in useful problem solving without these two pieces of metadata, yet supposedly smart people continue wasting their efforts and other people's money on such folly. > Perhaps in years to come, people can omit some/all of this metadata and > future AI interfaces to the web will still work, bit I simply see no reason > to wait until then to "smarten the 'web". Once the metadata is in place, any > bright programmer can implement the"Internet Singularity" by simply > populating his tables based on the metadata. > > What? According to http://www.dreliza.com/singularity.php the singularity > already happened in 2001 "when Steve Richfield had his intelligence greatly > increased..." :-) It had to start somewhere. Only time will tell if this statement is correct, so it is useless to argue this point right now. Whether or not I and my efforts continue the thread the ultimately succeeds, I have little doubt that whatever happens will include someone who has had their intelligence greatly increased with my or similar methods. This certainly provides a MUCH better "jumping off point" to singularities of all sorts than anyone else has yet proposed. The passage you quoted from contains a detailed explanation of how this works, and I'll gladly help anyone who wants to follow this path through the process of collecting another ~20 IQ points in just one difficult day (following ~2 weeks of preparation, and followed by months of recovery). Note that this ONLY works for smart people (which probably includes everyone on this forum) who now have low daytime body temperatures, a condition known as central hypothermia (which probably excludes >50% of the people here). The quick screening test is seeing if your temperature stays <98.2F, even in the afternoon when it should be at its highest and usually reaching ~99F for helathy people. This will also fix numerous minor health problems that you may already have. BTW, for easier demos, http://DrEliza.com has new knowledge that should be "wrung out" in the next few days, on how to save teeth that your dentist says are hopeless and absolutely must be extracted. I had a lot of really bad dentistry long ago, and have been struggling to save what little is left ever since, and hence I have become quite expert in this domain. I still have at least some part of every tooth left. To illustrate, just yesterday, a "third opinion" yet again proclaimed my #31 molar to be headed for the garbage can. I then presented my plan to save ~half of it by extracting just the cracked, decayed, and unsalvageable root, keeping the remainder which would then be too weak to function on its own (and which might even break part of my jawbone if left as-is), and installing a 2-unit bridge to an adjacent tooth that had its own problems and was also weak, but to pressure in the opposite direction. Together, these two teeth should make one very good tooth - a little like one of the long molars in the back of a dog's mouth. Here, my methods were accepted and the various procedures are now being scheduled, even after a PhD dentist, an endodontist, and an oral surgeon (all board certified) had all proclaimed salvaging #31 to be completely hopeless until they heard my plan. The total cost will be ~half of that of an implant. #31 will become my 5th tooth to survive after being advised that extraction was the only viable option. Each of these teeth has their own unique story. The thing that really pisses me off is that the total worthless dental consulting fees for these three idiots, ~$300, is about equal to the entire cost of the oral surgery that I, not they, designed. Does anyone here have knowledge in the domain of evading fees for worthless dental consulting, for me to put into Dr. Eliza?! Steve Richfield ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=120640061-aded06 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
