On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 11:13 AM Abdulrahman Semrie <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > So, without knowing the type, but only knowing the string name? My > knee-jerk reaction is you're doing something wrong, if you feel you need to > do that. You've mis-designed some data representation, somehow > > I don’t understand how this can be due to a “mis-design” issue. It’s > fairly common to index graph dbs using the name of the nodes (or other > properties on the vertices/edges) and retrieve a node based on its name > only. e.g - http://s3.thinkaurelius.com/docs/titan/1.0.0/indexes.html > I don't understand what you don't understand :-) If you need to search something by name, why don't you put it all into the same name-space? Just make everything a ConceptNode, then you're done. The whole point of having namespaces, is that they're namespaces, but now you want to not have namespaces. -- You've got to kind of figure out whether you want to have them and use them, or whether you don't want to have them. So I'm back to the initial point: what are you actually trying to do? I think there are three approaches to add indexing to the atomspace, each > with its own pros and cons. > > 1. > > The first potential solution , as you and Kasim have suggested, is to > use MemberLinks to “index” the atoms. This has the benefit that it > doesn’t require any additional work to add to the current atomspace. But it > has the following disadvantages: > > a. It could result in doubling the number of atoms in atomspace - i.e > more RAM usage. It is infeasible for large atomspaces > > Why do you think it doubles? Where do you think all of that RAM usage is going? Where do you think indexes are kept? The MemberLink maintains indexes in the incoming/outgoing sets, those are just c++ std::set and std::vector, respectively. If you create some other index, you are just moving around where the RAM is being used. You're talking about shifting around the internal representation; you are not proposing anything that will actually decrease RAM usage. Take a look at RAM and disk usage in one of these commercial databases. Create a table. Put a milllion things into it. Place an index on the table; RAM usage will double. Place two indexes on it. RAM usage will triple. It's quite linear, and it's a worth-while experiment to perform, if you are interested in databases. It will provide some hints into how these systems are actually designed, under the covers. (And not just RAM, disk, too, when stored to disk. Disk usage doubles, triples ... as you add indexes.) > 1. > > b. As you have explained earlier, using MemberLink means more graph > search -> more cpu usage > > c. This solution requires the user of the atomspace to manage the > index. The user has to take care of adding/deleting MemberLinks when a > node is added/deleted. > > Nothing in life is free. It is not the "user" who is adding these "by hand", it is a block of code. That block of code requires the expenditure of CPU cycles. You can re-arrange the location where those CPU cycles are spent, but you can't remove it. Adding/deleting MemberLinks is trivial, so the complaint is unfounded. Only you know what the structure of your data needs to be. You have to manage the structure of your data. As a general rule, you cannot force the AtomSpace to guess what you wanted to have. Trying to automate indexes is particularly damaging: for every atom insertion/deletion, the "automatic" code would have to trigger the indexer, analyze the kind of atom being inserted, and then make a decision as to which indexes need to be updated. Again: take a commercial database, pick one, any one, and place a million items into it. Then measure insert/delete performance. Then place an index on it; repeat. Put two indexes on it, repeat. As before, you will discover that CPU time will double, triple, quadruple for each new index that you add. It is very linear. It's O(N) where N is the number of indexes. The AtomSpace is very unique -- it offers you indexes that run at O(1) instead of O(N). This is because the atomspace design has a trick that few other (maybe no other) databases offer: it has fractional indexes. aka incoming/outgoing sets. When you add a MemberLink, you update only a handful of very small, per-atom indexes (three, to be precise: for (Member A B) you update incoming-A, incoming-B and outgoing Member) Because they are tiny, they fit on one CPU cache-line. Because they are tiny, there is no tree-rebalancing. Because they are tiny, there are no hash-buckets. But wait, there's more -- the most important point is that if you add some other atom -- say (Concept "foo") -- then exactly ZERO index updates are needed! Compare this to the commercial databases: if you have a commercial database with N=5 indexes, and K=1000000 entries, you have to update N indexes of size K, when you add "foo" to some table. CPU time will be typically be O(N log K) on those commercial databases, vs O(1) for the AtomSpace. Seriously, this is a big deal. The AtomSpace literally does something that other SQL/noSQL databases literally cannot do. This is something that "graph databases" can kind-of do, because (in principle) graph databases can also maintain fractional indexes (that is what makes them graphs) Whether they actually do this, I don't know. This is one reason I'm working so hard on the "sheaf" theory -- the sheaving shows you precisely how to manage RAM and CPU for the connectivity of a graph. I guess I now have to write yet another PDF in this series, talking about indexes. The sheaves aren't just some willy-nilly abstraction: they have real-life implications for RAM and CPU. This is just email, so if you are uncertain of what I write or don't believe me, you can actually perform these experiments yourself, make the measurements. Prove me wrong -- I'm not always right. There's always room for improvement. But I'm certain that, in this case, I'm right, because I've, uhh, "been around the block a few times". Or, uhh, "been there, done that". Having well-done, well-documented measurements would be nice: we could publish a white-paper comparing atomspace performance to performance of database X. I'm fairly confident we'll come out looking pretty good. > 1. > > d. We can’t add index atoms by their values using this approach. For > example, if we want to retrieve all atoms that have values with the key > key1, it is not possible with this approach > 2. > > The second solution is adding support for indices that are managed by > the atomspace similar to that of TypeIndex > > <https://github.com/opencog/atomspace/blob/master/opencog/atomspace/TypeIndex.h> > and having a way for users to define custom indices on atoms. This has the > benefit that the user of the atomspace doesn’t have to manually handle > insertion and removal of atoms for the indices. It also allows indexing > atoms by their Values. The cons with this solution, in addition to the > extra work required, is as we add more indices inserting and deleting atoms > will be slower. > 3. > > The third solution is using external search engines/dbs (such as > ElasticSearch or Apache Solr) to store the indices of the atomspaces. This > moves managing the indices from the atomspace to the dbs and will improve > the search time without having slower write speeds. But this requires to > have some interface code to connect the atomspace with external index > store. > > Combination 2 & 3 is what I have seen being mostly used in other > databases. For example, in the variant annotation work I did couple of > months ago, I used mongodb to store the genomic data which indexed data by > their id and used elasticsearch to store the location and gene indices of > the variants. > I've nothing more to say here. This is why "other databases" suck. Seriously -- you should try to actually use some of them, before you tell me how great they are. Spend a few weeks, spend a month. You'll be back. And if you don't come back, .. well, hey, then clearly, the Atomspace was not the solution for whatever problem you are trying to solve. The AtomSpace does not solve every problem. But the ones it does solve, it solves better than anything else out there. --linas — > > Regards, > > Abdulrahman Semrie > <https://canarymail.io> > > On Thursday, Aug 27, 2020 at 9:43 PM, Linas Vepstas < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 12:55 PM Abdulrahman Semrie <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > A second is to create a UniProtNode and use that; queries are then >> simple because you just ask for all UniprotNodes. >> >> We are already using this approach. We have added new, data-source >> specific types to the atomspace and we use those types in pattern matching >> query. >> >> > A third (recommended) way is to write (MemberLink (Node "Uniprot: >> 1234") (Concept "the-set-of-all-uniprots")) >> >> can you please explain why this approach is recommended compared to the >> second one? Doesn't using this approach add many links that can be avoided >> by having a specific type? >> > > The second approach is problematic, because it requires a human being to > create, edit and publish an "atom_types.script" file to github ... and then > download, compile, install. That's a hassle. > > It is possible to dynamically add new Atom types at run-time, but the > API's for this are incomplete; this is not encouraged, because it raises a > variety of other technical issues (which I can review, but is a bit > off-topic). > > The third approach (of using MemberLinks and/or EvaluationLinks) is > "recommended" because it can be done at run-time, and has a giant raft of > neat features, bells and whistles for doing all kinds of stuff. It's very > flexible. > > The disadvantage of using MemberLinks is slightly larger RAM usage: about > 100 bytes for the link itself, and maybe another 50 bytes for the > incoming-set index. (roughly; it's hard to measure because these bytes are > not all in one place; some are in c++ std::set internal nodes, etc.) This > implies that one million MemberLinks require 150MB extra RAM which ... > well, that seems reasonable, these days. Defining a UniProtNode does save > you this RAM. > > Another disadvantage of using MemberLinks during search is that it > requires one extra graph-walk step during pattern matching -- i.e. walking > from (Node "Uniprot: 1234") to the (Concept "the-set-of-all-uniprots")) via > the MemberLink. This walk does take many thousands of cycles and lord-knows > how many cpu-cache misses. Based on my measurements from January with the > actual bio-agi/mozi datasets in use at that time, I had the impression that > this extra step accounts for 5% to 25% extra CPU, depending on the query. > Something like that. And since the queries you are doing are extremely > common, frequent and cpu-intensive, it makes sense to hand-optimize and > performance-tune, i.e. to invent a new UniProtNode. > > But both of these considerations are very highly specific to the > agi-bio/mozi project, where you are willing to put in the human labor costs > to optimize for performance. More generally, one must recognize that human > labor is expensive, and CPU-cycles/RAM is cheap, so the generic answer has > to be "buy more RAM, buy more CPU" because that is cheaper than paying > humans. That's why the third way is the recommended way. > > >> > . unless you mean "can I ask if (Node "uniprot: 1234") exists, without >> accidentally creating it if it does not?" >> >> More like "can I ask if any node with name "uniprot:1234" exists? If so, >> can you return that node." >> >> > you can do this from the C++, scheme and python API's, but you cannot >> do this in Atomese. >> >> If I know the type and the name, yes I can do this from the C++, scheme >> and python - I'm actually doing this in the C++ code for the rpc server. >> But in the case I'm describing, I only know the name and not the type. And >> to create a Handle to retrieve the atom, I need both the type and the name. >> > > So, without knowing the type, but only knowing the string name? My > knee-jerk reaction is you're doing something wrong, if you feel you need to > do that. You've mis-designed some data representation, somehow. > > But if you really, really want to ... you can get a list of all atom > types, and then ask the atomspace, one type at a time, if it has a node > with that name. > > Another possibility is to "create an index" via the third (recommended) > way: > > (MemberLink (ProteinNode "unprot: 1234") (Concept "things named 1234")) > (MemberLink (GoNode "structure: 1234") (Concept "things named 1234")) > (MemberLink (PathwayNode "pathway: 1234") (Concept "things named 1234")) > > And then there's RegexNode .... which is theoretically ugly, because it is > a crutch, a work-around to a mis-designed data representation. The > theoretical ugliness in a nut-shell: if you really want to use strings, > then don't use the atomspace, use perl. That' is what perl is for. Regex's > are finite state machines, and the comp-sci industry has well-developed > theories of how finite-state machines work, and what you can do with them. > More generally, there is a well-defined theory of string manipulation and > string-rewriting... adding this to the atomspace is .... its ... well, > it's like trying to surgically attach that machinery ... it's like, .. I > dunno, building a car with three wheels powered by a gasoline engine and > one wheel powered by an electric motor. You can do it, but why? > > --linas > > >> >> On Thursday, August 27, 2020 at 8:33:29 PM UTC+3 linas wrote: >> >>> I just provided three different solutions to that task... -- linas >>> >>> On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 11:14 AM Ben Goertzel <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> I think perhaps what Xabush wants is to be able to query >>>> >>>> " Find me all Atoms whose name string contains the substring "ABDPDQ". >>>> " >>>> >>>> even if he doesn't know what types these Atoms may be ? >>>> >>>> ben >>>> >>>> On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 9:09 AM Linas Vepstas <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> This statement I find confusing: "I can’t write a pattern matching >>>>> query to retrieve an atom using its id/name" There is one and only one >>>>> such >>>>> atom, ever, by definition... There is nothing to query; if you know the >>>>> name, you know the atom. >>>>> >>>>> There was talk previously about "substring matching", for example, you >>>>> have atoms named "Uniprot: 1234" and "Uniprot: 5678" and you want to find >>>>> all atoms that start with the eight characters "Uniprot:". There are (at >>>>> least) three solutions for this. One is to create a RegexNode, but this is >>>>> ugly from a theoretical standpoint. A second is to create a UniProtNode >>>>> and >>>>> use that; queries are then simple because you just ask for all >>>>> UniprotNodes. A third (recommended) way is to write (MemberLink (Node >>>>> "Uniprot: 1234") (Concept "the-set-of-all-uniprots")) >>>>> >>>>> This third way is recommended because, in a sense, the atomspace is >>>>> nothing but one giant network of interconnected partial indexes. There is >>>>> an index from (Node "Uniprot: 1234") to everything that makes use of it -- >>>>> its called "the incoming set" and it is a real index - a c++ std::set if >>>>> I >>>>> recall. Same for (Concept "the-set-of-all-uniprots") and what the pattern >>>>> matcher "actually does" is to stitch together these partial indexes into a >>>>> whole, and then prune away the irrelevant parts. >>>>> >>>>> -- Linas >>>>> >>>>> ... unless you mean "can I ask if (Node "uniprot: 1234") exists, >>>>> without accidentally creating it if it does not?" ... you can do this from >>>>> the C++, scheme and python API's, but you cannot do this in Atomese. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 4:07 AM Abdulrahman Semrie <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> TL;DR: you can already do that. It's already supported. >>>>>> >>>>>> It’s partially supported. As you’ve described, we can cache the >>>>>> result of a pattern matching query and it is already supported. However, >>>>>> since I can’t write a pattern matching query to retrieve an atom using >>>>>> its >>>>>> id/name from the atomspace, there is no way to cache/index. If there was >>>>>> some ExistsLink that inherits from QueryLink where you can use to >>>>>> retrieve an atom by its name if it exists or return a false truth value, >>>>>> then what you’ve described can be done. >>>>>> >>>>>> — >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> >>>>>> Abdulrahman Semrie >>>>>> <https://canarymail.io> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thursday, Aug 27, 2020 at 2:46 AM, Linas Vepstas < >>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> TL;DR: you can already do that. It's already supported. >>>>>> >>>>>> Please follow me on this train of thought. >>>>>> >>>>>> 1) What is an "index"? Well, its a pre-defined cache of all atoms of >>>>>> some shape or pattern. >>>>>> >>>>>> 2) How can one specify an index? Well, if its a pattern, then a >>>>>> pattern query can be used. >>>>>> >>>>>> 3) Where should the index be stored, or kept? Well, it can be stored >>>>>> or kept with the pattern that defines the shape of the index. >>>>>> >>>>>> Before I move on to the next thought, let me point out that 1-2-3 can >>>>>> be directly solved today. Define a pattern, e.g. a query link. Run it. >>>>>> Store the results on the query, as a value. You can "do this yourself", >>>>>> today, its easy, but it becomes even easier if you are willing to read >>>>>> the >>>>>> docs for `cog-execute-cache!` (appended below) >>>>>> >>>>>> 4) How should the index be updated? Ah, well, that is actually the >>>>>> tricky question, the hard question, the place where all of the >>>>>> interesting >>>>>> technology debates and thinking are centered. One strategy is to update >>>>>> the index every single time an Atom is added to/removed from the >>>>>> atomspace. >>>>>> But recomputing the index every time is wildly inefficient, burning >>>>>> through >>>>>> vast quantities of CPU time. What else can one do? Well, maybe recompute >>>>>> on >>>>>> demand. Or recompute every few minutes. Or maybe once a night. (aka >>>>>> "eventually consistent") Maybe store a time-stamp on the index, to tell >>>>>> you how old it is. Or maybe have an append-only log of atomspace >>>>>> changes... >>>>>> I can propose many different kinds of solutions. They all have space and >>>>>> time-overhead, and/or assorted usability issues. Which of these best >>>>>> suits >>>>>> your needs, I have trouble guessing, so you would have to explain what >>>>>> the >>>>>> problem is (if any). >>>>>> >>>>>> --linas >>>>>> >>>>>> Here's the docs: >>>>>> cog-execute-cache! EXEC KEY [METADATA [FRESH]] >>>>>> >>>>>> Execute or return cached execution results. This is a caching >>>>>> version >>>>>> of the `cog-execute!` call. >>>>>> >>>>>> If the optional FRESH boolean flag is #f, then if there is a Value >>>>>> stored at KEY on EXEC, return that Value. The default value of >>>>>> FRESH >>>>>> is #f, so the default behavior is always to return the cached >>>>>> value. >>>>>> If the optional FRESH boolean flag is #t, or if there is no Value >>>>>> stored at KEY, then the `cog-execute!` function is called on EXEC, >>>>>> and the result is stored at KEY. >>>>>> >>>>>> The METADATA Atom is optional. If it is specified, then metadata >>>>>> about the execution is placed on EXEC at the key METADATA. >>>>>> Currently, this is just a timestamp of when this execution was >>>>>> performed. The format of the meta-data is subject to change; this >>>>>> is currently an experimental feature, driven by user requirements. >>>>>> >>>>>> At this time, execution is synchronous. It may be worthwhile to >>>>>> have >>>>>> an asynchronous version of this call, where the execution is >>>>>> performed >>>>>> at some other time. This has not been done yet. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 7:41 AM Abdulrahman Semrie <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In the current atomspace, atoms are indexed by their type, i.e given >>>>>>> a type we can retrieve all the atoms that have that type. But there is >>>>>>> no >>>>>>> other away of adding custom indices in the atomspace. For example, if we >>>>>>> want to index nodes by their name, there is no way of doing this. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> As discussed in this issue >>>>>>> <https://github.com/MOZI-AI/annotation-scheme/issues/192>, we plan >>>>>>> to expand the annotation-service, which uses the AtomSpace to store >>>>>>> genomics data, to support the annotation of more types in addition to >>>>>>> genes. Currently, when I user submits a list of ids to the service, it >>>>>>> is >>>>>>> assumed that these ids/symbols represent `GeneNode`s. But in the case >>>>>>> where >>>>>>> the input can be a protein, a drug molecule, pathway or a gene, there >>>>>>> is no >>>>>>> direct way of retrieving what type of the atom with the given name is >>>>>>> unless we iterate through all atoms searching for that particular id. >>>>>>> This >>>>>>> isn't be a good approach from performance standpoint. But if we had a >>>>>>> custom index - e.g `name_index`, on the ids/names of the atoms, it will >>>>>>> be >>>>>>> easier to search the atoms by name and identify the type that the atom >>>>>>> belongs to. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hence, if there is a way to add custom indices to the atomspace, it >>>>>>> will greatly simplify some searches. Or maybe there is a way to do what >>>>>>> I >>>>>>> described above without the need for an index. If so, please share it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>> Groups "opencog" group. >>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>>> send an email to [email protected]. >>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/27892502-0dfb-4042-a805-30a1520f6250n%40googlegroups.com >>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/27892502-0dfb-4042-a805-30a1520f6250n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>>> . >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Verbogeny is one of the pleasurettes of a creatific thinkerizer. >>>>>> --Peter da Silva >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in >>>>>> the Google Groups "opencog" group. >>>>>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit >>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/opencog/5uE2lw6b-5E/unsubscribe. >>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to >>>>>> [email protected]. >>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CAHrUA34qoTA90pcSC3GwXsGy8xpK5yn-1U7k%2Ba10nuDTWcrBLQ%40mail.gmail.com >>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CAHrUA34qoTA90pcSC3GwXsGy8xpK5yn-1U7k%2Ba10nuDTWcrBLQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>> . >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>> Groups "opencog" group. >>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>> send an email to [email protected]. >>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/2a5214b7-c083-40c0-801d-0a3595783046%40Canary >>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/2a5214b7-c083-40c0-801d-0a3595783046%40Canary?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>> . >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Verbogeny is one of the pleasurettes of a creatific thinkerizer. >>>>> --Peter da Silva >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>> Groups "opencog" group. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>> an email to [email protected]. >>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CAHrUA37N%3Dbjr7QDQzS-uUpcwaSP%3D44QEYfkmUXQC9mrVEZATEQ%40mail.gmail.com >>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CAHrUA37N%3Dbjr7QDQzS-uUpcwaSP%3D44QEYfkmUXQC9mrVEZATEQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>> . >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Ben Goertzel, PhD >>>> http://goertzel.org >>>> >>>> “The only people for me are the mad ones, the ones who are mad to live, >>>> mad to talk, mad to be saved, desirous of everything at the same time, the >>>> ones who never yawn or say a commonplace thing, but burn, burn, burn like >>>> fabulous yellow roman candles exploding like spiders across the stars.” -- >>>> Jack Kerouac >>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups "opencog" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>> an email to [email protected]. >>>> >>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CACYTDBeqdq0vixYq1M0kceBqyywkAvQMPsMOd51X-0V5Oagr2Q%40mail.gmail.com >>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CACYTDBeqdq0vixYq1M0kceBqyywkAvQMPsMOd51X-0V5Oagr2Q%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>> . >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Verbogeny is one of the pleasurettes of a creatific thinkerizer. >>> --Peter da Silva >>> >>> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "opencog" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/8e6d763a-9b4d-4a68-810e-d6f16e80e118n%40googlegroups.com >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/8e6d763a-9b4d-4a68-810e-d6f16e80e118n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> > > > -- > Verbogeny is one of the pleasurettes of a creatific thinkerizer. > --Peter da Silva > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the > Google Groups "opencog" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/opencog/5uE2lw6b-5E/unsubscribe. > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to > [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CAHrUA35Z%3DH1oSVFZ%3D-WTTATf4U9jhmfhMMAF6jNO1daTrbDXJg%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CAHrUA35Z%3DH1oSVFZ%3D-WTTATf4U9jhmfhMMAF6jNO1daTrbDXJg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "opencog" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/e4efdf67-88d3-4163-9e98-78363fc6ed0a%40Canary > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/e4efdf67-88d3-4163-9e98-78363fc6ed0a%40Canary?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- Verbogeny is one of the pleasurettes of a creatific thinkerizer. --Peter da Silva -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "opencog" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CAHrUA35aPSH%2BHZ-a5_oPgB7%2BO95tms9qWNTLWoA7%3DsEwE59Hww%40mail.gmail.com.
