[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: First Order Logic and Semantic Web RE: NPR, Godel, Semantic W eb
- From: Jeff Lowery <email@example.com>
- To: 'Joel Rees' <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Jeff Lowery <email@example.com>,"'Bullard, Claude L (Len)'" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 18:05:50 -0700
> Pardon me for jumping into the middle of this. I'm naive, so
> if my questions
> are off target, tell me so. (Or ignore me.)
Not to worry. Never stopped me.
> > Reminds be of a simple computer simulation, called voters.
> You start with
> > grid of cells, randomly populated with 1's and 0's. The
> feedback mechanism
> > here is your eight immediate neighbors. If you have four 0
> neighbors and
> > four 1 neighbors, you vote your conscious, otherwise you
> vote along with
> > majority of your neighbors. Unlike the real world, eventually the
> > collapses to a single-party system: everybody votes the
> same. Thus, any
> > in the initial random scattering of 1's and 0's is
> reinforced. Once an
> > advantage is gained, it is maintained under these rules.
> Many countries do gravitate towards the one-party system. Political
> stability in a multi-party system is (historically) a
> relatively rare thing,
> and a fairly recent phenomon.
Even one party systems have their detractors, open or otherwise. What would
be more worrying is a system by a stereotypes coerces others into supporting
it through unchecked feedback loops. How one would spot such loops seems
worthy of a doctoral thesis.
> Of course, real stability in a single-party system is even
> more rare. Single
> party systems, on the other hand, are very good at providing
> an illusion of
> stability, at least for a few years.
> Is that what you mean by "unlike the real world?"
Unlike the real world, not everybody can be made to believe the same thing,
or support the same agenda. Unless your a member of a Politburo, that is
(but that's phony unanimity).
> Can SW be implemented and still leave room for DIYers?
I defer to Len's response.
> Icckkk. Sorry. That's not a question. Uhmm. Is watching
> Scurvivor part of
> your job, or does a co-worker insist on watching it? (If you avoid the
> ad-rags, I assume you are not watching it voluntarily.)
Office politcking has all the element of Survivor, not that I ever watched
the show :-)
> I guess that's still not a question.
> Can SW be implemented without leaving the web open to
> Scurvivor sites? If it
> can, would the danger of closing it to Scurvivor sites be
> worth whatever is
> saved thereby? (Looking at the use of stereotypes from an
> abstract point of
Comes down to the question of acceding authority: how's it done? How do you
demand a recall? Or is authority something that can be determined
deterministically? I think no matter how you slice it, you're going to have
competing authorities, then what happens when my chosen authority is
different from yours? How do you automate negotiation between belief
systems? Aaaackk. Hurts my head.
Len's postulate that SW can only operate in narrowly scoped domains with
clear authority seems a logical conclusion.
> > This all gets back to checks and balances. This can't be ad hoc.
> If it can't be ad hoc, how does the SW community propose to
> do checks and
Good question. Even in narrowly scoped domains, you're going to have
contention against the established authority. Then the domain splinters?
This echoes back to the original topic: the world is not wholly
deterministic, neither can be SW.
> Self-training agents? Auto-adjusting stereotypes?
Yes, eventually. Probably won't live to see it.
> I like that metaphor. Does any interactive fiction of the
> complexity of War
> and Peace exist yet?
Dunno, I play chess. Still haven't explored all the possible moves yet, but
must be getting there by now.
> Just had a thought. All this talk about making the system do
> things that
> humans are way better than computers at, what would the
> dangers of putting
> humans in the loop be? And would that defeat the purpose of SW?
> [Len] Humans are in the loop.
[Jeff] How big will the loops get?
> I, for one, hope that Bill and company are not breathing over
> shoulders to get SW out the door.
Oh, now, don't be difficult. They know what's best: it's their stereotype.
Soon, they'll make it everyone's.
> Joel Rees
> ============================XML as Best Solution===
> Joel Rees $B%j!<%9!!%8%g%(%k(B
> Media Fusion Co.,Ltd. $B3t<02q<R%a%G%#%"%U%e!<%8%g%s(B
> Amagasaki TEL 81-6-6415-2560 FAX 81-6-6415-2556
> Tokyo$B!!(BTEL 81-3-3516-2566 $B!!(BFAX 81-3-3516-2567