[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
am i missing something here? or is it a peculiarly "american" belief
that people aren't political and fail to grasp that people will stop at
nothing to gain the ascendency of their own views and beliefs. there's
more than one search engine, but only one makes any admission on it's
behaviour (i think(?))
even the popularity of google is probably a manipulation by marketers in
a prelude to it's ipo. and as we've noted before you can't even trust
maths and physics (and like politics, you can't escape them :) )
the non-sematic web is a distortion. xml is a distortion. rdbms is a
distortion. thankfully the sun doesn't care and is there each day for us.
i wonder if alta vista still works?
rick
Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
>Here's a pretty good example of how it all goes wrong
>even when humans are making the selections:
>
>http://www.perrspectives.com/
>
>Some say Google is doing what the Semantic Web proposes,
>but the mammals put their biases into their selections
>and this means that as the selection process itself
>is centralized (the critical one: the choice of choices),
>biases become system selectors. See Tim Bray's question at
>Ongoing.
>
>http://tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2004/06/22/GoogleCensor
>
>Tim isn't sure if it is stupid or evil. My assessment
>is that it is an example of stupid becoming evil. Such
>systems must provide feedback-correction; yet we then
>realize that as Joshua Allen points out, this is a closed
>system (Google), not an open system, and self-correction
>is not assured. The owners of Google have allowed their
>company and its services to become players in the politics
>of the American electorate.
>
>That is unacceptable but at least Larry and Sergey's
>faces are on that decision and Tim can push back.
>
>So now we envision a future where these same biases are
>entering ontologies used for machine to machine communications.
>This is the Golem problem at its clearest and most easily
>understood. Speed of light advocacy by amplifying
>biases in a faceless medium is dangerous in the extreme.
>
>len
>
>From: Danny Ayers [mailto:danny666@virgilio.it]
>
>One final point is that no matter how good the trust and information
>system, the actions that result may have little bearing on their truth
>or validity. The suggestion of weapons of mass destruction is enough to
>justify a war - the evidence is orthogonal.
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
>initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
>
>The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
>
>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
>manager: <http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/index.php>
>
>
>
begin:vcard
fn:Rick Marshall
n:Marshall;Rick
email;internet:rjm@zenucom.com
tel;cell:+61 411 287 530
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
version:2.1
end:vcard
|
